NETANYAHU ANNEXATION PLANS-HOW FOREIGN POLICY IS SACRIFICED FOR DOMESTIC CONSIDERATIONS

NETANYAHU ANNEXATION PLANS-HOW FOREIGN POLICY IS SACRIFICED FOR DOMESTIC CONSIDERATIONS

By Josef Olmert

Benjamin Netanyahu is arguably Mr. Israel in the last eleven years, the longest-serving prime minister in the country’s history. Adore him or loathe him. Whatever has happened in the country in this long period is largely attributable to his achievements or failures, actions, or lack of them. When one looks at the Israeli economy, surely until the disaster inflicted by COVID 19, one can see the GDP per capita is almost identical to that of Great Britain and France. It is an export-oriented economy that has to deal with boycotts and other political problems. Yet, it has grown in a robust and steady way throughout the Netanyahu period at the helm.  Exports are the oxygen. While Israel opened and extended new markets, particularly in Asia, the EU has remained a crucial destination for Israeli goods.  So, the economy has done well under him. Wha,t then, about Israel’s foreign relations?

It is here, where Netanyahu can claim his greatest achievements. While Israel is often considered to be an isolated nation, subjected to the relentless barrage of UN condemnations and global boycott campaigns such as BDS, the real, hard facts portray another picture altogether. Let us start with the chronic Arab-Israeli conflict. Does it really still exist? Sure, formally, it does. Most members of the Arab League are still maintaining a state of war with Israel. This is bad, indeed, an unprecedented situation. However, it is actually a ritualistic statement, and in actual terms, it does not exist. Netanyahu met publicly with the leaders of Oman and Sudan. Other Arab states, such as Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, are also in constant touch with Israel, something which they hardly even try to conceal and deny. Morocco can also be considered one of these countries. Surely, so are Egypt and Jordan, with whom Israel has a peace treaty. The fact that many of the contacts with Arab states are still behind closed doors, under the carpet, should not mislead us. The BDS exists in the West, not in the Middle East. The truth is that the volume of pro-Israel articles in the Saudi press and other Gulf states is amazingly high. Even in the Qatar-dominated Al-Jazeera, there have been polls among viewers showing that a vast majority of respondents considered Iran, not Israel, to be the Arabs’ greatest enemy.

Moreover, Israel is in formal relationships with the Palestinian Authority. Yes, this is a conflict situation, but one that has lost a great deal of its urgency and overall strategic importance. Under Netanyahu, Israel used properly the opportunities opened to her under changing circumstances, such as the Arab Spring and the growing Iranian-Sunni conflict in the region. Netanyahu also used opportunities wisely this time, in so far as the Palestinians are concerned. He has not pushed the relations with them to the point of no return, leaving the door open for negotiations, while maintaining a status quo on the ground that is decidedly advantageous to Israel. His pragmatism, which comes with a domestic political price, is in dramatic display with regard to Gaza. Let us be honest here-Netanyahu, as prime minister of Israel, has caved into terrorism. He buys quiet in Gaza by allowing the Qatari infusion of large sums of money to Hamas. This is the same Netanyahu who started his political career over three decades ago by presenting himself as the fearless warrior against terrorism. He is acting pragmatically  here, though the question remains as to how justified is his pragmatism in this particular case. Clearly, one of his considerations is the need to keep the separation between Hamas in Gaza and the Palestinian Authority[PA] in Judea and Samaria.

Beyond the Middle East, the scope of Israel’s foreign policy outreach is indeed highly impressive. Israel is having near-alliance relations with Greece and Cyprus. Likewise, Israel has very friendly relations with the Balkan states and is closely allied with the Visegrad group of the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, and Hungary. The relations with other major European countries are cordial, though not without difficulties. They are very good with Putin’s Russia. In fact, Putin visited Israel three times, and Netanyahu is a frequent traveler to Moscow. The success of the relations with EU countries helps Israel in its constant struggle to prevent anti-Israel resolutions by the EU. Germany is a key state in this regard-being a barrier for anti-Israel measures initiated mostly by France with British connivance. The impact of relations with Russia is for all to see in the case of the Israeli activities in Syria, tacitly approved and even assisted by Russia. It was recently revealed that Putin prevented a dangerous Obama Administration anti-Israel resolution in the UN Security Council, on top of the resolution about settlements. Israel’s outreach has extended to the African continent, where countries like Kenya, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Uganda, Tanzania, Zambia, and others maintain open and  warm relations with Israel.  This fact demonstrates so vividly the folly of the claims about Israel being an Apartheid state. When the son of the legendary Jomo Kenyatta gives his blessing to Israel, Progressive anti-Israel agitators look ridiculous. Relations have developed into a strategic alliance with  India under Prime Minister Modi and improved greatly with Japan. Then there is China with whom Israel has extensive open economic relations, less open but also important strategic relations. So much so, that the Trump Administration expresses public concern about the intensity of these relations. Last but not necessarily least, Israel is back in Central and South America.

On top of all that, Netanyahu has forged strong relationships with the Trump administration. This is such a sharp contrast to the thorny relations with President Obama. Here is a problem for Israel-Most American Jews resent Trump, and this is, to put it mildly, BUT Trump has proved his pro-Israel credentials in actions, not in words. Netanyahu had to make a painful decision, and rightly so decided to expand the relations with Trump. He may have overplayed his hand here, saying and doing things which unnecessarily undermined the bi-partisan support for Israel. This is an issue that clearly goes beyond the scope of this piece, a painful subject to deal with, but definitely within the scope of the article to raise this issue in the context of the question of the annexation of parts of Judea and Samaria.

Is it all the magic of Netanyahu? Surely, it is not, as there are so many interests that are at play. Be it Iran and its influence in the Middle East, which is so alarming in the eyes of Sunni Arab states. Be it the advanced Israeli technology, which is so in demand in Africa, Asia, and the Americas. Be it the Turkish challenge that connects Greece, Cyprus, and the Balkan states with Israel. That said, it all happens under Netanyahu’s watch; clearly, one of his greatest claims to fame and he is right in arguing it.

The prime minister has a problem, one that is casting a huge shadow over his achievements and possibly over his entire legacy,  and it has to do with his legal troubles. It is possible that in a matter of a few months, maybe not later than September 2021, he will be forced to leave his office. Worse than that, he may be facing devastating results in his legal cases, with the likelihood of a jail sentence looming heavily over his head. It is THE problem that he is facing now, and here is where this problem coincides with his new political baby-the talk about the annexation of parts of  Judea and Samaria, or application of Israeli sovereignty over these areas, which is the term preferred by him and his supporters. This is also where this talk coincides with the policy of the Trump Administration.

Netanyahu did not deal with the question of annexation ever since his first election as PM in 1996. Moreover, this is a question that was deliberately put in the back burner by successive Likud governments ever since the  Likud victory in 1977. Menachem Begin, Mr. Greater Israel himself, he and no other, is the one nationalist leader who made the historic decision NOT to formally annex parts of Judea and Samaria. Begin never abandoned the claim for Israeli sovereignty over all of Judea and Samaria, nor should he, nor should any Israeli prime minister, regardless of his/her party affiliation. Still, he offered self-rule to the Palestinians with the obvious possibility of developing into something else. Nor did PM Shamir annex any territory, and whether Likud supporters like it or not, the fact is, that the party whose traditional banner was greater Israel, has consistently refrained from going with it to the ultimate destination -annexation. Netanyahu started to refer to this issue only when the Trump deal of the century was in the making.

Did Netanyahu encourage the Trump team to work out this very detailed plan? Did he simply go along with it,  realizing that Trump is determined to have his own plan? These are questions that cannot be answered now, as Netanyahu keeps the answers close to his chest. However, it is clear that from the very beginning, Trump and his team explained that any annexation by Israel is contingent upon agreement to an independent Palestinian state over at least 70 percent of Judea and Samaria. It is also obvious, that the Trump plan leaves Jewish settlements out of the possible annexed territories. All in all, the Trump plan is NOT the ideal Likud and Right-Wing cup of tea. Netanyahu had a choice to make. He could declare that he is ready to negotiate with the Palestinians in good faith on the basis of the plan, let them refuse as they did, and then move on to deal with other issues on the national agenda of Israel and, at the same time, looking as the positive statesman ready to negotiate, compared with the outright Palestinian rejectionism.  His other choice was to dwell on one element of the Trump plan, the question of possible annexation, and turn it into a major domestic political issue, probably the number-1 issue on his agenda. Netanyahu chose the latter. Yes, it is his right, and from the perspective of his devoted followers, his duty, as it is in line with the ideology of greater Israel and the overall image of the Likud party being THE nationalist, Right-Wing party of Israel.

Here are the problems though-timing, motivation,  priorities, and cost-benefit of this decision IF implemented.

Netanyahu talks about July 1st, as the D-Day, the beginning of the process of annexation/application of sovereignty.  As of now, just days ahead of the deadline, very little preparations have been made by his government to be ready for the decision and to face up to its very likely implications. The IDF did only some work. No legal work to accompany the decision, and to justify it legally, and there is no PR /Hasbara effort in the world. The enemies of Israel completely dominate this arena. The questions of motivation and timing dwarf all of the above. Israel is grappling now with the devastating effects of COVID-19. Netanyahu handling of the crisis until now was exemplary- Israel is ranked as one of the best countries in the world in terms of its overall handling of the crisis. It comes, though, with a huge economic price.

Israel GDP in the first quarter of 2020 shrunk by 6.8 %!. Unemployment is at all-time record-over 20%, and the return to work is distinctly slow. For recovery, Israel needs its foreign markets to be open to her as before. Will they IF Netanyahu goes along with its plan? Simple answer-NO, surely many countries in the EU, which already specifically say so, will impose sanctions on Israel. Just a  few days ago, the German Foreign Minister visited Israel with the stated aim of warning Netanyahu about the possible ill effects of annexation. Above and beyond the possible economic implications, there is another problem here. Israel will place itself in the center of a world crisis with this decision at a time when world attention is focused on other issues, but then will turn to her. We know from experience that Jews are always news. It is not an Israeli interest to almost deliberately push Israeli issues to the forefront of world attention. It should be taken for granted that Israel’s enemies are waiting just for that to happen. Add up to this the possibility of Palestinian violent reaction whether in Gaza or in Judea and Samaria. Again, no interest of Israel, and let us take into account also the commotion inside Israel itself. At a time of national emergency, caused by the COVID-19 implications, Israel needs the maximum level of internal solidarity and cohesion, not the opposite.

There is no foreign policy interest of Israel that is going to be served or even improved if the prime minister really intends to realize his stated goal. The damage, by far, supersedes any possible advantage. Take, for example, the Arab Sunni states- It is one thing for them to have the current level of relations with Israel, another one to maintain it after annexation. As already is becoming abundantly clear, the Gulf States publicly PLEAD with Israel not to do it. This, in itself, attests to the success of the Netanyahu policy as described above, but also to its fragility, hence the need to keep it going, especially when Netanyahu keeps referring to the Iranian danger and the need to stop it. Israeli sources report that while Iran may be reducing its presence in Syria, it intensifies its work on the nuclear program. THIS IS Israel’s number-1 strategic interest and concern, and to deal with it, Israel needs to mobilize every iota of goodwill, not losing it. This is just one example. There are more that relate to the question of cost-benefit.

On top of all that, stands the relations with the US. Yes, the Trump deal of the century mentions the possibility of annexation/application of sovereignty, and the Administration deals with Netanyahu about this. Still, Trump may lose in November, and then what?.

Can Netanyahu be sure that the Biden Administration will veto a UNSC resolution about sanctions against Israel? Will Netanyahu be able to repair the relations with the Democratic party? Will Netanyahu be able to mend fences with the vast majority of American Jews, when even AIPAC is publicly reserved about his annexation plans? It is arguably the case that a serious dialogue between Israel and the diaspora is an essential interest of both parties. By definition, a dialogue means that both sides have issues, complaints, criticisms. It is in this context that the timing now is not conducive to such a dialogue. Both American and Israeli Jews have enough on their plates right now. COVID-19 and its tragic consequences, antisemitism in the US, and the rise of identity and race politics in a way that can present existential dangers to the American Jewish community.

In fact, now is the time to talk unity and solidarity, not the opposite.

Netanyahu surely is aware of all that. Again, like him or not, he has a lot to offer. He is a strategist and statesman, he is aware of the world scene, and he knows a lot about American politics. Above all, however, he is a politician. He wants to serve four or eight more years. He wants to somehow evade the possible devastating implications of his legal situation.  For that to happen he needs another government, totally dominated by him, not the one he is running today. The current government is not what Netanyahu wanted to have. This is NOT a government based on a Knesset majority which will legislate in a way which will lead to the stoppage of the legal proceedings against him. He does not even make bones of the fact, that he wants such a legislation. For that to happen though, he needs new elections, and in these new elections he needs a winning card. He cannot base a campaign only or mostly on his personal agenda, so it has to be on a national agenda. This IS where the talk about annexation comes to play.  Polls show that he will easily win this election, and they also indicate that there is enough support to annexation/application of sovereignty, though not an overall majority. Netanyahu is pushing towards a scenario whereby Gantz-Ashkenazi party will object to his plans. That may give him the pretext to go for new elections, arguing that the ”historic opportunity” of annexation will not repeat itself. It also serves his agenda that the majority

of the settlers oppose THIS version of annexation, as their rejectionism will enable him to argue that he is positioned in the very center of Israeli politics, a point which may help him in the campaign which he already is planning. Not without relevance to all this is the fact, that the American strategist who helped Netanyahu in the previous campaigns is back in Israel. Netanyahu knows very well why his presence there is needed now.

All the above do NOT constitute the entire discussion about the possibility of annexation, with the significant point of voting rights to the Palestinians in the very center of this added discussion, as this piece is entirely devoted to a political analysis of how Netanyahu runs Israel and decides on his priorities.

Henry Kissinger once made his famous observation to the effect that Israel has no foreign policy, only a domestic one. Does Netanyahu want to justify Kissinger of all people? Is he really ready to sacrifice impressive foreign policy achievements for the sake of gaining a  possible domestic political victory?

Dr. Josef Olmert is a Senior Fellow at the Palm Beach Center for Democracy and Policy Research and an adjunct professor of Political Science at the University of South Carolina