On Israeli Settlement Freeze, Public Has Obama's Back

There have been hints in the press that the Obama Administration has been considering conditioning U.S. aid to Israel on a real freeze of Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank. There's a conventional wisdom that suggests that doing this would touch a "third rail of politics." But the conventional wisdom might not have been accurate; if it once was accurate, it might not be accurate any more.

WorldPublicOpinion.org has just released a poll showing that three-quarters of Americans oppose Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank. This number is up 23 points from 2002.

Even among respondents who say they sympathize with Israel more than the Palestinians, 64% say Israel should not build settlements in the West Bank.

Opposition to settlements is found among majorities of Democrats, Republicans, and independents. Those who followed the issue closely oppose settlement expansion by the same margin as those who don't.

Some may say: public opinion doesn't matter. What matters, they may say, is that the so-called "Israel Lobby" will effectively punish any politician who tries to shift U.S. policy towards Israel and the Palestinians.

But the Obama Administration has already proved that this isn't necessarily so.

The Los Angeles Times reports:

The administration has asked Congress for minor changes in U.S. law that would permit aid to continue flowing to Palestinians in the event Hamas-backed officials become part of a unified Palestinian government.

Secretary of State Clinton defended the administration's position before Congress. She noted that

the United States supports and funds the Lebanese government, even though it includes members of Hezbollah, another militant group on the U.S. terrorist list.

Reps. Nita Lowey and Mark Kirk objected. But as the Jewish Telegraphic Agency notes,

Significantly, however, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Shultz (D-Fla.), a pro-Israel stalwart, defended Clinton in a call organized by the National Jewish Democratic Council to mark the first 100 days of the Obama administration.

"The unity government itself will have embraced those principles," she said. "The most important priority for members of Congress is to support Israel and to move the peace process forward."

If the Obama Administration can shift U.S. policy towards engaging in some form with Hamas, then surely it can shift policy towards moving the U.S. from ineffective to effective implementation of its stated policy of opposition to Israeli settlement expansion, as it is virtually universally recognized that stopping Israeli settlement expansion is an absolutely necessary element of achieving a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict - just as it is virtually universally recognized that some form of engagement with Hamas will be necessary to achieve a two-state solution in the long run, and to get effective aid into Gaza in the short run.

Moreover, if the U.S. would get serious about stopping Israeli settlement expansion, it could help fundamentally alter the political dynamics in Israel. Israel's right-wing has grown accustomed to the notion that Israel can indefinitely go through the motions of a "peace process," while steadily expanding settlements in the West Bank in the hopes of making a Palestinian state impossible. If the U.S. puts an end to this game, it will empower the political forces in Israel who genuinely want a two-state solution - who, on this question, represent the majority of the Israeli population.

Comments

[jamilk99]

How is the following quote from Rep. Shultz not treason?:

"The most important priority for members of Congress is to support Israel"

Unless Israel is part of their districts, support of Israel should not be anywhere near the most important priority for our Congressmen - especially not in these tough times.

[StMTraveler]

President Obama: Israel and the Lobby

How do we categorize the fighters of the wars of 1775-1783, the wars of American Independence? The forces from the 13 colonies assembled and fought an asymmetric war against the organized forces of England. When the members of these American forces were captured by the English forces, often they were killed and labeled as terrorists.

How do we label the defense-liberation forces of Lebanon and Palestine? Do we call these terrorists because they have been fighting those who have occupied their land, killed their families and children? As Americans would we fight for the defense of our homeland? Those who help the people of Palestine and Lebanon are called the sponsors of terrorists. France helped our forces to fight the British forces. Were French sponsoring the American terrorists?

Any rational and humanistic resolution of Palestinian dilemma has been non-starter with Israel. The Palestinian subjugation to Israel occupation are the seeds for an unstable world including the Middle East.

USA can’t afford war after war to support failed attempts to stabilize the region. Palestinians have paid a high price for failed attempts to consider the human side of the Palestinians struggle for peaceful life.

The problem of Iranian nuclear fuel cycle is just a diversion from the real problems in the Middle East, is a humanistic resolution of Palestinian dilemma.

[tommyj7648]

George Washington on Israel

"A passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justificat­ion." ~George Washington Farewell Address

"The nation which indulges toward another habitual hatred or habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interests.­" ~ George Washington

"Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none." ~ Thomas Jefferson

[realEconomy]

Can it be true?
Hope for sanity and intra-human respect is not dead?

Now, President Obama, please, stop the violence and unnatural poverty toward the folks at home, and toward our suffering neighbors of the planet. Especially Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Somolia, et al.

We must stop, and clean up our grevious mistakes without wasting another sheckle or penny.

Having a privately controlled Zionisit Central Bank in every country is not a pre-requisit for sustainable prosperity and happiness. Such greedy aggression only brings misery, and bad karma. The citizens of the USA, Canada, Mexico, and the world do not want any more of it!

Well, minds can change in the 'twinkling of an eye'.

[Issa Dadoush]

Fact: 11.5 million people live in the region between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. The total population in the area is about 52% Jewish and 48% Arab.
Fact: 74 percent of Palestinians and 78 percent of Israelis are willing to accept a two-state solution.
I believe that a historic, hard won but lasting peace is within our grasp by seizing the opportunity opened up by Annapolis built on a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders: a democratic state of Israel, secure from attack and at peace with all its neighbours, alongside a democratic and territorially viable state of Palestine, and with Jerusalem the capital for both.
Pray for Israel and Palestine. Let us give hope to the next generation of Israelis and Palestinians. War is not the answer. Peace is possible, please listen.

[alexa07]

"Even among respondents who say they sympathize with Israel more than the Palestinians, 64% say Israel should not build settlements in the West Bank."

It's painful for many Americans, but it looks as if we are coming round to reality, that everyone (not just one group in the region) deserves human rights; security in their own homes. We can no longer afford to be concerned about the welfare of one group only, while we pretend that no one else lives there or deserves our attention. I voted for President Obama & had supported Hillary during most of the campaign (although I was somewhat uneasy about their views on the Middle East), but it looks as if they both are rising to the occasion & may bring a much needed solution to the region. The fate of the world may very well depend upon what they do. Robert, I also want to thank you for all you do with "Just Foreign Policy." I read your summaries every day.