Mr. Dayan goes to Washington
Barak Ravid reports with some consternation that former Yesha Council head Danny Dayan is giving the revenants something they never had before: A diplomatic alternative.
Dayan is heading to Washington this week, and he is the first 'settler leader' ever officially to do so.
Dayan feels that there has been a change in the attitude of the
international community towards the settlers in the past year. The
United States and the European Community countries believe that the
settlements are in contradiction of international law, that they are an
obstacle to peace and must be removed. But they understand that the
settlers are a significant political player that cannot be ignored.
“From total indifference and treating us like lepers with whom one
doesn’t speak, the situation has changed − now there’s curiosity and an
eagerness to hear what we have to say,” notes Dayan.
For
example, one day last October Dayan’s cell phone rang. It was former
U.S. Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk, who is currently the vice
president and director of Foreign Policy at the Brookings Institution in
Washington. The two, each of whom was at different meetings in the
Knesset, arranged to meet in the Knesset cafeteria.
While
talking to Indyk about “the situation” Dayan realized that he was
actually in the midst of an “audition.” At the end of the meeting Indyk
invited him to participate in the Saban Forum − one of the most
prestigious events in Washington dealing with Israel-U.S. relations. The
Israeli participants − politicians, academics, diplomats and
journalists − are traditionally identified with the left. Dayan was the
first representative of the settlers.
George Mitchell, the U.S. Middle East envoy during the first term of U.S. President Barack Obama,
has never agreed to meet with Dayan or any representative of the Yesha
Council. All requests were turned down at best, or ignored at worst. The
only liaison for Dayan and the settlers was the U.S. consul general in
Jerusalem, who is actually credentialed to the Palestinian Authority.
Nowadays Dayan is invited to dinners in the home of U.S. Ambassador to
Israel Dan Shapiro. When one of the most senior advisors to President
Obama visited Israel a few weeks ago he sat with Dayan for two hours.
There
has also been a change in the attitude of the international media. Last
August The New York Times, which is known for an editorial policy
critical of the settlements, wrote a flattering portrait of him entitled
“A Settler Leader, Worldly and Pragmatic.” A month earlier Dayan
published an article in the Times entitled “The Settlers are Here to
Stay.” In March he published another article in which he declared that
“The Two-State Formula is Impossible.”
But
the most interesting example is the British newspaper The Guardian,
compared to which the New York Times looks like the mouthpiece of the
Yesha Council. Many European leaders read the op-ed page of The Guardian
with their morning coffee. Two weeks ago Dayan published an article in
the paper entitled “What You Call ‘Settlements’ are on Solid Moral
Ground.” Dayan claimed that the settlements are not an obstacle to peace
and that the world must recognize the fact that the settlers are not
the problem but part of the future solution.
The
article received 565 responses. Some were erased by the editors,
apparently because they contained various types of curses and invective.
The rest consisted mainly of harsh criticism of Dayan and of The
Guardian itself for publishing the article. “The Al Qaida manifesto
demands the return of Al Andalus in Spain where I live. Perhaps we
should have an article by one of them explaining how the land is theirs.
I am appalled that such a propaganda article has appeared in The
Guardian,” wrote one respondent. Many bloggers also published posts
attacking The Guardian.
One
can think of many reasons for the change in the attitude of the
international community towards the settlers. The stagnation of the
peace process, the lack of hope for the two-state solution and the
outcome of the recent election in Israel are some of them. “My
explanation is that for the first time in 20 years the world is
beginning to internalize that we don’t necessarily have to travel on the
two-state highway,” says Dayan. “We’ve reached a crossroads and
everyone is asking themselves where do we go now. People have understood
that ignoring the settlers was a mistake and only undermined the
attempts to find solutions.”
After
many years of opposing the idea, Dayan now believes that the settlers
have to present a genuine and serious diplomatic plan as an alternative
to the two-state solution. He has no consolidated plan as yet, but his
basic assumption is that there will be permanent Israeli control in
Judea and Samaria and no foreign sovereignty west of the Jordan River.
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Danny Dayan, Judea and Samaria, one-state solution, revenants, two-state solution, Yesha Council
Pigs fly: NY Times publishes op-ed by 'settler' leader
Unexpectedly, the New York Times has published an op-ed by
Yesha Council leader Dani Dayan (Hat Tip:
My Right Word).
Arabs called for Israel’s annihilation in 1967, and Israel legitimately seized the disputed territories of Judea and Samaria in self-defense. Israel’s moral claim to these territories, and the right of Israelis to call them home today, is therefore unassailable. Giving up this land in the name of a hallowed two-state solution would mean rewarding those who’ve historically sought to destroy Israel, a manifestly immoral outcome.
Of course, just because a policy is morally justified doesn’t mean it’s wise. However, our four-decade-long settlement endeavor is both. The insertion of an independent Palestinian state between Israel and Jordan would be a recipe for disaster.
The influx of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees from Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and elsewhere would convert the new state into a hotbed of extremism. And any peace agreement would collapse the moment Hamas inevitably took power by ballot or by gun. Israel would then be forced to recapture the area, only to find a much larger Arab population living there.
Moreover, the Palestinians have repeatedly refused to implement a negotiated two-state solution. The American government and its European allies should abandon this failed formula once and for all and accept that the Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria are not going anywhere.
On the contrary, we aim to expand the existing Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria, and create new ones. This is not — as it is often portrayed — a theological adventure but is rather a combination of inalienable rights and realpolitik.
I can hear the Left lining up now:
'Acquisition of territory by force is not acceptable.'It is when it's done in a defensive war, when you have a better legal claim to it than the attacker, and when it's ratified by the United Nations in Resolution 242 (which famously said 'territories' and not '
the territories.'
'The status quo will force Israel to choose between being Jewish and democratic.'Only if you believe the damned lies known as 'Palestinian statistics.'
'The 'Palestinians' are the indigenous people of the region.'No, they're not. In fact, Newt Gingrich may have best described them when he called them
an invented people.
But the most important thing here is that Dayan is adopting a form of the 'one Jewish state solution. That's a good thing, because it's the only solution that gives peace a chance.
Yossi Beilin, a left-wing former Israeli minister, wrote a telling article a few months ago. A veteran American diplomat touring the area had told Mr. Beilin he’d left frightened because he found everyone — Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Jordan and Saudi Arabia — content with the current situation. Mr. Beilin finds this widespread satisfaction disturbing, too.
I think it is wonderful news. If the international community relinquished its vain attempts to attain the unattainable two-state solution, and replaced them with intense efforts to improve and maintain the current reality on the ground, it would be even better. The settlements of Judea and Samaria are not the problem — they are part of the solution.
Indeed.
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Dani Dayan, Judea and Samaria, one-state solution, revenants, two-state solution, Yesha Council
How the 'settlement freeze' was stopped
We all know that Prime Minister Netanyahu was under enormous pressure to extend the 'settlement freeze' in October. We also know that Netanyahu normally doesn't stand up to pressure like that. So what happened this time? The short answer is that there was enormous pressure the other way by the
Yesha Council.
How did the Council stave off a seemingly good opportunity toward what many believe is the only path to peace? Not by amassing messianic-looking armed men wearing sandals and kippas—the dominant image of the Yesha Council in the past and the most persistent picture of the Jewish settler movement in the eyes of the world—but with a high-pressure campaign that included thousands of pre-recorded, computerized phone calls targeting members of the Knesset, central figures in Netanyahu’s Likud Party, and other political movers and shakers.
This new approach is the influence of Dayan, a former IDF major and secular high-tech tycoon who sold his software company in 2004 and threw himself full time into settlement politics. Since becoming chair in 2007, he has worked to transform the council into a Washington-style lobby armed with the latest marketing tools. “We carefully timed a surgical campaign,” says Dayan of the Council’s efforts to prevent the freeze extension. “It was very effective and quite unprecedented. I know for sure that it influenced the prime minister. We showed that we still have political leverage and capabilities.”
Coupled with the phone campaign—albeit to a government that is sympathetic to its cause—is a public relations effort targeted at everyday secular Israelis, most of whom live on the other side of the Green Line and have few ties, personal or otherwise, to the settlements or historic sites such as the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron. More importantly, they have come to accept the inevitability of a two-state solution. “I wouldn’t call it PR,” Dayan says hesitantly. “It’s more like hasbara,” the Hebrew word that has come to mean public diplomacy. “We’ve shifted our focus,” he says. “We’re working to negate stereotypes. The Yesha Council was traditionally involved in promoting the interests of our communities, but we neglected the educational component of our task and failed to reach the Israeli public. The Israeli public needs to understand the historical link we have to the territories.”
Read it all.
Labels: Binyamin Netanyahu, Dani Dayan, settlement freeze extension, Yesha Council
Freeze extension would be ignored?
Yesha Council Chairman Danny Dayan brushes off the idea of a 'settlement freeze' extension by saying that the revenants will
ignore it.
Dayan is doing some wishful thinking. There is no reason to believe that Defense Minister Ehud Barak will not order the security forces to enforce any extension with any less zeal than they enforced the original 'settlement freeze.' And while the inspectors may be willing to ignore construction that took place between September 26 and whenever the freeze takes effect (if it takes effect) if that construction is not continued, I can envision a situation where the security forces would destroy everything if construction is continued.
Please don't just brush off the 'settlement freeze' extension. It's a real threat.
Labels: Danny Dayan, Ehud Barak, settlement freeze extension, Yesha Council
