Israeli settlements undermine prospects for peace

This past week the Obama administration “strongly condemned” the Israeli government’s plan to create more Jewish settlements in the West Bank.
In the context of US-Israeli relations, such words are quite harsh and uncommon. Given the fact that the US had just earmarked a US$38-billion (Bt1.3-trillion) military package for the next 10 years and President Barack Obama had just returned from Jerusalem where he and former president Bill Clinton attended the funeral of the late statesman Shimon Peres, it was understandable why Washington was upset.
It was not the first time that Washington had pointed out that construction of new settlements in occupied territory runs counter to Israel’s security interests.
In 2010, the municipality approved 1,600 new housing units in East Jerusalem. The announcement came as Vice President Joseph Biden was visiting Israel, leading policymakers in the US to view it as a slap in the face.
According to reports, the new settlements will house settlers from an outpost that an Israeli court ruled illegal and ordered demolished.
“It is disheartening that while Israel and the world mourned the passing of President Shimon Peres, and leaders from the US and other nations prepared to honour one of the great champions of peace, plans were advanced that would seriously undermine the prospects for a two-state solution that he so passionately supported,” the US State Department said in a statement this past week.
The strongly worded statement raised speculation that Obama, with just over three months left in the office, might try to level the playing field between Palestinians and Israelis. Such a move, although it would be welcomed by members of the international community, would naturally irritate hardliners in the pro-Israel camp.
The Obama administration has for some time now voiced concern about settlements in the West Bank on the grounds that they could diminish prospects for a two-state solution.  But the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu doesn’t seem to be listening.
Obama has only a few months left to salvage his reputation and his legacy. He may not be able to do much in fundamental terms – and nobody is expecting him to. But, nevertheless, there is a feeling that something has to be done in terms of exacting consequences. Statements without action are meaningless.
Say what you may about the US’s longstanding historical support for Israel. But when there is a settlement deep inside the West Bank, closer to Jordan than to Israel – that’s pushing things a bit too far.
Efforts like those of international peace activists who launched a flotilla to reach the shores of Gaza – an effort to blame and shame the Netanyahu government and highlight the deteriorating humanitarian and economic conditions of Gazan residents – have not worked to force the Israeli government to change its policies, whether in terms of the blockade of Gaza or settlement expansion in the West Bank. It’s an irritation that Netanyahu has shown that he can tolerate.
Peace overtures will not work if hawks on both sides see benefits in war. And when war breaks out, hardliners on both sides of the political divide will be quick to boost their popularity and step up their rhetoric to tell their constituencies that the solution to the conflict is more war.
The greater the devastation, the greater the desire to take revenge. Sadly, both sides are waiting for the next spark to ignite the situation and return to the battlefield.
Netanyahu and his supporters, as well as hardliners in the Hamas organisation, can’t seem to see that war and violence are ineffective in bringing about peace and security – and that their efforts continue to drive a wedge between the world and these two longstanding political and military rivals.