Trending Topics:

As Kerry leaves Israel, Netanyahu announces 272 new settlement homes

Israel/Palestine
on 24 Comments
Kerry leaves, settlements grow

Kerry leaves, settlements grow

In a move that will surprise absolutely no one, Israel has seen U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry out the door by announcing 272 new homes in two West Bank settlements.

Ynet reports:

An Israeli official confirms that Israel has promoted plans for 272 new apartments in two isolated West Bank settlements.

The final step in the approval process came as US Secretary of State John Kerry wrapped up another Middle East trip as part of his attempt to forge a peace deal.

The anti-settlement group Peace Now said Monday that Israeli authorities published the building plans for the settlements of Ofra and Karnei Shomron a day earlier. Peace Now says construction could begin in coming weeks.

Major Guy Inbar, an Israeli defense official, confirmed the plans were published. He says the initial approval was given in October.

US brokered peace talks have put the government coalition in a bind. While centrist Yesh Atid, led by Finance Minister Yair Lapid support a peace talks and a two-state solution, Habayit Hayehudi, led by Economy Minister Naftali Bennett, opposes the two-state arrangement and has been vocally critical of peace talks.

Israel’s move to release the 104 Palestinian prisoners jailed from before the 1993 Oslo Accords as a goodwill gesture to the Palestinians came in response to right-wing reluctance to accept a freeze in settlement construction.

Thus, in a bid to perserve the coalition, following every round of prisoner releases, Netanyahu’s office is quick to publish new tenders for construction of thousands of new housing units beyond Jerusalem’s 1967 borders.

The Israeli government had made its intention to expand settlements known last week before Kerry arrived as Netanyahu attempts to mollify the U.S. government and his own right-wing base.

It seems Netanyahu will continue to get pressure from the right. Israeli Finance Minister Naftali Bennett announced today that his Habayit Hayehudi party “will never accept an agreement based on the 1967 lines,” and threatened to leave the governing coalition if talks lead to a shared Jerusalem.

Haaretz reports:

“If our friends in the world ask us to commit suicide – even if they have good intentions – we will tell them ‘no,'” Bennett said, about the international pressure to reach an agreement with the Palestinians. “They tell us there is an occupation and that it’s immoral as Jews. Let me tell you this – we are not occupiers in our land,” he said. . .

Referring to the so-called demographic threat, Bennett said that “They scare us with the demographic demon and that there won’t be a Jewish majority. That’s incorrect; in fact, the opposite is true. Arab birthrates are falling. The day after a diplomatic agreement, the Palestinians will open their borders to hundreds of thousands refuges and their descendants. Imagine driving on Highway 6 and seeing them lining the fences.”

Rather than a peace agreement, Bennett says Israel just needs “a strong army and faith.”

adamhorowitz
About Adam Horowitz

Adam Horowitz is Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

24 Responses

  1. Sammar
    Sammar
    January 7, 2014, 12:19 pm

    What else is new? Did anyone really expect Kerry to get any concessions from the Israelis?

    • mondonut
      mondonut
      January 7, 2014, 2:56 pm

      Sammar says: What else is new? Did anyone really expect Kerry to get any concessions from the Israelis? Palestinians?

      First we can not accept Israel as a Jewish state. Secondly we can not accept any Palestinian state on the 1967 borders, without Jerusalem. Thirdly we can not accept any Israeli on Palestinian territory, sea or air, after the completion of the gradual withdrawal. Fourth we can not accept any solution without the exercise of the refugees’ right of return according to Resolution 194, the right of return and compensation, and (fifth) the release of all prisoners at the signing of the agreement. This is the Palestinian position.

      – Saeb Erekat

      • The Truth
        The Truth
        January 7, 2014, 3:12 pm

        You do realize that the Palestinians are under no moral or legal obligation to accept Israel as a “Jewish” state, right?

        The rest of the demands you list are all in line with International Law, and recognized as being the rights of Palestine, by the UN and World Court.

        So while one could say both parties are thin on concessions, we must note that the Palestinian position remains firmly grounded in International Law, while Israel’s position remains in violation of said law.

      • mondonut
        mondonut
        January 7, 2014, 6:19 pm

        The Truth says: You do realize that the Palestinians are under no moral or legal obligation to accept Israel as a “Jewish” state, right?
        ===============================================
        What’s your point? That should everything they dream come to fruition and all that remains towards getting the state they (supposedly) desire is recognizing Israel as a Jewish State – they should not do that?

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 7, 2014, 3:22 pm

        “Did anyone really expect Kerry to get any concessions from the Israelis? Palestinians?”

        Only in the fevered dreams of you zios is the Palestinians agreeing to give up over 75% of their country to you, coupled with a desire for justice and to be free of your oppressions, an expression of them not granting any concessions…

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 7, 2014, 3:42 pm

        mondonut Did you have a point?

        The Palestinians want their LEGAL rights

        Israel has no legal right to;
        A) demand recognition
        B) any non-Israeli territory
        C) have control over the territory of any other state
        D) refuse refugees their legal rights
        E) ignore the Laws of War re the release of prisoners

      • mondonut
        mondonut
        January 7, 2014, 4:56 pm

        talknic says: mondonut Did you have a point?
        ==============================================
        The point is all too obvious, but I will spell it out for you. The idea that the only party required to compromise (or refusing to) are the Israelis, is simply ridiculous. The Palestinians brag on their unwillingness.

        As for the rest of your nonsense:
        a) It is a negotiation, the Israelis can demand what they want, no “legal right” to do so is required.
        b) True for both sides. As of yet the territory is not Palestine.
        c) Palestine has no territory. Only claims.
        d) Your definition of refugee has no similarity to Palestinians’
        e) The prisoners whose release is demanded are not POWs, Israel is not required to release murderers and criminals.

      • Dutch
        Dutch
        January 7, 2014, 8:41 pm

        Mondonut — You’re off your anchors, sailor. On the table is the Arab Peace Initiative. Israel was given nine months to consider peace and open relations with the Arab world. The API is based on a 2SS, that guarantees a viable Palestinian state ánd a ‘Jewish state’. Like it or not — but this is no ‘nonsense’. After 65+ years Israel has to show it’s true intentions.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 7, 2014, 9:09 pm

        @ mondonut “The idea that the only party required to compromise (or refusing to) are the Israelis, is simply ridiculous. The Palestinians brag on their unwillingness”

        Of course they’re unwilling to accept less than their legal rights. WTF should they? There is nothing wrong, illegal or immoral about demanding one’s legal rights under the Laws, UN Charter and conventions Israel AGREED to uphold. There IS something wrong, illegal and immoral about a state that ignores its legal obligations

        Israel is not offering, nor has it ever, any compromise. Israel is making demands that have absolutely no legal basis.

        “a) It is a negotiation, the Israelis can demand what they want, no “legal right” to do so is required”
        The Palestinians are under no legal obligation to forgo any of their legal rights even in negotiations. Israel is obliged to the Law and UN Charter
        “b) True for both sides. As of yet the territory is not Palestine”
        UNSC res 476 says you’re full of sh*t. As far back as May 22nd the Israeli Government admitted to Palestine having territories “outside the State of Israel”
        “c) Palestine has no territory. Only claims”
        UNSC res 476 and Israeli Govt statements from May 22nd 1948 (ibid) tell us you’re spouting drivel
        “d) Your definition of refugee has no similarity to Palestinians’”
        http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/418E7BC6931616B485256CAF00647CC7 says you’re spouting nonsense
        “e) The prisoners whose release is demanded are not POWs, Israel is not required to release murderers and criminals”
        While occupation exists and it does, the Laws of War, Geneva Conventions, Ceasefire and Armistice Agreements apply

      • mondonut
        mondonut
        January 8, 2014, 10:22 am

        ttalknic says: Of course they’re unwilling to accept less than their legal rights. WTF should they?
        =======================================
        Why should they? Well first of all, most of their “rights” are imaginary. Secondly, they are supposed to be more interested in having a state than in eliminating the Jewish one.

        a) The Palestinians are under no legal obligation to forgo any of their legal rights even in negotiations.
        Refusing to recognize Israel as a Jewish State is not a Legal Right. However they can chose not to and thereby jeopardize their ability to get the state they supposedly want – that is their right.

        b) UNSC res 476 says you’re full of sh*t. As far back as May 22nd the Israeli Government admitted to Palestine having territories “outside the State of Israel”
        476 does not assign territory to the Palestinians. Nor does your ridiculous linky. You need to get over the idea that anything not explicitly Israeli is Palestinian by default.

        c) UNSC res 476 and Israeli Govt statements from May 22nd 1948 (ibid) tell us you’re spouting drivel
        See Above (b)

        d) link to unispal.un.org says you’re spouting nonsense
        The Palestinians are not confining their demands to those definitions, the Palestinians and 99.99% of their supporters (everyone but yourself) believe descendants have a RoR.

        e) While occupation exists and it does, the Laws of War, Geneva Conventions, Ceasefire and Armistice Agreements apply
        None of the above preclude Palestinians from being convicted of murder and criminality.

      • Nidal_AL-Hariri
        Nidal_AL-Hariri
        January 8, 2014, 11:44 am

        simply youre a nutcase. it’s just a matter of time untill your little zio state of terror crumbles down the immoral trash of history! meanwhile you can bark loud and as frantic as you can…

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 8, 2014, 12:16 pm

        mondonut “Well first of all, most of their “rights” are imaginary”

        The United Nations says http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/b86613e7d92097880525672e007227a7/6de6da8a650b4c3b852560df00663826?OpenDocument you’re spouting Red Heifer sh*t

        ” Secondly, they are supposed to be more interested in having a state than in eliminating the Jewish one

        In front of the world at the UN they offered to accept only 22% of their rightful territory for peace. Israel responded by building more illegal settlements.

        “Refusing to recognize Israel as a Jewish State is not a Legal Right”

        There is no law requiring anyone to recognize any state or person. Therefore it is legal to refuse to recognize any state or person. The UN has Member states that don’t recognize each other. Recognition of statehood is not mandatory.

        ” ..in the view of the United States, International Law does not require a state to recognize another state; it is a matter for the judgment of each state whether an entity merits recognition as a state. In reaching this judgment, the United States has traditionally looked for the establishment of certain facts. The United States has also taken into account whether the entity in question has attracted the recognition of the International community of states.” http://tinyurl.com/n6ftzn

        “However they can chose not to and thereby jeopardize their ability to get the state they supposedly want

        They already have the state they want. It was declared

        ARTICLE 3 The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence, to provide for its conservation and prosperity, and consequently to organize itself as it sees fit, to legislate upon its interests, administer its services, and to define the jurisdiction and competence of its courts.

        The exercise of these rights has no other limitation than the exercise of the rights of other states according to international law.

        ARTICLE 4 States are juridically equal, enjoy the same rights, and have equal capacity in their exercise. The rights of each one do not depend upon the power which it possesses to assure its exercise, but upon the simple fact of its existence as a person under international law.

        ARTICLE 5 The fundamental rights of states are not susceptible of being affected in any manner whatsoever

        ARTICLE 11

        The contracting states definitely establish as the rule of their conduct the precise obligation not to recognize territorial acquisitions or special advantages which have been obtained by force whether this consists in the employment of arms, in threatening diplomatic representations, or in any other effective coercive measure. The territory of a state is inviolable and may not be the object of military occupation nor of other measures of force imposed by another state directly or indirectly or for any motive whatever even temporarily.
        http://www.cfr.org/sovereignty/montevideo-convention-rights-duties-states/p15897

        What is required by the laws reaffirmed here http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/b86613e7d92097880525672e007227a7/6de6da8a650b4c3b852560df00663826?OpenDocument is for Israel withdraw from it so that it can be independent.

        “476 does not assign territory to the Palestinians”
        Your denialism is putrid pal

        1. Reaffirms the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem;

        3. Reconfirms that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which purport to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal validity and constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War and also constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East; http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/b86613e7d92097880525672e007227a7/6de6da8a650b4c3b852560df00663826?OpenDocument

        “Nor does your ridiculous link… “
        It’s the official UN record of the official Israel Government statement you silly person

        In addition, the Provisional Government exercises control over the city of Jaffa; Northwestern Galilee, including Acre, Zib, Base, and the Jewish settlements up to the Lebanese frontier; a strip of territory alongside the road from Hilda to Jerusalem; almost all of new Jerusalem; and of the Jewish quarter within the walls of the Old City of Jerusalem. The above areas, outside the territory of the State of Israel, are under the control of the military authorities of the State of Israel, who are strictly adhering to international regulations in this regard. The Southern Negev is uninhabited desert over which no effective authority has ever existed.” … ” the Government of the State of Israel operates in parts of Palestine outside the territory of the State of Israelhttp://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/B4085A930E0529C98025649D00410973

        You don’t believe what the Israeli Government said?

        “You need to get over the idea that anything not explicitly Israeli is Palestinian by default”

        Problem. According to the official record of the Israeli Government’s official statement attempting to claim the territories ” outside the state of Israel” (ibid) it does not belong to any of the other surrounding states .

        (i) No territory forming part of Egypt, the Lebanon, the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom or Syria is added to Israel by this adjustment. http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/fd807e46661e3689852570d00069e918/c96e0252e7710bce85256d95006bc157?OpenDocument

        Those territories ARE Palestinian by default.

        “The Palestinians are not confining their demands to those definitions….”

        The official Palestinian demand is per UNGA res 194 and this http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/418E7BC6931616B485256CAF00647CC7 is the definition covering UNGA res 194

        //While occupation exists and it does, the Laws of War, Geneva Conventions, Ceasefire and Armistice Agreements apply//

        “None of the above preclude Palestinians from being convicted of murder and criminality”

        They may be convicted under the laws of the Occupied Territories in the Occupied Territories or the Laws of Occupation in the Occupied Territories. Israel has transported them to Israeli territories, convicted them in Israeli Civil and military courts and incarcerated them in Israeli prisons, which is against the laws of War and the GCs.

        You’re trying to defend the indefensible. Israel is a rogue state and YOU are a part of its problem

      • Sumud
        Sumud
        January 7, 2014, 4:04 pm

        Maybe you’re the ONE mondonut!

        Can you please name any genuine concession Israel has offered in any post-Oslo negotiation?

        Others have tried, and failed.

    • Kathleen
      Kathleen
      January 7, 2014, 4:11 pm

      Nothing new..Netanyahu is a pro at kicking U.S. Presidents, officials in the cajones. “Normalized” ball kicking.

  2. Justpassingby
    Justpassingby
    January 7, 2014, 12:36 pm

    What a sick move!
    No one threat America more than Israel.

  3. Citizen
    Citizen
    January 7, 2014, 1:23 pm

    “Here’s a few of our thousands of native prisoners–and lots more Israeli settlements, grabbing more native land, Mr. Kerry, do with this as you will.”

    Kerry’s a real dunce. He actually thought he might accomplish something because he spent his whole life in Congress voting for Israel uber alles. Zionists don’t truck in gratitude, only subservience to their wishes, and every day they calculate anew.

  4. justicewillprevail
    justicewillprevail
    January 7, 2014, 2:02 pm

    When will Kerry wake up and see how he, and thus the US, is being treated so contemptuously? How much humiliation can he take, whilst still pretending that Bibi and his mob have any interest in a just settlement? Abject, craven and self-deceiving, how the Israelis must revel in inflicting that on their paymaster, no doubt toasting their success in fobbing him off as soon as he has left. Once again they have offered nothing, haven’t moved an inch, and are still helping themselves to Palestinian land and resources. Kerry has expended all of his political capital on reaching a ‘framework’ for talks – how they must be laughing in Tel Aviv at his naivety, and congratulating themselves on another ‘peace’ treaty neutered and meaningless. This should be a lesson to all the suckers for Israel, who imagine the support they offer will ever be reciprocated or even acknowledged. They demand, they take, they never give.

    • annie
      annie
      January 7, 2014, 2:12 pm

      i doubt if kerry is worried about that. netanyahu is getting reamed over iran in the background so the fact they have not moved one iota on palestine doesn’t mean they’re sitting around laughing. well, some of the pols are. but anyone paying attention, any sane person, probably notices zionisms mask getting peeled away as the iran negotiations are moving along without them. i’m sure this has netanyahu completely seething. http://mondoweiss.net/2013/11/netanyahus-greatest-linkage.html

      and kerry is cool as a cucumber uttering these complete nothings as if everything is fine and dandy. http://mondoweiss.net/2014/01/diplomatic-doublespeak-together.html i think the least of his worries is being personally ridiculed.

    • seafoid
      seafoid
      January 7, 2014, 5:06 pm

      Kerry is another hopeless careerist. He wouldn’t have been much better than Bush in 04.

  5. annie
    annie
    January 7, 2014, 2:04 pm

    “If our friends in the world ask us to commit suicide –

    doesn’t it occur to them if they keep using this suicide lingo it will wear out? it’s so one note, as if everything is that simple. crying wolf over and over.

    • Sumud
      Sumud
      January 7, 2014, 4:08 pm

      Bennett doesn’t have the guts (or brains, I’m not sure) to admit that Israel is committing suicide all on it’s own with these settlements.

      Maybe he thinks AIPAC and the US veto for Israel in the UN SC is forever. Whoops.

    • Justpassingby
      Justpassingby
      January 7, 2014, 4:14 pm

      Annie

      I am afraid it wont (wear out).

  6. seafoid
    seafoid
    January 7, 2014, 5:05 pm

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.567533

    “Kerry asks Saudis, Jordan to support Palestinian recognition of Israel as Jewish state ”

    I hope the dictators tell Kerry to f*ck off back under AIPAC’s rock

Leave a Reply