The freeze on building new Israeli settlements within the West Bank is due to end on September 26. As we mentioned in class, these settlements are a major sticking point for progress in the current peace talks and any final agreement. They are illegal under International Law, as the West Bank was taken from Jordanian administration following the 1967 War.

Israeli PM Netanyahu, although conservative, does not necessarily support the settlements without reservations. He does however, need to maintain his coalition in order to remain PM. The foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman, who heads the far-right Yisrael Beitenu party, has issued his unqualified support for the settlements.

The story at BBC

This Op-Ed by Hebrew University in Jerusalem professor Gadi Taub relates excellently the varying historical strands that have comprised Zionism from its infancy. Note the distinction that Taub makes not only between the secular left and secular right, but also between the religious right and its secular counterpart. Israeli politics have comprised such a wide scope of actors that include both those who subscribe to Zionism and those who dismiss its basic tenets.

This passage is particularly illuminating in understanding such a gulf and how it plays out in important policy decisions,

“The secular Israeli right has abandoned the idea of annexation but still favors settlement on short-term (and short-sighted) security grounds.”

The op-ed, at the NYTIMES

From al-Jazeera, an opinion piece that argues Israeli PM Netanyahu and his government have been allowed to impose their own conditions on the upcoming talks, while PNA President Abbas has been “bullied” to the negotiating table. The writer makes the case that these talks clearly fit Israeli and American interests at this time, but the PNA will not “surrender” anything.

The author uses one contentious issue – settlements – as an example of Israel getting its way before negotiations begin.

“In fact, the mere announcement that talks will resume has emboldened the Israeli prime minister to declare that settlement-building will continue and to demand Palestinian recognition of the Jewish character of the Israeli state as a precondition for any future agreement. So, at the same time that it has pressured the PA into dropping its preconditions for participating, the US has allowed Netanyahu to impose his on the whole process with impunity.”

From the Jerusalem Post, an editorial that sees the talks and Abbas’ participation from a different perspective. Consider the way this editorial discusses the issue of settlements and possible freezes, in contrast to the piece from al-Jazeera.

“Netanyahu can’t, after vowing last November that the 10- month freeze on housing starts at West Bank    settlements was a ‘one-time, temporary’ moratorium, now come out and say, ‘Well, actually, it’s not quite a one-time, temporary thing, after all. It’s more of a twotime, or maybe even a three- or four-time, semi-permanent kind of thing.’”

The JPost writer views the issue from the lens of domestic politics and Netanyahu’s internal support, which is absent from the analysis from al-Jazeera. Interestingly, the al-Jazeera writer is not blind to the need for Abbas to maintain any credibility at home.

The wildly different ways these two opinion pieces approach the same subjects within the upcoming talks helps in understanding the problems that exist even before the issues get discussed.