New York Post

Failure-crats Assail Don’s Mideast Plan

- David Friedman is the US ambassador to Israel. DAVID FRIEDMAN

THE Obama administra­tion’s approach to the Israeli-Palestinia­n conflict, and the Middle East as a whole, is best remembered as “often wrong, never in doubt”: from the disastrous Iran deal, to squeezing Israel without obtaining meaningful peace concession­s from the Palestinia­ns, to allowing the UN jackals to demonize and single out the Jewish state. Now, two of the architects of the last administra­tion’s Mideast policy have publicly offered their advice on how to frustrate President Trump’s bold and creative Vision for Peace and Prosperity, a major step forward in the pursuit of peace between Israel and the Palestinia­ns.

Philip Gordon and Robert Malley, champions of the Iran deal and apologists for Palestinia­n intransige­nce, published an article last week in Foreign Policy magazine headlined: “Biden Must Speak Out Against Israeli Annexation Plans Before It’s Too Late.” Gordon and Malley served up a barrage of falsehoods and wrongheade­d ideas. Seven especially demand answering.

(1) The authors argue that the limited annexation of West

Bank territory envisioned by

Trump would jeopardize Israel’s future as a Jewish state.

Wrong. Under the Trump vision,

Israel would be claiming sovereignt­y over a fraction of the West

Bank, comprising territorie­s that either are sparsely populated or overwhelmi­ngly populated by Israeli

Jews. Israel wouldn’t be doing that to territorie­s with significan­t Palestinia­n population­s. Therefore, the vision wouldn’t alter the Jewish majority within the State of Israel. In fact, it would increase it.

(2) Gordon and Malley also argue that the vision would jeopardize Israel’s democracy.

Wrong again. A majority of Israelis, as well as Israel’s democratic­ally elected government, support the president’s vision. It is ironic that so many of Israel’s critics, who purport to care so much about democracy, condemn Israel when it adheres to the will of its own citizens. The vision would only enhance democracy by permitting Israelis to choose their elected leaders — and Palestinia­ns to freely do the same. Two states for two peoples.

(3) Which brings us to their third piece of malarky, as Joe Biden would put it: that the vision would undermine the two-state solution. Wrong. On the contrary, the Trump vision provides for a two-state solution. Ours is the first and only administra­tion to have obtained Israel’s commitment to negotiate based upon specific terms, conditions and territoria­l dimensions that would lead to the creation of a state with double the geographic footprint the Palestinia­ns enjoy now.

(4) The Trump vision, the critics claim, violates internatio­nal law. False. Settlement­s of the kind allowed under the deal don’t presumptiv­ely violate internatio­nal law. That’s not our view alone. It is a longstandi­ng position, going back to Undersecre­tary of State Eugene Rostow, who negotiated the 1967 UN resolution setting out peace terms between Israel and her Arab neighbors following the Six-Day War.

(5) The Trump vision relegates Palestinia­ns to second-class status, Gordon and Malley charge. Wrong, yet again. The vision gives Palestinia­ns a clear path to statehood and a huge influx of economic investment that would allow them to live independen­tly with peace, prosperity and dignity.

(6) Gordon and Malley want the United States to reject any action the Israelis take in furtheranc­e of the Trump vision unless the Palestinia­ns agree. Wrong. That approach was taken for 53 years and led nowhere. Giving

the Palestinia­ns a veto on progress guarantees stagnation and violence.

(7) The two Obama alumni would withhold aid to Israel and deny it support at the United Nations if the Jewish state declares sovereignt­y in conformity with the Trump vision. Wrong. Extremely wrong. Israel has made enormous concession­s in agreeing to negotiate in accordance with the Trump vision, and it shouldn’t be punished for acting in accordance with its commitment to Washington. To do that isn’t in the region’s interest — or America’s.

Publicly seeking to frustrate the foreign policy of our duly elected president is downright obnoxious. It’s even worse when the effort comes from members of a prior administra­tion that never achieved any steps towards peace and that damaged the US-Israel relationsh­ip. And it is still worse than that when the critique is flatout wrong in so many respects.

‘ The Trump vision gives the Palestinia­n statehood.’ people a clear path to

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States