Analysis: Trump Peace Plan Splits Israel’s Pragmatic Right From Ideological Right

JERUSALEM (VINnews) — The much touted Trump peace plan, (officially titled: Peace to Prosperity: A Vision to Improve the Lives of the Palestinian and Israeli People) has left both sides with significant dilemmas to deal with. The Palestinians, once described by Abba Eban as “never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity”, must decide if they should seize what could be their final opportunity to declare a state on at least 70% of Judea and Samaria. Conversely, they could watch Israel declare its own sovereignty over other regions in Judea and Samaria and wait for a more favorable administration as well as other sympathetic countries to apply pressure on Israel to relinquish its claims on what they perceive as their territory.

For Israel, the dilemma of whether to declare sovereignty seems to have been solved by the new winds shifting from the US State Department and other quarters. Just as the Golan law passed in 1980 despite international condemnation and the Jerusalem law was not recognized by the international community, Israel will continue to legislate its sovereignty in places where communities have been established. However the real question is what Israel will gain from this legislation.

At present the security situation in Judea and Samaria, while not perfect, allows for the growth and expansion of the over 100 Israeli communities in the region numbering close to half a million people (a third of whom are Chareidi residents of Beitar and Modiin Illit). The establishment of borders would mean that most of these communities will not be able to expand beyond the limited area around them and at least 15 could find themselves as enclaves within a Palestinian state with no connection to the rest of Israel. While security issues are being discussed, most of these communities could not conceive of living under such restrictions and would likely be forced to evacuate.

The plan has also aroused huge opposition even from the moderate Arab world which Israel has been trying to woo over the last decade. Jordan, Saudia Arabia and even the UAE have declared that annexation would hinder normalization and Jordan even warned of ‘massive conflict’ in the event of annexation of parts of Judea and Samaria

Moreover the Trump plan has exposed and silhouetted the huge chasm between the two opposing parts of the Israeli right. The pragmatic, secular-oriented and centrist right, which includes most of the Likud and Blue-And-White, sees Judea and Samaria as an important strategic asset in Israel’s security infrastructure but does not view it in holy terms. Thus the key components for this group are not the communities themselves and the territory around them but rather the hills in the center of Israel as well as the Jordan valley which protect Israel’s coastal plain and eastern border from enemy activity. These elements will be happy to reach a compromise with the Palestinians which will maintain Israel’s security concerns. The fact that such a compromise is not presently feasible does not mean that Israel should wait but it should leave the door open to such a compromise even while conferring sovereignty on some regions and leaving others isolated. This explains why Prime Minister Netanyahu has long failed to develop the region between Jerusalem and Ma’ale Adumim (known as E1), since this would be a death knell to a contiguous Palestinian state as it would cut off Judea from Samaria.

However the more extreme ideological elements are horrified by the thought of relinquishing hundreds of historic sites holy to Judaism as well as parts of the historic heartland of Israel with so many biblical implications. The altar which Yehoshua built on Har Eival, the city of Shomron -now Sebastia which the Palestinian Authority has for some reason been allowed to occupy, these are just some of hundreds of Jewish heritage sites situated in Judea and Samaria. If eventually the Palestinians compromise under intense US pressure, Israelis will once again be prevented from visiting these sites, as well as developing the existing communities beyond their perimeters. This is anathema to the ideological right, which believes that Israel’s inalienable right to these territories is the biblical blessing to Avraham: “To you I will give this land” including all the region of Judea and Samaria.

Thus despite the unique consensus within Israel favoring annexation and sovereignty over parts of Judea and Samaria, both the left-wing and the ideological right, represented by the ousted Naftali Bennett and Ayelet Shaked are strongly opposed for different reasons to the Trump plan. It is unlikely that these groups will merge their opposition or offer significant resistance to the plan, but it remains to be seen how Netanyahu will succeed in implementing Israel’s part of the plan without risking both international isolation (even the Americans have backtracked on the full 30% annexation proposed earlier) and a total rupture with the ideological right which could have political ramifications in the near future.