The oversized government will look stupid without sovereignty – opinion

In an effort to strengthen Israel's prospects for a pragmatic peace and secure borders, one candidate declared before the last elections, “The president's [Trump's] peace plan is a historic opportunity... a significant milestone that defines the way the parties to the Middle East conflict can march toward a historic agreement.... Immediately after the election I will implement it through a stable government.” One would think this declaration was made by Benjamin Netanyahu. It wasn't. The statement was made six months ago by Benjamin Gantz in Washington for the reasons mentioned, and in a bid to convince voters that he supports extending Israel's sovereignty in their Promised Land. The stance of the soft-spoken former general should not have surprised a soul. His words were based on the same logic applied by Yigal Alon in 1967 and by another soft-spoken former general, Yitzhak Rabin, in 1995. In his last speech before the Knesset, Rabin, the Labor leader and prime minister at the time, clarified his vision, “First and foremost Jerusalem will remain united under Israel's sovereignty… the security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.” The Palestinians, he said, would have “less than a state,” and settlements in Judea and Samaria would become part of Israel. Rabin was assassinated a month later. Since then, Israel's Left has lost its way. It opted for appeasement, suggested unprecedented concessions, doubled down on unilateral withdrawals and unsuccessfully tried to convince the public that the thousands of Israeli casualties of Palestinian terrorism were the price for peace. In the last elections, Labor received two out of 120 seats and is now on the verge of political extinction. According to the American peace and prosperity plan, areas intended to be under Israeli sovereignty are and have always been in consensus by all key Israeli leaders. The innovation here is that now the plan comes to turn the table on the peace process and put an end to a century of futile negotiations, including the last 11-year Palestinian refusal to engage in dialogue. The plan facilitates the maximization of land and Israelis within Israel while maximizing the number of Palestinians within the Palestinian entity to be established – without uprooting Arabs or Jews from their homes and without the process held hostage by Palestinian politicians. As opposed to the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and Gush Katif – which was the worst alternative to a negotiated agreement – the declaration of sovereignty over the Jordan valley and other barren lands is the best alternative to a negotiated agreement. The momentous move can trigger a material peace process, as the Palestinians may realize for the first time that their denial of history and civility has a price. Truth and time are not on their side and the world will no longer need to wait for them to get in the mood for negotiation. Moving forward despite Palestinian boycotts is the art of this deal. Over the past three-year sovereignty implementation build-up, Israel and its allies, especially the United States, have carried out official and discrete diplomacy around the globe. Senior diplomats from more than 60 countries, including Bahrain, assembled in Warsaw last year to support President Trump's peace plan. Israeli ministers have traveled to the UAE. The prime minister visited Oman, Sudan and Chad, as Israeli airplanes were permitted to fly over Saudi Arabia. In conjunction, a clear message was sent to those who may want to derail the process, with a series of secret strikes that were purportedly carried out in Syria and other places in the region. The scene is now set, and the time has come for extending Israeli sovereignty on areas of the Jordan Valley, Judea and Samaria. Anticipated criticism of the plan and Israel's sovereignty has come mostly as lip service from countries which almost always denounce Israel, regardless of the issue at hand. Nevertheless, with COVID-19 on most national leaders' minds, they are largely indifferent to Israel's plan of extending its civil law into Israeli communities and areas critical for Israel's security. Most Republicans in the US congress, led by Sen. Ted Cruz and members of the Foreign Relations Committee, strongly back Israel's sovereignty, reiterating that only a “fact-based negotiation process can lead to peace.” That is important. Many Democrats, due to domestic affairs, are silent or oppose it. That is disappointing but can be overcome. The UN is largely albeit not vehemently opposed, which is inconsequential. Criticism by states that warned we were on the verge of WWIII before Trump's declarations on Jerusalem, the Golan Heights and the move of the American Embassy to Israel's capital can be disregarded accordingly. Most Arab states will denounce the extension of Israel's sovereignty but have already tacitly acknowledged it. And the fact that thousands of Palestinians living in areas controlled by the Palestinian Authority are now trying to migrate to the Jordan Valley in anticipation of Israel's move is intriguing. Knee-jerk foreign criticism is not surprising, but endless domestic bickering in Israel is baffling. It has been reported and yet to be denied that Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi, recently briefed senior German and UN officials behind closed doors, saying, “The annexation will not include the Jordan Valley. Everyone understands this.” This is the same former general who purportedly opposed and helped prevent a preemptive strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. Gantz has been less outspoken against the American plan but has shown much less support after the elections than he did before them, and actually mumbled this week, “anything not related to coronavirus will wait.” A large government of more than 35 ministers was formed after the recent Israeli elections for one reason: to facilitate Israeli sovereignty over the Jordan Valley. That was the only issue in consensus during the last elections. That is the only reason that Benjamin Gantz's party has the same number of ministers as Netanyahu's party, despite being half its size. The only reason to replace a good defense minister with a mediocre former general is because of the latter's apparent willingness and ability to convince large parts of the public. The only reason a former general with no diplomatic experience was appointed to the Foreign Ministry post was due to his explicit support of sovereignty prior to the election and his apparent ability to strengthen the national consensus around the initiative. If Gantz or Ashkenazi now retract their commitment, then their appointments would also seem regrettable and should be reconsidered. One way or another, should that happen, this oversized government would appear stupid without attaining sovereignty. The writer is the author of Targeted Killings, Law and Counter-Terrorism Effectiveness: Does Fair Play Pay Off? and the founder of Acumen Risk Ltd.

The oversized government will look stupid without sovereignty – opinion

Knee-jerk foreign criticism is not surprising, but endless domestic bickering in Israel is baffling.

BoP preparing for first Gaza Strip visit

IDF may have destroyed 10,000 weapon-holding Lebanese homes

The oversized government will look stupid without sovereignty – opinion

Knee-jerk foreign criticism is not surprising, but endless domestic bickering in Israel is baffling.

See more on