West Bank annexation by Israel imminent?

Pauls' Revere

Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2007
Messages
11,347
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-palestinians-un-idUSKBN23V1ZB

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Cabinet is preparing to start discussions on July 1 on annexation of the West Bank, territory Israel captured in a 1967 war and that Palestinians seek for a state.

Palestinians vehemently oppose the annexation plan, as do most world powers. Palestinian leaders have also completely rejected a peace proposal unveiled in January by U.S. President Donald Trump, in which Washington would recognize Jewish settlements as part of Israel.

“Should Israel decide to extend its sovereignty, it will be doing so with respect to areas over which it has always maintained a legitimate, historical and legal claim,” Israel’s U.N. Ambassador Danny Danon told the council.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/...-israeli-plans-annex-parts-west-bank-n1231964

LONDON — Israel's plans to annex parts of the occupied West Bank would be “fatal to the prospects of Israeli-Palestinian peace,” according to a letter signed by more than 1,000 lawmakers from 25 European countries.

Politicians from countries including the United Kingdom, Germany and France expressed “serious concerns” about the Trump administration’s Mideast peace plan and the prospect of imminent Israeli annexation of occupied territory, in the letter to European governments published Tuesday.

Unilateral annexation would be “fatal to the prospects of Israeli-Palestinian peace,” the letter said. “Acquisition of territory by force has no place in 2020 and must have commensurate consequences.”
 
Update:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/worl...ition-to-annexation/ar-BB168Ec4?ocid=msedgdhp

JERUSALEM (AP) — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appears determined to carry out his pledge to begin annexing parts of the occupied West Bank, possibly as soon as Wednesday.

His vision of redrawing the map of the Holy Land, in line with President Donald Trump’s Mideast plan, has been welcomed by Israel’s religious and nationalist right wing and condemned by the Palestinians and the international community.

Here’s a closer look at annexation:

WHY ANNEXATION, AND WHY NOW?

Israel’s right wing has long favored annexing parts or all of the West Bank, saying the territory is vital for the country’s security and an inseparable part of the biblical Land of Israel. But most of the world considers the West Bank, captured by Israel from Jordan in the 1967 Mideast war, to be occupied territory, and Israel’s dozens of settlements, now home to nearly 500,000 Jewish Israelis, as illegal.

Surrounded by a team of settler allies, Trump has upended U.S. policy, recognizing contested Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, moving the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, recognizing Israel’s 1981 annexation of the Golan Heights and announcing that Jewish settlements are not illegal.

Seeking to court hard-line voters on the campaign trail, Netanyahu last year began talking about annexation. After Trump released his Mideast plan in January envisioning permanent Israeli control over 30% of the West Bank, including all of Israel’s settlements and the strategic Jordan Valley region, Netanyahu quickly jumped on board. Israel and the U.S. have formed a joint committee to map out precisely which areas Israel can keep.

Netanyahu made sure that under the coalition agreement, he can bring a proposal to the new government anytime after July 1. He appears eager to move forward before the November presidential election, possibly with a limited move billed as a first stage, especially with Trump’s re-election prospects in question.

WHY IS THERE SO MUCH OPPOSITION?

The Palestinians seek the entire West Bank as the heartland of a future independent state and believe the Trump plan would deliver a fatal blow to their fading hopes of statehood.

Among the plan’s components: The Palestinians would only have limited autonomy in a fraction of territory they seek. Isolated Israeli settlements deep inside Palestinian territory would remain intact, and the Israeli military would retain overall security control over the Palestinian entity.

The international community has invested billions of dollars in promoting a two-state solution since the interim Oslo peace accords of the 1990s. The U.N. secretary general, the European Union and leading Arab countries have all said that Israeli annexation would violate international law and greatly undermine the prospects for Palestinian independence.

WILL ANYTHING CHANGE ON THE GROUND?

Not immediately. Israel has controlled the entire West Bank for more than 50 years. Palestinians will remain in their towns and villages, while Israelis will live in their newly annexed settlements. The Palestinian Authority is protesting annexation but has ruled out any kind of violent response.

But over time, there is a larger risk of conflict.

Netanyahu has said he opposes granting citizenship to Palestinians living on annexed lands, presumably because it would undercut Israel's Jewish majority. But failing to grant equal rights to Palestinians in annexed areas opens Israel up to charges of establishing an apartheid system that would draw heavy international condemnation.

Palestinians who are not living on annexed lands could face other challenges. Moving between Palestinian population centers — or even reaching their own properties and farmlands — could become difficult if they have to cross through Israeli territory. Critics say that Israel could also use its sovereignty to expropriate Palestinian lands.

The Palestinian Authority has already cut off its ties with Israel to protest the looming annexation. In the absence of any peace prospects, the Palestinian Authority could see its international funding dry up or decide to close.

The collapse of the authority could force Israel, as an occupying power, to pick up the tab for governing the Palestinians. In the long term, it could lead to Palestinian and international calls to establish a single binational state with voting rights for all — a scenario that could spell the end of Israel as a Jewish-majority state.

WHY DOESN'T THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY STOP THIS?

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has said annexation would mark a “most serious violation of international law.” The EU’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, has warned of “significant consequences.” Jordan and Egypt, the only Arab states at peace with Israel, have condemned the annexation plan. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, powerful Arab players with informal relations with Israel, have said warming ties will be in danger.

But Israel and the U.S. appear to be banking on the international community’s poor record of translating rhetoric into concrete action. Days after the UAE warned Israel against annexation, for instance, two Emirati companies reached cooperation deals with Israeli partners in the fight against the coronavirus.

Thanks to the U.S. veto over U.N. Security Council decisions, international sanctions appear to be out of the question. Divisions within the EU make concerted European reaction unlikely as well.

Individual countries might seek to impose limited sanctions against Israel, and the International Criminal Court in the Hague could take annexation into account as it weighs whether to launch a war crimes investigation into Israeli policies.

CAN ANYTHING STOP ANNEXATION?

The biggest obstacle to Netanyahu appears to be from within. U.S. officials say they are unlikely to allow Israel to move forward unless Netanyahu and his coalition partner, Defense Minister Benny Gantz, are in agreement.

Gantz, a former military chief and bitter rival of Netanyahu, has said Israel should move carefully and in coordination with regional partners. Gantz laid the groundwork for further delays Monday when he said his top priority is guiding the country through the coronavirus crisis.

“Anything unrelated to the battle against the coronavirus will wait,” he said.

Ironically, some hard-line settler leaders have also opposed the plan, saying they cannot accept any program that envisions a Palestinian state.

If the issue remains frozen, time could run out on Netanyahu. The presumptive Democratic nominee, Joe Biden, has said he opposes annexation. A Biden victory in November could mean that any Israeli annexation will be short-lived.
 
[h=3]
icon4.png
Palestinians file ICC complaint against Trump, Kushner and Netanyahu over annexation[/h]
 
How is Biden going to handle the Middle East?

O'l Joe is quiet but the Left isn't.

Calls for cuts or strict conditions to Israeli aid.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...ael-and-us-security/ar-BB16miIW?ocid=msedgntp

This week, a letter signed by several left-leaning lawmakers - initiated by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and signed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) as well as members of "the Squad" of freshman representatives, including Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) -called for U.S. military aid to Israel to be conditioned and cut in response to Israel's plan to annex parts of the West Bank.

The letter - which has been met with criticism by pro-Israel groups and lawmakers - called to "condition the $3.8 billion in U.S. military funding to Israel to ensure that U.S. taxpayers are not supporting annexation in any way" and said that annexation "would lay the groundwork for Israel becoming an apartheid state."

To be sure, annexation is a politically divisive issue in Israel, and even in the United States. According to a June 2020 Brookings Institute Poll, nearly eight in ten Democrats (79 percent) oppose the proposed annexation, while a majority of Republicans (56 percent) support it. While there are credible reasons to oppose annexation, this call by Democratic officials to condition military aid to Israel represents the latest manifestation of the far-left's anti-Israel sentiment.

Ultimately, if support for conditioning military aid to Israel ends up being reflected within the mainstream Democratic Party, it would be politically damaging to Democrats in the midst of an election year and, moreover, would harm the United States' relationship with our most critical ally in the Middle East.

Taken together with the Democratic Party's demonstrable left-ward movement - on issues such as defunding the police and support for unfettered immigration policy - the progressive wing's antagonistic stance toward Israel has the potential to damage the Democrats' chances of winning the White House and the Senate, and holding onto their House majority.
 
Some pro-liberty news for a change:

[h=3]
icon14.png
AIPAC allows lawmakers to criticize West Bank annexation[/h] AIPAC tells lawmakers it won’t push back if they criticize West Bank annexation
By Ron Kampeas, JTA | June 11, 2020
The leading pro-Israel lobby in the United States is telling lawmakers that they are free to criticize Israel’s looming annexation plans — just as long as the criticism stops there.
Two sources — a congressional aide and a donor — say the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, is delivering that guidance in Zoom meetings and phone calls with lawmakers. The message is unusual because the group assiduously discourages public criticism of Israel.
But these are unusual times: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has set a July 1 deadline to annex parts of the West Bank, over the criticism of people at home and abroad who say the move would set back any efforts to bring peace to the region.

With anxiety pervading the U.S. Jewish community ahead of that deadline, AIPAC faces a thorny question: Does it support Israel’s leadership at all costs, or does it draw a line on actions it believes endangers the Jewish state’s future?
In a statement to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency sent after this article was initially published an AIPAC spokesman said that AIPAC does not encourage criticism of Israel.
“AIPAC does not encourage members of Congress to criticize the government of Israel,” Adam Harris said. “Our role is to strengthen the relationship between the two allies.”
Telling lawmakers that they were free to criticize Israel, while short of encouraging them to do so, was nonetheless a departure from past practice.

So far, the group has remained publicly silent about annexation. But in private, AIPAC is telling lawmakers that as long as they don’t push to limit the United States’ aid to Israel, they can criticize the annexation plan without risking tensions or a clash with the lobby group.

How far AIPAC is willing for lawmakers to go is unclear. A spokesman pointed to a May 11 statement warning against proposals to reduce ties with Israel should annexation take place. “Doing anything to weaken this vital relationship would be a mistake,” AIPAC said then.
 
Some pro-liberty news for a change:

[h=3]
icon14.png
AIPAC allows lawmakers to criticize West Bank annexation[/h] AIPAC tells lawmakers it won’t push back if they criticize West Bank annexation
By Ron Kampeas, JTA | June 11, 2020
The leading pro-Israel lobby in the United States is telling lawmakers that they are free to criticize Israel’s looming annexation plans — just as long as the criticism stops there.
Two sources — a congressional aide and a donor — say the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, is delivering that guidance in Zoom meetings and phone calls with lawmakers. The message is unusual because the group assiduously discourages public criticism of Israel.
But these are unusual times: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has set a July 1 deadline to annex parts of the West Bank, over the criticism of people at home and abroad who say the move would set back any efforts to bring peace to the region.

With anxiety pervading the U.S. Jewish community ahead of that deadline, AIPAC faces a thorny question: Does it support Israel’s leadership at all costs, or does it draw a line on actions it believes endangers the Jewish state’s future?
In a statement to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency sent after this article was initially published an AIPAC spokesman said that AIPAC does not encourage criticism of Israel.
“AIPAC does not encourage members of Congress to criticize the government of Israel,” Adam Harris said. “Our role is to strengthen the relationship between the two allies.”
Telling lawmakers that they were free to criticize Israel, while short of encouraging them to do so, was nonetheless a departure from past practice.

So far, the group has remained publicly silent about annexation. But in private, AIPAC is telling lawmakers that as long as they don’t push to limit the United States’ aid to Israel, they can criticize the annexation plan without risking tensions or a clash with the lobby group.

How far AIPAC is willing for lawmakers to go is unclear. A spokesman pointed to a May 11 statement warning against proposals to reduce ties with Israel should annexation take place. “Doing anything to weaken this vital relationship would be a mistake,” AIPAC said then.

Who the F*****^%$& does AIPAC think they are to dictate what elected lawmakers say? We DON'T need their permission to say what we think.
 
Back
Top