What It Is About:
US Speaker of the House Mike Johnson has strongly criticized the Biden administration’s decision to revert to a position that views Israeli settlements in the West Bank as inconsistent with international law, a policy shift that has raised eyebrows among Israel’s supporters.
Why It Matters:
This development reignites a highly charged debate over Israel’s right to build settlements in its historical and biblical heartland, particularly in territories like Judea and Samaria. The decision is seen by many as undermining Israel’s sovereignty and its ongoing struggle for security amidst regional tensions.
Key Points:
Speaker Johnson expressed indignation over the move, especially given the current security challenges Israel faces, including terrorism and the detention of over 130 hostages in Gaza. He described the Biden administration’s stance as counterproductive to the cause of validating Israel’s legal and historic rights to the land.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken reinstated the past US viewpoint that considered new settlement activities as detrimental to achieving lasting peace and contradictory to international law. This move marks a departure from the so-called “Pompeo doctrine” established under the Trump administration, which argued that settlements were not inherently against international law.
Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich’s recent announcement of new housing projects in the West Bank, intended as a response to terror attacks, underscores Israel’s determination to strengthen its hold on strategic and contested areas, focusing on West Bank regions widely supported for their historical and security perspectives.
Context:
Following significant terror incidents, Israel’s assertive action to advance over 3,000 new settlement homes has been depicted as a measure of deterrence and a symbolic reinforcement of the Jewish people’s unbreakable bond to the land of Israel. Notwithstanding the internal and external contestation, such steps resonate with a significant portion of the Israeli populace and diaspora, advocating for a robust response to terrorism and affirming Jewish historical claims.
Disappointment expressed by US and international figures over Israeli settlement plans has led to a polarized discussion. However, it is crucial to factor in the broad national consensus within Israel regarding certain settlements and the complex historical, legal, and security dimensions intrinsic to these debates.
In light of ongoing challenges, Israel’s actions in the West Bank, contextualized as part of its broader security and nation-building strategy, should prompt a more nuanced international discourse. The effort to safeguard its citizens and secure its ancestral homeland underlies the motivations for recent policy decisions and settlement expansions.
The unfolding debate concerning Israeli settlements and the pertinent international responses underscore the delicate balance Israel must navigate amid its pursuit of peace, security, and historical vindication on the world stage.
This story was first published on timesofisrael.com.