Jews against the Trump Plan for Israel

It may come as a surprise to many, but a lot of the Jewish "settlers" — I know they hate the term, but there is no better one — are opposed to Trump's peace plan, which allows for Israel to annex a large portion of the disputed territories.  They see Trump's plan as too generous to the Palestinians.

Despite the US proposal seemingly allowing for Israeli annexation of all Israeli settlements and the Jordan Valley, some settler officials have come out against the plan for provisioning space for a Palestinian state on some 70 percent of the West Bank.

Many conservatives, both Israeli and American, are surprised at such "settler" stubbornness.  Isn't Trump giving the right-wing Israelis more leeway that any other American president?  By moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, Trump did what Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama would not do.

Apparently, to these "hawkish" settlers, President Trump has not done enough — or rather, he has given a degree of recognition to the Palestinians that the "settlers" are not comfortable with.

Daniella Weiss, a settler leader, has said:

The government of Israel must reject the plan completely.  It is a time-bomb of terrible danger.  It is a trap coated with honey.  The clause regarding sovereignty is only a part of the overall plan, which will eventually award 90 percent [of the arable areas] of Yesha [Judea and Samaria] to the Arabs.

To be fair, this is not a recent development, nor is this aimed personally at Trump.  The leadership of the settler organizations have been determined from day one to prevent any Palestinian state at all — in any capacity — as this earlier quote of Daniella Weiss shows:

With my many talks with Ariel Sharon and my work with Ariel Sharon, there was a clear understanding, a very clear planning, of spreading the Jewish communities in the way that there will be no option for a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria.

So everyone should have known that the two-state solution, in any capacity, was an impossibility — whether due to Arab recalcitrance or Jewish settler determination.  Both sides want all of the pie and will accept nothing less.  The two-state solution was a farce.

Nor will it appease the "settlers" that Trump has put a deadline of four years on the peace plan — after which Israel will have a freer hand.  The "settlers" do not even want to entertain the possibility of a Palestinian entity, even if Trump's plan offers only limited autonomy to it.  As far as the settlers are concerned, God gave the Jews the land, and they want all of it.

It is obvious that the "settlers" will not yield.  So, amazing as it sounds, they want to sabotage Trump's plan.

Does Israel have the nerve to overrule the "settlers"?

The point is moot, actually.  The Arabs will never agree to a limited autonomy, either, and Israel will not offer any more than that.  But in the four-year interim, the "settler" enclaves do not like being surrounded by Palestinians, nor do they like construction limits placed on growth, while their connection to "Israel" will be limited to roads, which they consider a security risk.

Yamina Party head Naftali Bennett has long opposed the Trump plan because it also allows for the creations of a demilitarized Palestinian state.  Bennett has long argued Israel must apply sovereignty to all of Area C, while the Trump plan allows Israel to annex only half of Area C, effectively 30% of the West Bank.

And it is not merely that the "settlers" want more land, but Trump's plan would give citizenship to too many Arabs.

"The map is not good for Israel. It must be corrected. For example the map would apply Israeli law to over a quarter of a million Palestinians," Bennett told reporters on Wednesday.

Right now, there are more than 250,000 Palestinians who would receive citizenship according to the Trump plan, he said. "This is a disaster for Israel. No one will accept this. If the map is good we will support it," Bennett said.

In a nutshell, the Israeli right wants more land than the Trump plan offers, with fewer Palestinians getting enfranchised.  Israel wants the land without the Arabs on it (or at least the minimum number).  Whether or not this is a good policy is another matter.

So if the settlers get their wish, and no Palestinian entity is allowed, what about a one-state solution where the Arabs eventually get enfranchised?  Well, the Arabs know that a one-state solution will eventually erode and dissolve the Jewish state.

This produces a dilemma.  Israel wants all the land, but not all of the Palestinains on it, yet claims to be democratic.  It is a juggling act.  For decades, Israel has avoided the hard decisions by making no formal declarations.  Israel refused to annex much of the land and then did a song and dance of explanation when the topic came up.

Trump's plan — for all its wonderful aspects — will put an end to the song and dance.  Israel will get half of Area C but will have to enfranchise a lot of unwanted Palestinians, which will cause a crisis, no matter how it is handled.

Let's face it: Israel cannot remain a democracy while this goes on, and it can no longer be hidden and ignored.

If Israel does not enfranchise the Palestinians, it will cease to be democratic.

If Israel does enfranchise the Palestinians, it will lose its Jewish character.

If Israel offers the Palestinians only autonomy, the Palestinians will not accept it.  They know that time is on their side.

The only option is separation.  If Israel wants all the land, it must pay the Palestinians to leave, and it will not come cheap.  The cost will be on the order of $200 billion, and it will have to be footed primarily by the Jewish people.

Rightly or wrongly, Europe will not pay for this, and the U.S. government should not have to.  This would amount to about half a million dollars to a Palestinian family of five to leave Judea and Samaria.  Nothing less would motivate them, and even that would motivate only some of them.

Some, like Israpundit's Ted Belman, have advocated for a Jordan Option, where the Palestinians are given Jordanian citizenship.  But Jordan already disenfranchised those Palestinians born after 1988.  Only an overthrow of Jordan's monarchy would effect the change needed, and there is no guarantee that what comes after would be better.  All of this would depend on the cooperation of an Arab state to make Israel's life easier.  This is the one fatal flaw in all Israeli plans.  They require a cooperation that will never exist.

The only solution is physical separation, to wherever...and the worldwide Jewish community will have to pay for it.

It will require something else from the worldwide Jewish community — namely, a change from its knee-jerk rejection of nationalism.  Too many Jews in the USA, Canada, France, Britain, etc. have pushed for multiculturalism and have been instrumental in passing laws that have deconstructed the character of Western states.  But France has as much a right to remain French as Israel has to remain Jewish.  Canada has as much right to remain Western European as Israel has to remain Jewish.

Israel's survival may depend on a mind change in the disapora Jewish community.  This is critical, because Israel will need their wealth to pay for this, and Israel will need diaspora Jewry to adopt nationalism as a virtue, or Israel's Jewish character may go down with France, Germany, Spain, and a denationalized West.

It may come as a surprise to many, but a lot of the Jewish "settlers" — I know they hate the term, but there is no better one — are opposed to Trump's peace plan, which allows for Israel to annex a large portion of the disputed territories.  They see Trump's plan as too generous to the Palestinians.

Despite the US proposal seemingly allowing for Israeli annexation of all Israeli settlements and the Jordan Valley, some settler officials have come out against the plan for provisioning space for a Palestinian state on some 70 percent of the West Bank.

Many conservatives, both Israeli and American, are surprised at such "settler" stubbornness.  Isn't Trump giving the right-wing Israelis more leeway that any other American president?  By moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, Trump did what Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama would not do.

Apparently, to these "hawkish" settlers, President Trump has not done enough — or rather, he has given a degree of recognition to the Palestinians that the "settlers" are not comfortable with.

Daniella Weiss, a settler leader, has said:

The government of Israel must reject the plan completely.  It is a time-bomb of terrible danger.  It is a trap coated with honey.  The clause regarding sovereignty is only a part of the overall plan, which will eventually award 90 percent [of the arable areas] of Yesha [Judea and Samaria] to the Arabs.

To be fair, this is not a recent development, nor is this aimed personally at Trump.  The leadership of the settler organizations have been determined from day one to prevent any Palestinian state at all — in any capacity — as this earlier quote of Daniella Weiss shows:

With my many talks with Ariel Sharon and my work with Ariel Sharon, there was a clear understanding, a very clear planning, of spreading the Jewish communities in the way that there will be no option for a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria.

So everyone should have known that the two-state solution, in any capacity, was an impossibility — whether due to Arab recalcitrance or Jewish settler determination.  Both sides want all of the pie and will accept nothing less.  The two-state solution was a farce.

Nor will it appease the "settlers" that Trump has put a deadline of four years on the peace plan — after which Israel will have a freer hand.  The "settlers" do not even want to entertain the possibility of a Palestinian entity, even if Trump's plan offers only limited autonomy to it.  As far as the settlers are concerned, God gave the Jews the land, and they want all of it.

It is obvious that the "settlers" will not yield.  So, amazing as it sounds, they want to sabotage Trump's plan.

Does Israel have the nerve to overrule the "settlers"?

The point is moot, actually.  The Arabs will never agree to a limited autonomy, either, and Israel will not offer any more than that.  But in the four-year interim, the "settler" enclaves do not like being surrounded by Palestinians, nor do they like construction limits placed on growth, while their connection to "Israel" will be limited to roads, which they consider a security risk.

Yamina Party head Naftali Bennett has long opposed the Trump plan because it also allows for the creations of a demilitarized Palestinian state.  Bennett has long argued Israel must apply sovereignty to all of Area C, while the Trump plan allows Israel to annex only half of Area C, effectively 30% of the West Bank.

And it is not merely that the "settlers" want more land, but Trump's plan would give citizenship to too many Arabs.

"The map is not good for Israel. It must be corrected. For example the map would apply Israeli law to over a quarter of a million Palestinians," Bennett told reporters on Wednesday.

Right now, there are more than 250,000 Palestinians who would receive citizenship according to the Trump plan, he said. "This is a disaster for Israel. No one will accept this. If the map is good we will support it," Bennett said.

In a nutshell, the Israeli right wants more land than the Trump plan offers, with fewer Palestinians getting enfranchised.  Israel wants the land without the Arabs on it (or at least the minimum number).  Whether or not this is a good policy is another matter.

So if the settlers get their wish, and no Palestinian entity is allowed, what about a one-state solution where the Arabs eventually get enfranchised?  Well, the Arabs know that a one-state solution will eventually erode and dissolve the Jewish state.

This produces a dilemma.  Israel wants all the land, but not all of the Palestinains on it, yet claims to be democratic.  It is a juggling act.  For decades, Israel has avoided the hard decisions by making no formal declarations.  Israel refused to annex much of the land and then did a song and dance of explanation when the topic came up.

Trump's plan — for all its wonderful aspects — will put an end to the song and dance.  Israel will get half of Area C but will have to enfranchise a lot of unwanted Palestinians, which will cause a crisis, no matter how it is handled.

Let's face it: Israel cannot remain a democracy while this goes on, and it can no longer be hidden and ignored.

If Israel does not enfranchise the Palestinians, it will cease to be democratic.

If Israel does enfranchise the Palestinians, it will lose its Jewish character.

If Israel offers the Palestinians only autonomy, the Palestinians will not accept it.  They know that time is on their side.

The only option is separation.  If Israel wants all the land, it must pay the Palestinians to leave, and it will not come cheap.  The cost will be on the order of $200 billion, and it will have to be footed primarily by the Jewish people.

Rightly or wrongly, Europe will not pay for this, and the U.S. government should not have to.  This would amount to about half a million dollars to a Palestinian family of five to leave Judea and Samaria.  Nothing less would motivate them, and even that would motivate only some of them.

Some, like Israpundit's Ted Belman, have advocated for a Jordan Option, where the Palestinians are given Jordanian citizenship.  But Jordan already disenfranchised those Palestinians born after 1988.  Only an overthrow of Jordan's monarchy would effect the change needed, and there is no guarantee that what comes after would be better.  All of this would depend on the cooperation of an Arab state to make Israel's life easier.  This is the one fatal flaw in all Israeli plans.  They require a cooperation that will never exist.

The only solution is physical separation, to wherever...and the worldwide Jewish community will have to pay for it.

It will require something else from the worldwide Jewish community — namely, a change from its knee-jerk rejection of nationalism.  Too many Jews in the USA, Canada, France, Britain, etc. have pushed for multiculturalism and have been instrumental in passing laws that have deconstructed the character of Western states.  But France has as much a right to remain French as Israel has to remain Jewish.  Canada has as much right to remain Western European as Israel has to remain Jewish.

Israel's survival may depend on a mind change in the disapora Jewish community.  This is critical, because Israel will need their wealth to pay for this, and Israel will need diaspora Jewry to adopt nationalism as a virtue, or Israel's Jewish character may go down with France, Germany, Spain, and a denationalized West.