The following article was written 3 weeks ago for the International Relations Professional Discussions group. It is therefore not entirely up to date and I would have written it somewhat differently if destined for publication on LinkedIn Pulse. I am publishing it at the request of members of that group who wanted to have the article in one easily readable piece, rather than divided into many subposts that are not necessarily in the right order. It is not without hesitation that I post it here, as the subject is very sensitive for many and I don’t want to see insulting comments from extremists on both sides of the issue as has happened in the past -I have been described by some on side as “Zionist” and “Islamist” and even “Jihadist” by some on the other side. I joked that I was most probably the first Islamist Zionist (or is it Zionist Islamist) if not in the world, at least on LinkedIn.

 All opinions on the subject are welcome but not breaches of netiquette, antisemitic of Islamophobic/racist anti-Arab comments. Offending posts from either side will be suppressed and in the most egregious cases I will block their authors and report them to LinlkedIn.

I have added two short pieces as addenda to this article, which again is three weeks old.

Giles Raymond DeMourot

Israeli deliberations about annexing parts of the West Bank should be part of discussions between Israel and the Palestinians on the Trump administration’s peace plan, the US State Department’s chief spokesperson said on 15 May 2020.

The comments by Morgan Ortagus, made during a phone briefing with Israeli reporters, came after US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made a lightning trip to Jerusalem Wednesday 13 May for talks with Israeli leaders on a number of issues.

Pompeo did not specifically address questions during the trip about whether the US would support Israel unilaterally advancing annexation after July 1, as the coalition agreement between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Blue and White chairman Benny Gantz allows the new government to do, but said Jerusalem has “the right and the obligation” to decide if and when it wants to annex (see https://lnkd.in/e-4MrdT).

Of course Israel has no such right at all, not to mention obligation: in international law annexation amounts to an act of aggression and as such is banned by international law, as Pompeo would say about Crimea and Sevastopol.

“He [Pompeo] said that annexation is up to Israel,” Ortagus said, stressing that annexation was “certainly, by no means, the reason” for Pompeo’s trip. “We think these discussions should be a part of the peace process, part of President Trump’s Vision for Peace (Peace?? -GRM). So it should be part of discussions between the Israelis and the Palestinians. I don’t really have much more to say on it than that.”

Asked directly whether Israel still has a “green light” for unilateral annexation, especially since the Palestinians are proving “unwilling to consider the Trump peace plan,” or whether Israel should put annexation on hold, Ortagus did not give a direct yes or no answer. She said, rather, that the US administration has put out a “comprehensive” peace plan… We’re going to continue to push for this vision for peace that the president has. We have certainly by no means given up hope. In fact it will continue to be a major part of our foreign policy to press for the Palestinians to come to the table as a part of this peace plan, as a part of this process.”

She added: “There is a mapping committee that is led by Ambassador Friedman (!!). And so I don’t have anything new to announce today other than just to reiterate the fact that all of these discussions relating to mapping and annexation we firmly believe should be a part of discussions between the Israelis and Palestinians working toward President Trump’s vision for peace.”

Key tenets of the proposal, namely Israel’s proposed extension of sovereignty over parts of the West Bank, are opposed internationally, with European Union foreign ministers meeting on that same day to discuss responses if the Israeli government goes through with the move.

Ortagus was asked how the US would respond if the EU sanctioned Israel over annexation in the West Bank.

“We will continue to remain a steadfast friend and ally of the State of Israel. We have proven in this administration we will do that,” she said, pointing to the Jerusalem embassy move and Trump’s recognition of the Golan Heights as part of Israel as examples of US support.

She was also asked to address Jordanian King Abdullah II’s warning that annexation could lead to a “massive conflict” between Israel and his country.

“He [Pompeo] said that annexation is up to Israel,” Ortagus said, stressing that annexation was “certainly, by no means, the reason” for Pompeo’s trip. “We think these discussions should be a part of the peace process, part of President Trump’s Vision for Peace (Peace?? -GRM). So it should be part of discussions between the Israelis and the Palestinians. I don’t really have much more to say on it than that.”

Asked directly whether Israel still has a “green light” for unilateral annexation, especially since the Palestinians are proving “unwilling to consider the Trump peace plan,” or whether Israel should put annexation on hold, Ortagus did not give a direct yes or no answer. She said, rather, that the US administration has put out a “comprehensive” peace plan… We’re going to continue to push for this vision for peace that the president has. We have certainly by no means given up hope. In fact it will continue to be a major part of our foreign policy to press for the Palestinians to come to the table as a part of this peace plan, as a part of this process.”

“The United States has a close relationship with the state of Jordan. We know that Jordan plays a special role in the Middle East, especially their relationship with Israel,” Ortagus said. “What we want for both Israel and Jordan is the relationship that is not only strong on the security level, but that’s also strong at the diplomatic level and the economic level.

“We certainly understand that the king has expressed his concerns today and again that’s why we think it’s important to turn back to President’s Trump’s Vision for Peace and to bring all parties to the table to work toward this peace plan,” she added. During the briefing, Ortagus also addressed US concerns about Chinese investment in Israel. “Whether we’re in Israel, whether we’re in the United Kingdom or India or Thailand or anywhere in the world, our message is very simple about the risk of Chinese investment,” she said, adding Israel should “look more closely” at creating a body to scrutinize foreign investment in the country.

While declining to comment on reported US concerns about a Chinese-linked firms bid to build a desalination plant in Israel, Ortagus warned many companies from China involved in technology and infrastructure projects were “beholden by law” to the ruling Communist Party of China.

“That is not a risk that the American people or the Israeli people should tolerate,” she said. But annexation pure and simple is a risk that should be tolerated, if I understand well -GRM!

China’s ambassador to Israel responded, calling US concerns about Chinese investment in the country “absurd” and saying Beijing hoped its “Jewish friends” will not only succeed in defeating the virus but also the “political virus.”

https://tinyurl.com/yd87b2cb

As to the EU, it will make a diplomatic push to try to stop Israel going ahead with a plan to annex parts of the West Bank, the bloc’s foreign policy chief said the same day.

European High Representative/ Vice-President Josep Borrell said the bloc would use “all our diplomatic capacities” to try to dissuade Israel’s incoming government from going ahead with the move, approved under US President Donald Trump’s Middle East "peace plan."

While EU countries are alarmed at the prospect of annexation, which would violate international law and harm the chances of peace, they are to an extent divided about what action to take against Israel.

“What everybody agreed is we have to increase our efforts and reach out to all relevant actors in the Middle East…,” Borrell said after talks that day between EU foreign ministers.

“We are ready to do that and we will do that in the next days using all our diplomatic capacities in order to prevent any kind of unilateral action.”

The push will involve talking to Washington and Arab countries as well as Israel and the Palestinians, Borrell said.

A majority of EU countries have pushed for the bloc to take a hard line against Israel, with Luxembourg’s veteran foreign minister Jean Asselborn in particular calling for the recognition of a Palestinian state.

“We are in a dialogue with the responsible parties, including in Israel,” German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said.

“We have always made it clear… that we are committed to the goal of a negotiated two-state solution, and that we believe that annexations are not compatible with international law.”

Ahead of the meeting, there were reports that several European nations led by France, and including Ireland, Sweden, Belgium, Spain and Luxembourg, expressed support for threats of punitive action in a bid to deter the new Israeli government.

“There is clearly a need to look at what annexation means in the context of international law and we do need to know our options,” a senior EU diplomat told Reuters earlier this week. “We also need to say what exactly the consequences of annexation would be, ideally as a way to stop any such move.”

The EU bloc is Israel’s largest trading partner, grants Israel favored trading status, and helps fund Israeli scientific research and development through its massive Horizon 2020 program. The settlement's largest market is by far the EU and therefore exposed to an export ban by the EU.

Proposed steps include announcing that Israel would be prevented from entering into trade agreements with the bloc as far as annexed settlements are concerned, receiving EU grants or participating in some other forms of cooperation with the union.

“There is clearly a need to look at what annexation means in the context of international law and we do need to know our options,” a senior EU diplomat told Reuters earlier this week. “We also need to say what exactly the consequences of annexation would be, ideally as a way to stop any such move.”

Also key to the discussions will be finding potential punitive measures that would not require the unanimous agreement of all 27 bloc members, as Israel’s allies, including Hungary, the Czech Republic and Poland, could conceivably veto any proposals that require unanimity. It should be to Netanyahu's shame that this is the list of EU countries that are investigated for breaches of the principle of democracy and the rule of law, and where antisemitism is more than tolerated.

“No one wants to reach the point that Israel’s relations with the Union are harmed for the long term, but that’s what will happen if Israel annexes, if only because of the precedent an annexation would set for every other place” where nations are fighting over disputed land, an EU source was quoted by Haaretz as saying.

In an interview published on June 8 , Jordan’s King Abdullah warned that should Israel move forward, it would lead to a “massive conflict” with his country, and did not rule out pulling out of Amman’s peace deal with Israel.

Trump’s Mideast peace plan allows for the possibility of US recognition of such annexations provided Israel agrees to negotiate under the framework of the proposal that was unveiled in January. But of course there will be no one to negotiate.

According to the proposed plan, the US will recognize an Israeli application of sovereignty over parts of the West Bank following the completion of a survey conducted by a joint US-Israel mapping committee and Israel’s acceptance of both a four-year freeze of the areas earmarked for a future Palestinian state and a commitment to negotiate with the Palestinians based on the terms of Trump’s peace deal. Peace built on annexation, that's at least original!

Alone among most governments, the Trump administration has said it will support the annexation of West Bank territory claimed by the Palestinians for an eventual state as long as Israel agrees to enter peace talks.

https://tinyurl.com/ybukjnz7

Comment: Again in international law forcible annexation is an act of aggression, a crime against peace. This is according to article 2(4) of Chapter I of the UN Charter and the Nuremberg principles. The international community in December 2016 clearly and succinctly expressed how Israeli settlements went against international law in UNSC 2334 which was adopted unopposed. The US abstained, not because it opposed what was in the resolution but because of what wasn't in it. The US as expressed by then Secretary of State John Kerry would have liked to see the resolution not limited to the settlements but placing them in the broader context of an Israeli- Palestinian accord.

Members of the Trump team were investigated by special counsel Mueller as they were trying in violation of the Logan Act to prevent the resolution from being adopted.

But what does UNSC 2334 say? It condemns all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, including, inter alia, the construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and displacement of Palestinian civilians, in violation of international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions.

It reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace. It reiterates its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respects all of its legal obligations in this regard. It underlines that it will not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations. It stresses that the cessation of all Israeli settlement activities is essential for salvaging the two-State solution, and calls for affirmative steps to be taken immediately to reverse the negative trends on the ground that are imperilling the two-State solution.

Note that none of these resolutions say that Jerusalem should be re-divided or that East Jerusalem should go straight to the Palestinians, They say that the final status of Jerusalem should be negotiated between the parties. The EU notoriously supports an undivided Jerusalem with joint sovereignty. The PA at this stage supports partition with some amendments, ie it would accept that the Western Wall and some purely Jewish sections could go to Israel. The Clinton parameters were a contribution to a solution of the issue.

Note that under article 25 of the UN Charter Security Council resolutions are binding on all member states that have ratified the charter. The US Senate ratified the United Nations Charter on July 28, 1945.

Suddenly last winter the State Department and Pompeo reversed the US traditional position on settlements, saying the US will no longer abide by a 1978 State Department legal opinion written by Herbert J. Hansell that found civilian settlements in occupied territories as "inconsistent with international law." "The establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not, per se, inconsistent with international law," he said. "Calling the establishment of civilian settlements inconsistent with international law has not worked. It has not advanced the cause of peace,'' he added.

Pompeo simply decided with Trump's support to ignore black letter law because ...international law had not worked until now!

At Foggy Bottom it's not Pompeo's bottom that's foggy but his other end.

 * * * *

I have added to the above article, which is three weeks old, two addenda to update what I wrote. See also in the International Relations Professional Discussions group, “‘It’s a war crime’: Over 5,000 rally in Tel Aviv against Netanyahu annexation bid”, https://tinyurl.com/y8fw5ff6

Addenda:

1.    Jordan’s king Abdullah II warns of ‘massive conflict’ if Israel annexes land in West Bank

Jordan’s King Abdullah II has warned that should Israel move forward with plans to annex parts of the West Bank, it would lead to a “massive conflict” with his country, and did not rule out pulling out of Amman’s peace deal with Israel.

In an interview published Friday 5 June by the German daily Der Spiegel, Abdullah insisted that a two-state solution was “the only way forward” in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

“What would happen if the Palestinian National Authority collapsed? There would be more chaos and extremism in the region. If Israel really annexed the West Bank in July, it would lead to a massive conflict with the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan,” he said, when asked by his interviewer about Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s intention to “take advantage of the opportunity that [US President Donald] Trump has created to seize large parts of Palestine.”

“I don’t want to make threats and create an atmosphere of loggerheads, but we are considering all options. We agree with many countries in Europe and the international community that the law of strength should not apply in the Middle East,” the king added, when asked if his country — one of only two Arab nations, along with Egypt, to have signed a peace deal with Israel — could suspend that treaty.

Jordan has a large Palestinian population and is deeply invested in promoting a two-state solution. “Leaders who advocate a one-state solution do not understand what that would mean,” he told the German daily.

The king’s comments echoed remarks he made in a September 2019 interview, warning that a West Bank annexation would have “a major impact on the Israeli-Jordanian relationship.” At the time, he stopped short of threatening to cut diplomatic ties.

More recently, Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi reportedly urged his counterparts in several countries to dissuade Jerusalem from its annexation plans. Implementing them would be “devastating,” would mark the death of a two-state solution, and could have explosive consequences for the region, he was said to have warned his interlocutors. But again, no word about ending the peace deal.

Friday’s interview was published hours before European Union foreign ministers were set to meet virtually to consider potential measures against Israel over its plan to annex parts of the West Bank.

Jordan has been lobbying the EU to take “practical steps” to make sure annexation doesn’t happen. In a statement, Safadi “stressed the need for the international community and the European Union in particular to take practical steps that reflect the rejection of any Israeli decision to annex.”

Several European nations led by France, and including Ireland, Sweden, Belgium, Spain and Luxembourg, have reportedly expressed support for threats of punitive action in a bid to deter the new Israeli government — set to be sworn in on Sunday — from carrying out the move with a green light from Washington.

On Tuesday 9 June EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said annexation plans and the union’s response to them would be “the most important item on the agenda” of the meeting.

The EU bloc is Israel’s largest trading partner, grants Israel favored trading status, and helps fund Israeli scientific research and development through its massive Horizon 2020 program.

Alone among most governments, the Trump administration has said it will support the annexation of West Bank territory claimed by the Palestinians for an eventual state as long as Israel agrees to enter peace talks.

US Ambassador David Friedman said last week that Washington is ready to recognize Israeli sovereignty over parts of the West Bank should it be declared in the coming weeks.

https://tinyurl.com/y9y69w9u

2.    German foreign minister Heiko Maas to travel to Israel with warning on annexation

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas is expected to travel to Israel on Wednesday 10 June to warn that there will be consequences if Israeli leaders move forward with plans to annex parts of the West Bank, Israeli officials and European diplomats tell me.

Israeli and European officials agree that if Israel goes ahead with unilateral annexation, the EU will respond with sanctions.

Starting from July 1st —coincidentally, the deadline set by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to begin the annexation process— Germany will assume the EU's rotating presidency.

Germany will also preside at the UN Security Council in July, and thus would play a key role in the European and international responses to annexation.

Maas will arrive in Israel on Wednesday 10 June as the guest of the new Israeli foreign minister, Gabi Ashkenazi. He is expected to also meet Netanyahu and Minister of Defense Benny Gantz.

 Maas will deliver two messages, Israeli officials and European diplomats told Barak David of Israel’s Channel 13 News:

• Israel is extremely important for Germany and it wants to strengthen the alliance.
• But, Germany is strongly against any steps toward unilateral annexation, and such moves could damage Israel’s relations with Germany and the EU.

The German government is concerned that this issue could force it to choose between its alliance with Israel and its respect for international law and Europe's longstanding positions and principles.

• Maas is expected to ask his Israeli counterparts not to put Germany in such a tough spot and warn that if pushed, Germany will support international law.
• Maas spoke about his concerns over annexation recently with U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. He has also discussed the issue with Jordan's foreign minister and the Palestinian prime minister.

Several days after Maas returns from Israel, the foreign ministers of all EU member states will convene for a meeting that will include discussion of the annexation issue.

https://tinyurl.com/y8gszl6v

Update: Israel Prevents German Foreign Minister's West Bank Visit, Citing Coronavirus Regulations

Israel has cited its coronavirus quarantine orders to prevent German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas from visiting the West Bank during his Middle East tour next week, three sources told Haaretz. Instead, he will meet Palestinian officials over video conference -which he could have done from Berlin.

Maas sought to visit Ramallah following his visit in Israel. Citing coronavirus restrictions, Israel said that if Maas enters the West Bank he will be required to enter a two-week quarantine when he reenters Israel on the way to Ben-Gurion International Airport.

Maas is set to meet with Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi and other Israeli officials on the day of his arrival. In the afternoon, he will hold a video call with Palestinian officials, and in the evening will depart for Jordan. Although the official purpose of the visit by Maas is to become acquainted with his new Israeli counterpart, he is also expected to ask Israel to avoid putting Germany in a difficult position by pushing ahead with its intentions to annex lands in the West Bank.

Israel's intent to annex West Bank settlements is a grave concern to Germany, which seeks to mediate between Israelis and Palestinians and prevent a violent escalation in the region. Germany is a key ally of Israel in international organizations, but is also a staunch defender of international law and institutions.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s declarations that annexation will be promoted on July 1, in less than one month, have put Berlin in a major quandary. On July 1, Germany will be taking over the rotating presidency of the European Council and will be assuming the presidency of the UN Security Council. These two roles will require the Germans to choose between their allegiance to international law and UN resolutions on the one hand, and their historical commitment to Israel on the other. https://tinyurl.com/y7tsu9fa

Sources at the German foreign ministry say the commitment is to Israel and to international law and institutions but not to supporting illegal annexations. Henry Kissinger once said that the US would always defend Israel but that this did not extend to its conquests.

PS: I had to delete three posts by Rony Michaely who is not interested in answering or countering any of my legal arguments, but simply accuses me of supporting Sunni Arabs (what about Christians, etc?), ergo Islamist terrorism. He also accused me of supporting the PA, which I do, but the PA is not a terrorist organization, is not designated as such even by the Netanyahu administration. The "non-member observer state of Palestine" has a seat at the UN, next to the Holy See, but of course no voting rights at the UNGA. The PA does have a seat in several UN agencies. Anyone may of course disagree with me, and me with anyone, and explain why, but personal attacks and insults are not arguments. This article is essentially a legal one. Legal arguments can be countered with other legal arguments, not with insults and personal accusations.

Unfortunately the only way to prevent this person -in no way a gentleman, more of a thug- to continue with his despicable extremist attacks is to disable comments to this article. Apologies. Those who belong to the International Relations Professional Discussions group can, however comment there.