Israel and the Palestinians Solution to a Conflict

Politics is sometimes raw and often raucous in the Jewish State. But that is nothing new. What is different is a claimed move afoot aimed at preventing the much debated “two-state-solution” for Palestinian Arabs in Israel.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government intends to announce the formal annexation of the West Bank in the coming weeks, a source has told the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh. According to Hersh, the religious parties that “dominate” Netanyahu’s government are demanding full Israeli control over both Gaza and the West Bank (Judea and Samaria).

“I was told this week by a well-informed Washington official that the Israeli leadership will formally annex the West Bank in the very near future – perhaps in two weeks…and will convince some in the skeptical Arab world to reconsider financing the planned reconstruction of Gaza,” Hersh wrote in an article on his Substack on Wednesday.

This writer, however, hears from Israel that full annexation is not on Prime Minister Netanyahu’s agenda – certainly not within a two-week timeframe. What is forthcoming however is what some might call a de facto (as opposed to de jure) “annexation.”

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has quietly developed a plan to “annex” portions of the West Bank approximating 60% of the territory (Area C) becoming essentially a part of the State of Israel. The minister has revealed a plan to impose permanent Israeli control over a significant part of the West Bank “without the government being accused of annexing it,” Smotrich claimed.

Smotrich’s statements, published by CNN and The New York Times, were made during a speech he gave earlier this summer. He was recorded saying that he had developed a plan to effectively preclude a “two-state-solution.” He further disclosed that Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu was “fully onboard.”

The plan pivots on transferring administrative authority in the West Bank from the Israeli IDF to the Israeli civil authorities. Smotrich said that he oversaw the creation of an entire administrative body directly linked to the government and it is ready to assume its responsibility.

In 1967, Israel began administering the West Bank and Gaza under a military administrative body; in 1981 the Civil Administration replaced it. With the advent of Netanyahu’s Likud-led government in 2022, Smotrich was put in charge of the Civil Administration.

He claimed that budgets were already allocated to infrastructure for settlement expansion and for “security measures” for them. He stressed that the aim of such a plan is “to avoid the West Bank from becoming part of a Palestinian state.”

The Oslo Accords divided the West Bank into 3 areas of responsibility and authority. Areas A and B are (with some exceptions) essentially Palestinian.

Area C comprises the West Bank territories where Palestinians aren’t allowed to have any kind of sovereignty or authority under the Oslo Accords. It covers 61% of the West Bank and includes the territory’s borders, the Jordan Valley, and the space between Palestinian towns and cities.

Smotrich’s plan constitutes a significant variation from the way the West Bank is administered presently. The latter will be under the civil control of the Israeli government, which will facilitate settlement building and expansion such that Area C will effectively become a direct extension of Israel.

The second stage in the plan will take authority on building and urbanization in Area B from the Palestinian Authority. Administration would remain unchanged, except the urban plans would no longer be defined by the Palestinian Authority. Rather, the Israeli government itself will be in control, turning Palestinian communities into more or less reserves controlled by Israel.

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich called this past week for Israel to effectively annex the West Bank. But he also desires to annex the Gaza Strip as well. In doing so he is calling for the establishment of new settlements deep inside both areas and the departure of Arabs harboring nationalist aspirations.

This writer contends that Smotrich’s desire to completely control Gaza and re-settle the strip after unilaterally withdrawing from it in 2005, after 38 years of settlers living there, is a disaster in the re-making.

Israel has every right to propose annexing Area C as that was the original intent of the 1994-95 Oslo Accords. Moreover, Prime Minister Netanyahu has reiterated recently that, “Israel has no intention of permanently occupying Gaza or displacing its civilian population.”

Netanyahu is prudent in his response rejecting calls for annexation of Gaza. And there are good reasons for this that make sense, especially given what has occurred in Gaza.

Consider this: If Israel were to at some point annex all of Area C (which is what the de facto plan of Smotrich’s intimates) and then proceed to negotiate with the Palestinian Arabs for subsequent control of areas A and B, a solution would still have to be found for the Palestinian Arabs.

Under any scenario, for peace to prevail, Palestinian Arabs must become self-determining and thus in control of their own destiny by having full rights for themselves.

This brings me to my final point. An opportunity exists or will shortly for West Bank Arabs to have their own homeland. Gaza must be rebuilt. Those calculations are already underway.

Supplemented with a bit of land contiguous with Gaza (by Egypt and/or Israel) to reduce density, West Bank Arabs could live comfortably in Gaza with the existing population? Both groups are Palestinian. Moreover, as I and others have proposed before (TOI Blogs), Jordan would benefit hugely (financially and politically) by being seen as a “savior” to West Bank Arabs – since some would opt for Gaza, their reduced number would not be viewed as a threat to the Hashemite Kingdom.

If the money will be available to rebuild Gaza (and numbers like $30-40 billion are already being discussed) why cannot it be fashioned so as to accommodate West Bank Palestinians as well. The point is – it can be – the question is why won’t it be? That’s a question that needs answering.

There is a solution to this 76-year-old problem – but there are those who do not want that to happen any place other than where it cannot happen – in Israel.

Could it be that the EU and UK do not want stability in the Middle East – because with it they lose influence and power for their own political agendas there and back home? This question also needs answering.