|
Trending Topics
|
Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124588743827950599.html
Hillary Is Wrong About the Settlements: The U.S. and Israel Reached a Clear Understanding about Natural Growth
[Wall Street Journal] Elliot Abrams - Despite fervent denials by Obama administration officials, there were indeed agreements between Israel and the U.S. regarding the growth of Israeli settlements on the West Bank. On April 14, 2004, President Bush handed Prime Minister Sharon a letter saying, "In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli population centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949." Several previous administrations had declared all Israeli settlements beyond the "1967 borders" to be illegal. Here Bush dropped such language, referring to the 1967 borders - correctly - as merely the lines where the fighting stopped in 1949, and saying that in any realistic peace agreement Israel would be able to negotiate keeping those major settlements. On settlements we also agreed on principles that would permit some continuing growth. Sharon stated these clearly in a major policy speech in December 2003: "Israel will meet all its obligations with regard to construction in the settlements. There will be no construction beyond the existing construction line, no expropriation of land for construction, no special economic incentives and no construction of new settlements." Sharon did not invent those four principles. They emerged from discussions with American officials and were discussed by Sharon and Bush at their Aqaba meeting in June 2003. Stories in the press also made it clear that there were indeed "agreed principles." On Aug. 21, 2004, the New York Times reported that "the Bush administration...now supports construction of new apartments in areas already built up in some settlements, as long as the expansion does not extend outward." In recent weeks, American officials have denied that any agreement on settlements existed. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated on June 17 that "in looking at the history of the Bush administration, there were no informal or oral enforceable agreements." These statements are incorrect. Not only were there agreements, but the prime minister of Israel relied on them in undertaking a wrenching political reorientation - the dissolution of his government, the removal of every single Israeli citizen, settlement and military position in Gaza, and the removal of four settlements in the West Bank. Regardless of what Mrs. Clinton has said, there was a bargained-for exchange. Sharon was determined to break the deadlock, withdraw from Gaza, remove settlements - and confront his former allies to endorse Palestinian statehood and limits on settlement growth. He asked for our support and got it, including the agreement that we would not demand a total settlement freeze. For reasons that remain unclear, the Obama administration has decided to abandon the understandings about settlements reached by the previous administration with the Israeli government. We may be abandoning the deal now, but we cannot rewrite history and make believe it did not exist. The writer, who handled Middle East affairs at the National Security Council from 2001 to 2009, is a senior fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.