Ahead of U.S. election, Trump ends a U.S. restriction applying to Israeli settlements

[webfact]

Ahead of U.S. election, Trump ends a U.S. restriction applying to Israeli settlements

 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman attend a special ceremony to sign an extension of the Israel-U.S. scientific cooperation agreement in “Judea, Samaria” (the biblical names for the West Bank) and the Golan Heights, at Ariel University in the Jewish settlement of Ariel, in the Israeli-occupied West Bank October 28, 2020. Emil Salman/Pool via REUTERS

 

ARIEL, West Bank (Reuters) - The Trump administration lifted a decades-old ban on Wednesday that had prohibited U.S. taxpayer funding for Israeli scientific research conducted in Jewish settlements in occupied territory, drawing Palestinian condemnation.

 

With Tuesday's U.S. election approaching, President Donald Trump's move was praised by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and could resonate with evangelical Christian voters who support Israeli settlement in the West Bank.

 

The West Bank settlement of Ariel, the site of an Israeli university, was chosen as the venue for a ceremony opening a new avenue of U.S. scientific cooperation with Israeli researchers.

 

Palestinians, who seek the West Bank for a future state, said the move made Washington complicit in what they termed Israel's illegal settlement enterprise.

 

In Ariel, Netanyahu and David Friedman, the U.S. ambassador to Israel, revised three agreements reached between 1972 and 1977, enabling researchers in settlements to apply for U.S. government funds. They also signed a new scientific and technology cooperation accord.

 

Under the now-lifted prohibition, research money for Israelis could not be distributed in areas such as the West Bank that Israel captured in the 1967 Middle East war. Most countries view permanent settlements on such land as a violation of the Geneva Conventions, though Israel disputes this.

 

"The Trump vision ... opens Judea and Samaria to academic, commercial and scientific engagement with the United States," Netanyahu said at the ceremony in Ariel, using biblical names for West Bank territory.

 

"This is an important victory against all those who seek to delegitimise everything Israeli beyond the 1967 lines."

 

Friedman said $1.4 billion had been invested by three U.S.-Israeli research cooperation funds since 1972.

 

A spokesman for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said lifting of the funding ban represented "American participation in the occupation of Palestinian lands".

 

The Trump administration last year effectively backed Israel's right to build West Bank settlements by abandoning a long-held U.S. position that they were "inconsistent with international law".

 

At the ceremony, Netanyahu again praised Trump for his "successful approach to bringing peace to our region", citing U.S.-brokered deals for diplomatic relations between Israel and several Arab states.

 

(Writing by Jeffrey Heller; Editing by Peter Graff)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-10-29

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

[Jingthing]

For those that don't realize it, this is not something that most American Jews want. American Jews are one of the demographics most passionately opposed to the white nationalist movement of 45 (which also includes blacks and LGBT people). This purely political pandering move by 45 is for his hard core right wing extremist Christian evangelical base. They are not really friends of Jews. Their apocalyptic vision for Israel includes Jews being forced to convert in the "end times" or if not, damned. With friends like that who needs enemies? 

Edited October 28, 2020 by Jingthing

[onebir]

9 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

American Jews are one of the demographics most passionately opposed to the white nationalist movement of 45

Ariel Uni "has the largest number of Ethiopian-born students in any Israeli university" and significant minority of Arab-Israelis. The original policy could also be interpreted as racist against two groups who I think are already somewhat marginalized in Israeli society.

 

Given that several Arab states have agreed to normalize their relations with Israel, I wouldn't have thought the US normalizing this rather minor aspect of its relations was a big deal (especially for uni that's been involved in holding mixed Israeli/Arab peace conferences too.)

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, onebir said:

Ariel Uni "has the largest number of Ethiopian-born students in any Israeli university" and significant minority of Arab-Israelis. The original policy could also be interpreted as racist against two groups who I think are already somewhat marginalized in Israeli society.

 

Given that several Arab states have agreed to normalize their relations with Israel, I wouldn't have thought the US normalizing this rather minor aspect of its relations was a big deal (especially for uni that's been involved in holding mixed Israeli/Arab peace conferences too.)

It's a big symbolic deal and I suspect you know that already.

Are these settlements legal and legitimate or not?

They're obviously not.

The 45 administration is all about  not even trying anymore for some kind of negotiated two state solution. Such a negotiation if it did ever happen could include legalization of certain close to Israel settlements and also control of some strategic military areas. The developments with other countries are positive but where does that leave Palestinians? 

[onebir]

13 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

1>It's a big symbolic deal and I suspect you know that already.

2>Are these settlements legal and legitimate or not?

2>They're obviously not.

3>The developments with other countries are positive but where does that leave Palestinians? 

1> Really?

2> I think "settlements on disputed territory" is more accurate. (As far as I can see, the situation in the West Bank is a corner case that isn't covered properly by international law. There's legal opinion, but as far as I can see that's just opinion.)

3> With a very weak bargaining position; I suspect part of the point of those treaties was to make that very clear to them. (Covert normalisation had already been occurring, apparently.)

[ezzra]

Hey. All is fare in love and war AND election's politics, this is NOT really about settlements right or wrong, it's about winning election... so any heated debates here are waste of breath... 

[Tug]

I’m sure all those little Muslim countrys that trump got to sign accords with Israel aren’t pleased but hey anything for a few votes ehh

[simple1]

18 minutes ago, Tug said:

I’m sure all those little Muslim countrys that trump got to sign accords with Israel aren’t pleased but hey anything for a few votes ehh

 

The OP comes across to me as contradictory to the spirit of the agreements i.e. further cementing Israeli settlements in the West Bank. As others have inferred, a cynical political move for evangelical votes.

[stevenl]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

For those that don't realize it, this is not something that most American Jews want. American Jews are one of the demographics most passionately opposed to the white nationalist movement of 45 (which also includes blacks and LGBT people). This purely political pandering move by 45 is for his hard core right wing extremist Christian evangelical base. They are not really friends of Jews. Their apocalyptic vision for Israel includes Jews being forced to convert in the "end times" or if not, damned. With friends like that who needs enemies? 

The good thing is, apparently Trump fears losing his hardcore evangelical base, hence this.

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, ezzra said:

Hey. All is fare in love and war AND election's politics, this is NOT really about settlements right or wrong, it's about winning election... so any heated debates here are waste of breath... 

So what is the point of a forum in the first place. You're always defending israeli policies, if this is the best you can come up with, it seems any reasonable defense is not there.

[Morch]

Reports on Israeli media suggest that there was pressure by Sheldon Adelson on Trump to finalize the move before the US elections.

 

As far as the move representing an attempt to secure more votes, it may plays on three fronts - US evangelicals, US Jews (that is the right-wing/religious element), and US citizens in Israel.  I don't know that it's a very effective move as such - so I'm inclined to suspect Adelson (or other parties involve) could be doubtful regarding Trump's re-election prospects, and trying to push his agenda while he can.

 

For Netanyahu, this comes at the right time - his support among right-wing and illegal settlers dropped during the last few months, the move represents a good opportunity toward correcting the situation.

 

This is obviously against the spirit of the recently signed normalization agreements, never mind going against international positions and views on the conflict. My guess is that, as usual, Netanyahu plays short term - score what you can now, deal with the issue right  in-front of you, and deal with the consequences later. More often than not, this actually works for him. How it effects Israel is another matter.

 

The change will mainly benefit the relatively newly declared university at Ariel (in the West Bank). It's not so much about the money but about legitimizing and normalizing the institute, and thereby, Israel's ongoing occupation of the West Bank.

 

Said university was (and is) a controversial affair in Israel. Other academic institutions were against it, and for sure, will not be in favor of the new changes. This is mainly because it makes the risk of other research grants, academic cooperation and ties to be divested or sanctioned. For Netanyahu, by the way, that's a double boon - generally speaking, the academic community is not his home crowd so them getting hit isn't too bad, plus at the same time such hypothetical sanctions would work great with his voters - the world is against us, they are antisemitic and the rest of the nonsense.

[Morch]

8 hours ago, Jingthing said:

For those that don't realize it, this is not something that most American Jews want. American Jews are one of the demographics most passionately opposed to the white nationalist movement of 45 (which also includes blacks and LGBT people). This purely political pandering move by 45 is for his hard core right wing extremist Christian evangelical base. They are not really friends of Jews. Their apocalyptic vision for Israel includes Jews being forced to convert in the "end times" or if not, damned. With friends like that who needs enemies? 

 

There's that. And then there's this...

 

Netanyahu, Ambassador Friedman Ink Deal Expanding Scientific Cooperation to Settlements

Quote

Sources involved in the agreement said, casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, a major donor to Ariel University and President Donald Trump, pressured the American administration to hold the ceremony ahead of the U.S. election on Tuesday.

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-netanyahu-friedman-ink-deal-expanding-scientific-cooperation-to-settlements-1.9268468

[Morch]

6 hours ago, onebir said:

1> Really?

2> I think "settlements on disputed territory" is more accurate. (As far as I can see, the situation in the West Bank is a corner case that isn't covered properly by international law. There's legal opinion, but as far as I can see that's just opinion.)

3> With a very weak bargaining position; I suspect part of the point of those treaties was to make that very clear to them. (Covert normalisation had already been occurring, apparently.)

 

Yes, really. It's not a biggy by itself, but it represents another step in accepting Israel's occupation in the West Bank.

 

The legal views that you present as 'more accurate' is not, generally speaking, in tune with how most of the international community sees things. Even said legal definitions would have to be widely stretched in order to accommodate the scope of Israel's activities in the West Bank.

 

The Palestinian may have a weaker bargaining point as a result of the recent normalization efforts and moves such as detailed in the OP. However, this argument is only relevant if there's an actual intention of carrying out negotiations. So far, there are little signs to indicate that Israel, under Netanyahu, is ready and willing to do so, or that it got something reasonable to offer. Before expected comments and objections - this is not to say that the Palestinian side(s) is ready and willing, far from it.

[Jingthing]

12 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

There's that. And then there's this...

 

Netanyahu, Ambassador Friedman Ink Deal Expanding Scientific Cooperation to Settlements

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-netanyahu-friedman-ink-deal-expanding-scientific-cooperation-to-settlements-1.9268468

Yes. I said most. Not all. 

[Morch]

5 hours ago, stevenl said:

So what is the point of a forum in the first place. You're always defending israeli policies, if this is the best you can come up with, it seems any reasonable defense is not there.

 

You've been a member long enough to realize that most politically contested topics are not so much about 'discussion', but rather serve as a platform for posters to repeat their views in a loop, and clash with those holding opposite positions.

 

If you want to express faux outrage about a comment regarding the futility of these 'discussion', that's up to you - I think it's a legit point of view, even if I do not follow what's preached. As for the partisanship comment - that's something you post (one way or another), in a partisan manner - meaning, you do not usually apply criticism such as this to posters holding opposing views.

[KhunFred]

Happy that Trump did something positive. I didn't vote for him in 2016 and I certainly won't vote for him next week. The last four years have been a disaster and America is a laughingstock around the world. We deserve all the hate we are getting.

[Morch]

4 hours ago, BobBKK said:

 

Funny Trump does something your beloved Israel wants and you STILL attack him. There is a word for that. Twist and turn all you like but Trump has done more for your Israel than your Dem pressies in the past. Personally I am against ALL Israel expansion.

 

Are you quite sure that's what "Israel wants"? Or rather, more likely uninformed as to this being a somewhat controversial issue in Israel? Same goes for the rest of the things you claim Trump did 'for Israel' - they are mostly related to the views of right-wingers/religious parties there. And apparently, equally uninformed as to what Democratic Presidents were involved in - two peace agreements (real ones), and a major boost to the aid Israel receives from the USA (that was Obama, btw).

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, KhunFred said:

Happy that Trump did something positive. I didn't vote for him in 2016 and I certainly won't vote for him next week. The last four years have been a disaster and America is a laughingstock around the world. We deserve all the hate we are getting.

 

Positive how?

And if you have issues with international hate toward the US - how do you imagine this will be play out internationally? Apart from Israeli right-wingers, that is.

Edited October 29, 2020 by Morch

[Thingamabob]

9 hours ago, Jingthing said:

For those that don't realize it, this is not something that most American Jews want. American Jews are one of the demographics most passionately opposed to the white nationalist movement of 45 (which also includes blacks and LGBT people). This purely political pandering move by 45 is for his hard core right wing extremist Christian evangelical base. They are not really friends of Jews. Their apocalyptic vision for Israel includes Jews being forced to convert in the "end times" or if not, damned. With friends like that who needs enemies? 

Rubbish. 

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

You've been a member long enough to realize that most politically contested topics are not so much about 'discussion', but rather serve as a platform for posters to repeat their views in a loop, and clash with those holding opposite positions.

 

If you want to express faux outrage about a comment regarding the futility of these 'discussion', that's up to you - I think it's a legit point of view, even if I do not follow what's preached. As for the partisanship comment - that's something you post (one way or another), in a partisan manner - meaning, you do not usually apply criticism such as this to posters holding opposing views.

With the poster himself regularly commenting on politics, it is a hypocritical point of view of the poster I reacted to, only intend to shut a for him potential negative discussion down.

[Thingamabob]

1 hour ago, KhunFred said:

Happy that Trump did something positive. I didn't vote for him in 2016 and I certainly won't vote for him next week. The last four years have been a disaster and America is a laughingstock around the world. We deserve all the hate we are getting.

I can assure you America is not a laughing stock, or hated, around the world, although the memories of the invasions and killing of civilians in Iraq and Libya linger on.

[Jingthing]

15 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

Rubbish. 

Clarify please.

Refute my points with logic and evidence if you dare.

[Jingthing]

11 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

I can assure you America is not a laughing stock, or hated, around the world, although the memories of the invasions and killing of civilians in Iraq and Libya linger on.

Pew Research says differently with a few national exceptions.

[Morch]

5 hours ago, stevenl said:

With the poster himself regularly commenting on politics, it is a hypocritical point of view of the poster I reacted to, only intend to shut a for him potential negative discussion down.

 

Well, I comment regularly on contested political topics, and do so despite feeling it's fundamentally futile. I think it would be only natural to feel that way when the same points are rehashed over and over again, and when they are opposed to one's point of view (which is, obviously, the undisputed truth....). It usually takes way more of the usual nonsense (and/or vileness) to get a topic shut down.

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been reported and removed.  The topic is about Israeli settlements.

 

[Scott]

Inflammatory post removed.  Continue making personal comments and you will be suspended.