“World” editorial. Benyamin Nétanyahou will he carry out his promise? Or will he prefer to weigh the sword of Damocles on Israeli politics, entirely occupied by this prospect? The question has arisen very concretely since 1is July, the date from which the Israeli Prime Minister undertook to propose to his government a decree to annex part of the occupied Palestinian territories. In this process, it relies on the peace plan proposed in January by President Donald Trump, which grants until 30% from the West Bank to the State of Israel.
Israel, of course, is engaged in a de facto, creeping annexation of the territories conquered in 1967 in favor of the Six-Day War, by favoring the installation of settlers there; today there are nearly 450,000 of them living in the West Bank among 3 million Palestinians, and 200,000 in East Jerusalem. But a de jure annexation would be a major political and diplomatic fact, of extreme gravity.
Diplomatically, this is a violation of international law, flouting the right to self-determination. The appropriation by a State of territories acquired by force and the modification of the borders under the same conditions are illegal. On the political level, the annexation would perpetuate the occupation of the Palestinian territories, definitively burying the idea of two states, Palestinian and Israeli, living side by side.
A discriminatory situation
While the demographic growth of the Palestinian population could, in the long run, exceed that of the Jews, the declaration of Israeli “sovereignty” would enclose in a second class status the Palestinians of the annexed areas – for whom one can doubt that the Israeli nationality and the they have the right to vote – and those doomed to remain in the occupied areas indefinitely. It therefore threatens to formalize a discriminatory situation equivalent to an apartheid regime.
Mr. Netanyahu suddenly seems to hesitate, while President Trump looks elsewhere. The scope of the annexation project could be limited, at least initially, to certain blocks of settlements in the West Bank, without including the Jordan Valley. But the number here does not matter: the principle remains the same. There is no doubt that, once the precedent has been created, the perimeter of the annexed territories could be enlarged.
The King of Jordan warned Israel of the risks of a “Massive conflict”. Wednesday, Boris Johnson, introducing himself “Staunch defender of Israel”, urged Mr. Netanyahu, to the front page of the daily Yediot Aharonot, to abandon a project which, argues the British Prime Minister, “Would be against the interests of Israel.” In Paris, the head of French diplomacy, Jean-Yves Le Drian, said that the annexation, “Whatever the perimeter”, “would not remain without consequences”.
What consequences? This is the crucial question which the European Union will have to face if annexation is decided. The Twenty-Seven are divided over Israel. In terms of illegal annexation, however, there is a precedent, on which the EU has shown remarkable unity for six years: the Crimea, which is worth Russia sanctions renewed unanimously every six months. German deputies said on Wednesday that sanctions against Israel would be counterproductive; the debate is open on the form that the European reaction would take. But this reaction must be strong, clear and concrete, otherwise the credibility of the weight of European democracy will be lost.
–
