Israel Matzav

The usual condemnations?

I noted in an earlier post that the Prime Minister's office approved the issuance of tenders for 238 apartments in Jerusalem outside the 1949 armistice lines. I was disappointed by the fact that the number of apartments was cut back to mollify the Obama administration.

Commenter Norman F got it right when he wrote that for all the trouble Israel is getting, Netanyahu should have approved 10,000 apartments or more beyond the armistice lines. I would add that he should also have approved some apartments in Judea and Samaria while he is at it. Indications are already being seen that from November 3, the Obama administration is going to go back to being Mr. Hyde when it comes to Israel. This is from Ben Smith in Politico.

With talks between U.S., Israeli and Palestinian leaders apparently on the brink of collapse over a Palestinian demand — and Israeli refusal — to extend a construction moratorium, a source close to the White House tells me the State Department is preparing its first public pressure on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu since the relationship warmed up earlier this year.

The State Department is expected to issue a statement saying it "regrets" the decision because it is "not productive" for the peace negotiations, the source said.

Much of the reaction from all sides will depend on the exact calibration of the criticism, and State's reaction will of course depend on exactly what Netanyahu says today.

Smith's post was written before the State Department issued its statement regarding the Israeli tenders (the 'Palestinians,' Egypt, Jordan, France and Russia have all issued statements with varying degrees of hysteria condemning the Israeli decision, but other than the American statement, none of them matter at all).

But Smith's colleague Laura Rozen writes that the warning about the State Department did not refer to Friday's statement but to another anticipated action by Netanyahu.

Another colleague is also hearing that State anticipates that Netanyahu may announce that he is not extending the freeze ... and would then issue a statement similar to what Ben is hearing. Suggestion that one such 'heads up' may have been sent to a lawmaker's office, along these lines....

But several Washington Israel hands say it's inconceivable Netanyahu would make such an announcement or any announcement at all on Shabbot, as it would collapse his government. And one Washington Israel expert wonders why Netanyahu would make such an announcement at all. He's already given his answer -- he would do an extension if the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state - and doesn't have to do anything right now, the Israel expert said.

But another Washington Middle East expert says it's clear to him that, whether Netanyahu says it today or another day, "all the visible signs seem to be that he is not extending."

A U.S. official said Friday that the U.S. is continuing to work the issues, both efforts to try to get a possible extension of the freeze, but more broadly to keep the direct talks going. He wasn't aware of U.S. anticipation of such an announcement from Israel.

"Look, let’s not get ahead of ourselves," State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said at the press conference Friday. "We are working intensively as we speak with the parties directly to get negotiations to resume. We are doing everything in our power and we are making clear to the parties that we want to see this direct negotiation continue, so we’re not focused on what happens 'if.' We’re focused on how can we create the conditions that allow the parties to continue."

I see no reason for Netanyahu to make any announcement that the freeze is over - he's done that already. And if he's going to start a massive building push in Judea and Samaria, he should start it now and not in three weeks. Enough of the timidity.

In the meantime, Israel was defended by a surprising source on Friday: Congressman Gary Ackerman (D-NY).

“Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. It is not a settlement," said Rep. Gary Ackerman Chairman of the Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia. "As such, the resumption of construction in Jerusalem is not a justification for a crisis, a showdown, a meltdown or even a hissy fit. Ramot and Pisgat Zeev are going to be part of Israel in any conceivable final status deal and to pretend otherwise is pointless."

"As I have said, those who earlier complained about the inadequacy of Israel’s unilateral and uncompensated settlement freeze, who chose to waste those ten months instead of diving aggressively into direct talks on peace, cannot reasonably now turn around and complain that the end of the freeze and the resumption of Israeli construction in Jerusalem is either a shock or an insurmountable obstacle to peace."

Ackerman continued to add, "the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinians are not going to be achieved by violence and they’re not going to be achieved by the equivalent of holding their breath until their lips turn blue. Direct negotiations are sole pathway to their goal and the sooner they recognize this fact, the better.”

Of course, Ackerman (pictured) would not have said the same thing had Israel chosen to build in Judea or Samaria. Still, Ackerman could jeopardize his Soros money with statements like that. Could the stooge he nominated to run against him actually be pressing him? Could Liz Berney be threatening him from the Tax Revolt Party line? Hmmm.

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 9:26 AM