by Lara Friedman
People keep asking me: "Have you seen the news? Has Bibi actually frozen settlements? What does this mean?"
"This" refers to news
that Prime Minister Netanyahu at some point in the recent past (it's not clear precisely when) instructed his
Minister of Construction, Uri Ariel, to hold off on promoting new settlement plans. And "this" also refers to the
confirmation issued by my colleagues at Peace Now, to the effect that in the wake of President Obama's March visit
to Israel and the West Bank, there have been no new tenders issued for settlement construction and no new approvals
of settlement construction plans.
So has Bibi frozen settlements? Categorically not.
As Peace Now has documented, settlement construction in the West Bank continues apace--as in, at the same fast clip
as before the Obama visit. How is this possible? Because Netanyahu and his previous government went on a settlement
binge in the period before the Obama visit. Peace Now
documented that during the period between the January 22 elections in Israel and the March 18 swearing in of
the new government, plans were advanced for the approval of more than 1,500 new settlement housing units, many in
isolated areas of the West Bank.
So what does this non-freeze mean?
Back in January, with Obama re-elected, Bibi had every interest in ensuring that he could both continue expanding
settlements and present himself and his new government as a serious, constructive partner for the new Obama
administration. And that is precisely what is transpiring today, as Bibi lets it be known that he is holding back
the settlement surge.
However, this period of "restraint" almost certainly won't last. Netanyahu has assembled the most pro-settler cabinet in Israel's history.
It is a safe bet that Netanyahu has privately assured Ariel and others that, if they will just keep quiet and play
ball for a short time, the settlement floodgates will re-open soon, perhaps even wider than before. This analysis
is bolstered by the fact that Ariel and other settler advocates have held back on criticizing Netanyahu for his
settlement "restraint." No doubt, Bibi will offer what he believes are compelling arguments for opening the
settlement floodgates. He will likely blame the Palestinians, portraying himself as the pro-peace actor who has
gone out on a limb, only to be treated shabbily by the Palestinian side. He will almost certainly return to the
tried-and-true tactic of pleading politics, arguing that he is constrained by the exigencies of keeping his own
government together--and the unreasonableness of asking any national leader to adopt policies that are akin to
political suicide.
Bibi's inevitable, impending decision to re-open the settlement floodgates promises to be a decisive test for the
second Obama Administration. The past 3-plus years were characterized by the most destructive U.S.-Israel dynamic
on settlements since 1967--a dynamic in which the Israeli Prime Minister came to believe, with good reason, that
there was no cost and were no consequences to giving the U.S. the finger when it came to settlement construction.
The result was the crossing of settlement red lines that no previous Israeli government dared cross and a deepening
of the settlement enterprise to a degree that challenges the credibility and viability of the two-state solution.
The result, too, was the weakening of the credibility of U.S. policy and U.S. leadership in the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict, not to mention the undermining of pro-peace, pro-two-state solution Palestinian leaders, like Salam
Fayyad.
All that being said, and while not ignoring the fact that settlement construction continues apace, this restraint
on new settlement tenders and approvals is a good thing. It creates political space for Kerry to try to get
something going in terms of re-establishing a political horizon. While Bibi is likely hoping that Kerry's efforts
will not get any traction, it is possible that Bibi will find himself pressured and cornered if Kerry succeeds in
catalyzing a new political process that gains a life of its own.
Moreover, Bibi's current policy of "restraint" proves that, regardless of all the excuses, if he wants to hold back
settlements, he can. He's doing it now and he did it four years ago with the infamous "moratorium"--a moratorium
which, while officially limited to the West Bank, was actually
quietly extended to East Jerusalem. Four years ago, Bibi's "restraint" on settlements didn't result in mass
demonstrations or bring down his government; the same is true today.
Bibi can restrain settlement construction--both in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. We know he can because he's
done so. The questions, then, are: how long will he keep up this "restraint," and what will be the reaction of
Washington when he re-opens the settlement floodgates?
This article first appeared on May 8, 2013, on Open Zion
at the Daily Beast.