Israel’s unilateral solution in the West Bank

I have said in previous articles that Netanyahu does not refuse the American deal with Iran, but is opposed to it, or at least has reservations about it, in order to use it to serve the interests of Israel. After the agreement, some have said that there is a serious disagreement between Netanyahu and Obama, and that Netanyahu is playing in the backyard of the Democratic party, i.e. recruiting Congress members to work against the Iranian deal. I believe that there is a game being played and recruitment, but not to reject the agreement on principle, but to use it to blackmail the White House on one hand, and receive extra guarantees from Iran and utilise his position to create a partnership with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states on the other.

Netanyahu is governing a nuclear state that is ranked sixth in the world militarily, so he is not afraid of Iran’s military threats. He is investing these threats in more than one regional issue, and it seems that his current visit to the White House and his meetings with American and Jewish parties have revealed some of these investments.

In the issue of the American agreement with Iran, Netanyahu suggested cooperation with the Obama administration for both sides to obtain assurances from Iran that it would not acquire nuclear weapons. Such assurances include not supplying Israel’s enemies with weapons.

In terms of the Syrian issue, Netanyahu said that a political solution is being prepared and agreed upon, and that he does not know what the map of Syria would look like and if it would go back to the way it was. Of course he does not support the restoration of its unity and he is asking Obama to agree to Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights.

News agencies quoted Netanyahu at the Centre for American Progress on 9 November when he said: “I don’t want Syria to be used as a launching ground for attacks against us. We will not allow Iran to set up a second front in the Golan. We will not allow the use of Syrian territory from which we would be attacked by the Syrian army or anyone else, and we will not allow the use of Syrian territory for the transfer of game-changing weapons into Lebanon into Hezbollah’s hands. However, I am not sure Syria as a state can be reconstituted.”

Netanyahu has made arrangements with Putin before Russia’s direct military intervention in Syria, and I believe he met all of his demands in terms of Syria. He is now at a crossroads, which he must cross by reaching an agreement with Obama, which includes the annexation of the Golan Heights if possible. This is because, in his opinion, Syria is heading for division, and there are serious threats posed to Israel by Daesh on one hand and Hezbollah and Iran on the other, as well as from the opposition in control of Damascus. He believes that all these threats are enough to convince the White House to change its old position and support the annexation of the Golan Heights.

There is no one better than the Zionists in seizing opportunities and blackmailing countries, as they succeeded in blackmailing Germany, France and America. Today they are presented with the golden opportunity to blackmail and invest by using the issues of terrorism, Iran and the Arab internal and sectarian disputes.

Netanyahu’s investments won’t stop at the Golan Heights; it will carry over to the most important issue, i.e. the Palestinian issue, particularly the issue of Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa Mosque. We should look at what he said in this regard: “The question of Jerusalem and specifically the Temple Mount is unsolvable.” He also did not rule out Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from the occupied West Bank, said that unilateralism would have to meet Israeli security criteria and that would also require a broader international understanding than exists now.

This visit by Netanyahu is considered one of the most dangerous visits he has made to Washington during Obama’s administration. It comes close to the American elections, when both the Democratic and Republican parties are keen to please Jewish voters and funders. Therefore, the purpose of Netanyahu’s visit is not to hold discussions and talks, but to declare what he wants, decide what he wants, and receive approval for what he wants. Hence, those concerned should pay attention to this visit and these statements and should come up with a strategy to confront this rather than leaving the playing field open for Netanyahu.

Translated from Felesteen, 11 November 2015.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.