More Sacrificial Lambs for the West Bank

By Patricia Lee Sharpe

Israel continues to dig its grave ever deeper by funneling more Israelis into the occupied West Bank. Not only does this policy further enrage Muslims everywhere. Sympathy for Israel, even in the U.S., is not what it used to be.

Yes. Israel is building 100 more new “housing units” on the West Bank. Assuming that family members per unit may average two adults and two kids, that means sleek modern housing for 400 more Israelis where they shouldn’t be. (Probably twice that number if most of the “units” are inhabited by religious conservatives, since pious types of all persuasions seem to think they have a special dispensation for seeding our over-populated earth with their precious genes.)

Splitting Hairs

The new construction has been subject to protest, of course, but Israeli spokesmen, as usual, have a clever answer. The “settlements” aren’t being expanded, they say. These “housing units” are to be located on land already stolen from the Palestinians—which, needless to say, is not quite how they say it.

"This construction of 50 (housing units) in Ariel and 50 in EL Kana are in the framework of the policy of the government because it will be construction inside the built-up area of existing settlement blocks," said [Prime Minister Ehud] Olmert's spokesman Mark Regev.

"This is consistent with what we said: one, no new settlements; two, no expropriation of land; three, no policy to outwardly expand existing settlement."

Only an official spokesman of the Olmert government could make such a statement with a straight face. Nobody, absolutely nobody, cares about housing units per se. It’s the ever increasing Israeli population on the occupied West Bank that’s the problem. Every additional Israeli is one more person who will have to be extracted (kicking and screaming, no doubt) at some point in the future.

Even so, the settlers themselves are not content with the additional construction:

"Thousands of housing units need to be built to cope with population growth [!!!!]," said Dani Dayan, of the Council of Jewish Communities in Judea and Samaria.”

Already, evidently, some 270,000 Israelis live in the West Bank, with 200,000 more in East Jerusalem.

The Policy of Whining

The official line of the U.S. government is that we keep pleading with the Israelis to cease settlement expansion because it is unhelpful to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and the ultimate creation of a viable Palestinian state. The Israeli government appears to agree to desist, then does it anyway, at which point the U.S. produces, for PR purposes, a little pro forma whining.

But U.S. aid to Israel doesn’t get cut off. Essentially Israel can do whatever it wants—and the U.S. gets to pay for it.

U.S. aid to Israel in 2006 was about $2.46 billion. Others say $2.56 billion. The difference is insignificant. It's a lot of money and U.S. Congressmen crow about their role in making it possible. This sum does not include nearly the same amount or more for military assistance. Keep that in mind as I make the following little suggestion to facilitate the withdrawal that must happen if Israel is ever to be secure and respected by the world community.

Build Where You Belong

Let all non-military U.S. aid be mandated to be used only for building housing within the 1967 borders of Israel, so that, within a decade or so, there will be no more Israelis on the West Bank or in Jerusalem.

On a website I can’t find any more, unfortunately, I discovered that you can buy a standard-sized, non-luxury, two bedroom apartment in Tel Aviv for $225,000 to $300,000.

So, for $2.46 billion we could build about 12,300 units a year at $200,000 from the U.S., plus an added $25-75,000 that Israel should be able to contribute, thanks to savings on infrastructure, security, etc. no longer needed to maintain settlers on the West Bank. Figuring that each unit will hold 4 people, we’ll be able to house nearly 50,000 settlers a year.* In four years, then, the West Bank will be wholly Palestinian, and in another five years East Jerusalem will be ready to become the capital of the Palestinian state.

Ah yes, Jerusalem! Sooner or later, Israel is going to have to accept the fact that Jerusalem is sacred to Jews, Christians and Muslims. Its final status has to reflect that. Things could be worse in this department. Imagine if we still had to make room for Baal worshipers! They’d have some historical claims, too, were there any adherents around.

Let Kids be Kids

Thank how wonderful this will be for the ex-settlers’ children—those sacrificial lambs, who will be able to play freely and safely, instead of being used by their parents as hostages to their vision of irridentist Israel. They will also be freed from the psychology of hate that prevails in the settlements.

Meanwhile, given the fact that the U.S. will be putting up the lion’s share of settler resettling costs, the U.S. should be able to choose the contractors. As it turns out, Iraq is crawling with U.S. building contractors. Surely, if these companies were good enough for the Iraqis we wanted to be such good friends with, they’re good enough for our good friends in Israel. If I were in power, of course, I'd do a little competitive bidding and insist on some quality control, but speed is of the essence here, too.

And here’s another benefit: those monster bulldozers Israel uses to pull down Palestinian houses can be put to constructive use, building “units” to resettle the settlers. (Hmmmm, I wonder if the U.S. Congress shouldn’t vote a special fund to rebuild the Palestinian houses and replant the olive groves that the Israelis have wantonly destroyed.)

Gaza's Not a Precedent

A few words about what’s happened since Israel withdrew from Gaza, which will probably be used as an argument against total resettlement. In short, it’s not a precedent. Sure, the Israelis pulled out of the strip. Then they converted the place into a semi-starved, all-Palestinian concentration camp where antsy kids have nothing to do and nothing to hope for. No wonder the rockets keep coming.

It’s been standard operating procedure in Washington lately to be rather cavalier about advocating regime change, by hook or by crook, by invasion or subversion or starvation or whatever. But, the last time I looked at texts on government, democracy meant that the people get to choose their government. Gazans chose Hamas in a fair election. How then can the U.S. government say that Hamas lacks legitimacy in Gaza? What makes the Olmert government any more legitimate?

So kudos to ex-President Jimmy Carter. He’s seems to be the only distinguished American who is fair-minded enough to be looking for a just solution to the endless stalemate in the Middle East. He has actually talked to Hamas leaders as well as Bashir Assad of Syria.

Justice Works Wonders

When Mikhail Gorbachev was here in Santa Fe last week, he made three main points: (1) disproportionate military power is destabilizing; (2) unilateralism cannot solve complex world problems; (3) the only way to reach agreement on sticky issues is to get together and very patiently discuss them.

Jimmy Carter is a Democrat. Perhaps the Democrats will be able to unite around a winning candidate in November, and by January we will have a President who has the intellectual acumen and moral courage of a post-presidential Jimmy Carter. Israel is not increasing its security (or ours) by populating the West Bank with ever more Israelis. Will desettlement work? I think it will. The majority of Muslims will see the coming into existence of a Palestinian state that controls every inch (no less!) of the West Bank as justice done. Justice in Arabic-speaking cultures is even more important than freedom, which [President Bush, take note] is often seen as another word for anarchy.

*Please no nitpicking on numbers. These are very rough and ready figures to suggest that the settlers can be resettled for little more than the U.S. is already paying to subsidize a wholly untenable situation.

Comments

[James]

What makes aid to Israel different from aid to any other country is that Israel is not given funds for any specific purpose. They are simply given cash, which they roll into general revenues. The proposal to tie the aid to a specific project would throw the Israeli government's finances into turmoil all by itself.

This is what is so frustrating. Israel is not really an independent country and can no longer survive without US aid. This much is well-known to both Israel and the Arab states and therefore the US could end the settlements any time it wanted by threatening to withhold aid. That the US refuses to consider such a move fundamentally undermines its already weak claims to be an "honest broker." It makes the US an accomplice to everything that happens on the West Bank. The settlements are, therefore, fundamentally a threat to US security because they spawn terrorism that is ultimately directed against us.

The settlements are a greater threat than any real or imagined state sponsor of terrorism because they actually create radicals instead of merely financing them. The argument that they aren't expropriating any new land is, as you say, absurd: they are still building on stolen land that will have to be returned eventually. Israel is playing a stubborn, long-term game to "create new facts on the ground." The Palestinians are playing a stubborn, long-term game to prevent those facts from being made permanent. But when the Palestinians respond to heavily armed settlers and IDF units with riots and demonstrations, they are accused of being "irresponsible," "unhelpful," and "terrorists." When has Israel been responsible? When has the US been helpful? Why shouldn't they resort to terrorism when they have no other hope?