Netanyahu Announces Settlement Freeze

by Eric on November 25, 2009

There is a reason that I prefer Likud to Labour and Kadima, and there is a reason I prefer the National Union (HaIchud HaLeumi) to the Likud.  The Likud is a center right party.  It will go along with many international interests, but will stand up for itself in many cases.  National Union will fight for what it believes no matter what.

So, it is with sadness that I read that Bibi, my hope following a horrible term under Ehud Olmert, has decided to give in to pressures to halt settlement growth.  Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced last night that Israel will impose a 10 month settlement growth freeze aimed at pushing the Palestinians toward a historic peace agreement.

The outstretched hand to the Palestinians does not include any part of Jerusalem, it only includes Judea and Samaria communities.  I have friends and family in those communities, and my heart goes out to those who are seeing Israel inching closer to removing them from their homes.

So, now, the ball is in their court.  Netanyahu took a painful step that people in his own party are furious over.  A part of me says he is completely wrong, a part says that I should trust him.  Either way, it is too late to look back and it is time to look at what is going to come and the possible benefits and drawbacks of this announcement.

Optimally, the Palestinians would take the outstretched hand of Israel and work toward a lasting and fair peace agreement where terrorism would end and we could each live our lives safely and in peace.  However, there are still many issues in the way of that peace.

First, and most obvious, is that a deal with Mahmoud Abbas is worth almost nothing.  He speaks for West Bank Palestinians affiliated with Fatah only, and even his supporters have been weary lately.  His leadership is faltering, and Hamas leaders in Gaza do not respect him or any deal he makes.  Therefore, a peace deal would not eliminate terrorist rocket attacks or terrorism in general.

Second, also very important, is the issue of Israel’s borders.  The Palestinians claim everything they had before the 1967 war as their territory if they are going to sign a peace deal.  Again, Hamas claims everything in the region as Islamic land.  So, the tens of thousands of Jewish residents in Judea and Samaria are faced with a pending doom.  They have lived in those homes for many years.  As I quoted prior to the Gaza withdrawal, “Yehudi lo migaresh Yehudi,” a Jew does not exile a Jew.  The “West Bank” is a part of Israel proper as far as I am concerned, and giving away holy cities such as Hebron and Jewish areas such as Gush Etzion is not an option.

The biblical Eretz Yisrael, or Land of Israel, stretches from Iraq to the Mediterranean Sea.  I am not suggesting the Jewish people go on an imperialist expansion and take over Jordan and Iraq.  I do, however, argue that we have a very tiny place in the world, that is smaller than New Jersey, and we should fight as hard as we have to in order to keep it.  The Jewish people have gone through far too much in the last few thousand years to simply give up our small homeland.

As always, I am interested in your thoughts as well.  Please give your opinions in the comments, if you agree or not.

About the author

Eric Eric is the founder and editor of IsraelSituation.com. He has been to Israel many times including a semester at Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He is the former president of the Israel advocacy group at the University of Colorado and teaches about Israel and the Media at a local religious school.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
  • Maurice

    AGREED. You are 100% correct.

  • http://www.israelsituation.com/ Eric

    Maurice, thanks for the vote of confidence and agreement.

  • http://www.israelsituation.com/ Anthony Reich

    Eric. There is a great deal of political innuendo involved here that may be worth speculating about. As I wrote in a recent blog published here, I believe that Bibi needs to do more to gain the support of the American administration. This is not because I believe that we should be pandering to everything that Obama, Clinton and Mitchell demand, but because I believe that peace will never be achievable without the support of the US administration. Agreeing to freeze expansion in the settlements has already caught the imagination and support of the US government with Mitchell and Clinton making some fairly strong supportive noises.

    The “freeze” does not stop sites already under construction, does not include Jerusalem and does not include public buildings (such as Synagogues). it is also limited to 10 months. How many residential projects were due to have been started in the next 10 months outside of Jerusalem is hard to count. I suspect not too many given the current economic climate.

    I am not convinced that this signals a wholesale withdrawal from Judea and Samaria. Although I did support the Gaza pull-out (not the way in which it was undertaken), I don’t support massive withdrawal from these areas. I don’t believe that this is on Bibi’s agenda.

    Instead, I think that this is a smart tactic by Bibi to put the ball back into the court of the Palestinians. It has already achieved this. Because I don’t believe that the Palestinians will be able (or willing) to do what the US requires of them as a next step towards peace, it probably won’t be too long until the construction in Judea and Samaria continues.

    Like Barak’s offer to give up part of Jerusalem at Camp David, this tactic will show the Palestinians for what they really are. Unwilling to really invest in a peace treaty with Israel. When the building freeze is lifted in 10 months’ time, it will give Bibi a much freer hand with the Americans to do what he wants.

Previous post:

Next post: