Settlements are illegal

All along, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been playing a double game: pretending to go along with the idea of a two-state solution while simultaneously conspiring against it.

The insistence on beefing up settlements sends the clear message that the Israeli government is not serious about peace with the Palestinians.

While Netanyahu government’s appetite for settlement activities is unquestionable, peace is clearly not on its menu.

Now, could the United Nations Security Council resolution against the Israeli settlements be both pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli?

Of course. The Palestinians seek to establish a viable state on the basis of the two-state solution, while the Israelis seek to avert being a minority if the outcome is one state. 

Hence, freezing and indeed dismantling settlements built on Palestinian land is a prerequisite for a two-state outcome.

Therefore, there is another way of looking at the UN Security Council resolution against the Israeli settlements. 

By all yardsticks, it could serve as a reminder that Israel cannot have its cake and eat it too.

The right-wing government is yet to realise that the ongoing settlement activities will, for sure, chip away at the possibility of reaching a two-state solution. In other words, Israel’s twin objectives of disengaging from the Palestinians and keeping on with the building of settlements are incompatible. 

Let us not forget that there is a difference between Israel proper and the occupied territories.

Settlements are built on occupied territories. Successive right-wing governments adopted policies designed to eradicate the Green Line that separates Israel from Palestinian lands. 

In doing so, Israel has kept millions of Palestinians under occupation, thus violating their basic human rights.

Apparently, the pro-settlement forces assume that the world will forget about the Green Line. Yet, the UN Security Council resolution makes it perfectly clear that while Israel is legitimate, its occupation and settlements are not.

It is hoped that this resolution will help revitalise the peace camp in Israel.

Since the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, in November 1995, the peace camp in Israel has been weakened to the point of disappearance.

The shift in Israeli politics to the right has been detrimental to both the peace camp and the peace process. 

The resolution should serve as a catalyst for whoever is left from the peace camp, bringing them together to speak out against occupation and settlements.

The resolution is not anti-Israel.

That said, the UN Security Council resolution was not adopted under Chapter Seven of the UN Charter. Netanyahu is trying to fan the flames of hatred for Obama among Israelis and Americans alike, accusing him of backstabbing Israel in the final days of his administration.

The pro-peace forces in Israel should worry about Donald Trump’s administration who pledged that things will be different when he assumes offices after a few weeks.

In brief, the clock is ticking on a two-state solution and, therefore, the UN resolution is good for both Israelis and Palestinians.

If anything, it reflects one basic truth: there is international consensus that both occupation and settlements are illegitimate.

This is the only truth, and Israelis should be concerned that their right-wing government has been charting a course towards disaster.

[email protected]