The Middle East Quartet report released recently once again takes issue with settlements as an obstacle to peace, a reiteration that has become as obsolete as the two-state compromise. Its lack of impact has nothing to do with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s denial, however, but a reflection of the continuous dissociation inscribed within such reports.
As Netanyahu embarked upon one of his favourite retaliatory measures – additional settlement expansion – after the killing of an Israeli settler teenager, both the US State Department and the UN issued the usual hypocritical, perfunctory statements. This time, the exploitation of the above mentioned time frames, both the Quartet report and the death of the Israeli settler, provided fodder for the rhetoric that makes no excuse about promoting colonial expansion.
According to the Times of Israel, the US is “deeply disappointed” that Netanyahu’s decision to expand settlement construction follows the report’s release. The report quotes US State Department Spokesman Stephane Dujarric as stating: “This raises legitimate questions about Israel’s long-term intentions, which are compounded by continuing statements of some Israeli ministers calling for the annexation of the West Bank.”
The UN resorted to its predictable statements confirming the illegality of settlements under international law and ineffectively called upon Israel to “halt and reverse such decisions in the interest of peace and a just final status agreement”.
Evidently the cycle of retaliation, settlement expansion, condemnations and security concerns are proving to be profitable in terms of diplomacy and allegiances, particularly as Palestinians are rarely mentioned in the repetitive jargon that is given prominence in the media. The constant displacement of focus is another issue that the international community prefers to ignore, thus making terms such as “just final status” and “independent viable Palestinian state” seem normalised and within reach, as if any of the clichéd terms can be reached without a prior acknowledgement of how Palestine has been permanently lacerated through colonialism.
In Israel’s rhetoric on settlements, what is left of Palestine and Palestinians has already been dismissed as an inconvenient detail and the international community is willingly giving its support to render Palestinians voiceless and invisible. Hence the lack of impact when Israel announces further settlement expansion – the elimination of Palestinians from the narrative suits international impositions well. There is no urgency to even define what a just solution entails precisely due to the refusal to place expansion within a historical context that goes beyond the regurgitated date of 1967 – another conveniently expanded timeframe that obliterates previous narratives and contributes to the fragmenting of the Palestinian population.
Within all this premeditated talk of two-state conspiracies and solutions, all of which are nothing but spasms of spurious limelight, Palestinians require organised resistance more than ever. Evidently, the international community will not hasten to deliver, which leaves a solitary option of articulating and organising anti-colonial struggle away from the UN and its dangerous charades. It is not a question of debating settlements, but rather recognising the right to resistance away from the dynamics of the international community.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.