ADC Op-Ed on
Aid to Israel in the Sunday Philadelphia Inquirer, 4-19-09
This is a
clear and persuasive statement that we can excerpt for Pres. Obama, Hilary
Clinton, and Congressional representatives.
If you would
like to continue the discussion started by this piece by writing a letter to
the editor, you may also do so by sending it via e-mail To:
Inquirer.Letters@phillynews.com . Letters should be under 200 words and all
contact information must be included for the letter to be considered.
Leverage
U.S. military aid to halt Israeli settlements
The settlement
of Ariel, which sits deep inside the Palestinian Territory of the West Bank,
voted overwhelmingly for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his
Likud Party in the recent elections. The reasons are straightforward: Likud has
vowed to protect and expand settlements, and its platform denies the existence
of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza.
These facts run
contrary to stated U.S. policy toward the peace process, but the new government
of Israel and the residents of Ariel and other settlements who voted for Likud
do not seem to care.
Every American
administration since Jimmy CarterŐs has taken a position against settlements in
the West Bank. They are not only illegal under international law, but they also
jeopardize IsraelŐs long-term security, stability, and prospects for peace with
its neighbors.
Settlements and
the security structures that surround them debilitate the livelihoods of
Palestinians, cut them off from each other, and make a viable Palestinian state
unachievable. From 1994 to 2004, after the start of the Oslo peace process,
which was based on the principle of two states, the settler population grew a
striking 89 percent.
On a recent trip
to the region, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton criticized settlement
construction and the demolition of Palestinian homes in Jerusalem. Yet
expansion plans continue to be developed by the Israeli Civil Administration.
Clearly, words
have yet to alter the course of Israeli policies, and if the past is prologue,
a Netanyahu-led government will not be helpful in ending construction. In fact,
the last time Netanyahu was prime minister, settlement construction increased
to its highest levels in 20 years.
When it comes to
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, we are running out of time to save a
two-state solution.Waiting for Ňpro-peaceÓ governments to be elected on both
sides is like waiting for the planets to align. With the right wing on the rise
in Israel and a fragmented Palestinian polity, the ideal configuration seems
light-years away. Israel is on a crash course with an irreversible entanglement
in Palestinian territory.
ItŐs time for a
new approach that will make it clear to the Israeli government that there must
be a permanent freeze on settlement construction and expansion.
In 2007, the
United States and Israel signed a memorandum of understanding guaranteeing
Israel $30 billion in military assistance over the next decade. This
assistance, however, has never been conditioned or leveraged to ensure
compliance with U.S. policy on settlements.
By conditioning
assistance on compliance with a complete and permanent freeze on settlement
construction, the United States can send a clear message to Israel.
This message
could also help Netanyahu. Since the domestic constituency that put him into
power is sympathetic to settlement expansion, limitations on U.S. assistance
can give Netanyahu the ability to argue that his hands are tied and that a
settlement freeze is necessary.
If we are
shipping our tax dollars overseas in these tough economic times, the least we
should do is make sure they are being used to further U.S. objectives. If the
United States truly is a friend to Israel, it should show some tough love, and
conditioning aid is the right way to start.
Yousef Munayyer is a policy analyst with the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee in Washington