- MENU
- HOME
- SEARCH
- WORLD
- MAIN
- AFRICA
- ASIA
- BALKANS
- EUROPE
- LATIN AMERICA
- MIDDLE EAST
- United Kingdom
- United States
- Argentina
- Australia
- Austria
- Benelux
- Brazil
- Canada
- China
- France
- Germany
- Greece
- Hungary
- India
- Indonesia
- Ireland
- Israel
- Italy
- Japan
- Korea
- Mexico
- New Zealand
- Pakistan
- Philippines
- Poland
- Russia
- South Africa
- Spain
- Taiwan
- Turkey
- USA
- BUSINESS
- WEALTH
- STOCKS
- TECH
- HEALTH
- LIFESTYLE
- ENTERTAINMENT
- SPORTS
- RSS
- iHaveNet.com
by William Pfaff
The Israeli press reports with alarm that the United States has threatened to reduce by $1 billion the guarantee the U.S. Treasury customarily provides for Israel state borrowings, which assure them the best commercial terms.
This is evidence that the Obama government is serious about halting Israel's colonization of the Palestinian territories -- and about imposing, rather than merely inviting, a two-state Middle East solution.
During the next two years, Israel would lose more than a quarter of its U.S. loan guarantees, a sum equal to the
estimated total the Netanyahu government now proposes to spend on the 120
This penalty excludes Israel's borrowing for military purposes, ordinarily underwritten by the U.S., thus defending President Obama from a charge of weakening Israel's security. It is also recognition that nearly all that Israeli military spending goes to American companies.
This measure seems to have antedated the defiant announcement by Netanyahu last Monday that Israel will construct a new housing project for Jews in Arab Jerusalem, the issue responsible for much current uproar. He declared that Israel can do whatever it pleases anywhere in Jerusalem since "united Jerusalem" has been pronounced "the capital of the Jewish people and of the state of Israel," and "our sovereignty over it cannot be challenged."
This statement followed Washington's summons of Israel's ambassador to the
Israel in fact has no sovereignty whatever over East Jerusalem, which it seized from Jordan in the 1967 war. Its presence is as a military occupier, and the legitimacy of its presence depends upon the
These legal considerations, generally neglected by the international public and deliberately obfuscated by Israel, have suddenly become relevant for two reasons.
The first, as set out by Henry Siegman, former national director of the
The settlements are illegal in international law, condemned by the international community, an enormous political and security liability to Israel, a burden on the state budget, and they enjoy relatively little support from the American Jewish community and the ordinary citizens of Israel. The notion that popular support for the colonies makes them untouchable by the government is, Siegman says, "absurd."
"Draconian laws" on illegal construction are regularly enforced inside Israel, and anyone who pleaded "natural growth" as a reason to be exempted from such law would be told to move: there are plenty of empty apartments in Israel, where the Jewish population of European descent is diminishing.
A recent book ("The Hebrew Republic" by Bernard Avishai) notes that up to one-third of the children of the Israeli elite lives abroad, and a 2006 study found that 44 percent of young Israelis "would seriously think of leaving Israel" if it would improve their living standards.
Siegman says that Obama is determined to establish a settlement based on UN resolutions, agreements Israel has already signed but ignores, and international law.
Such a proposal would be powerfully reinforced by the second new factor in the situation: the
If they fail, as they have until now, the
The responsibility to settle the matter, if the parties can't do it themselves, is implicit in the UN resolutions that created Israel and awarded a right to self-determination to the Palestinians.
If the United States and the
WORLD | AFRICA | ASIA | EUROPE | LATIN AMERICA | MIDDLE EAST | UNITED STATES | ECONOMICS | EDUCATION | ENVIRONMENT | FOREIGN POLICY | POLITICS
Obama, Solana Mean Business About Two-State Solution