Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu understands all too well what are the essential ingredients for peace with the Palestinians. During his trip to the United States, which ended Tuesday after a powerful address to Congress, he used all kinds of tactics to distract Americans from the territorial reality he must confront at home.
He tried confrontation with the U.S. president. He played the sympathy card. He offered the confusing image of a tolerant, multicultural Israel — home to 1 million Muslims — while excoriating the Palestinian leadership for refusing to call his country a Jewish state.
For all the important points Netanyahu made about Arab democracy and freedom, the Israeli leader conceded nothing regarding his longstanding preconditions for peace with the Palestinians. Instead, he suggested that President Barack Obama threatened Israeli security by calling for territorial negotiations based on the pre-1967 armistice lines.
The Obama administration is hardly the first to take this position. Every U.S. administration for decades has called for the pre-1967 lines to be the starting point for territorial talks. Obama is the first to say it out loud.
Within seconds of Obama’s speech last week, Netanyahu’s office began issuing Twitter messages labeling Obama’s territorial position “indefensible.” The normally supportive Jerusalem Post described Netanyahu’s reaction as “surprisingly harsh.”
The historical record is clear: After the Six Day War in 1967 — in which Israel seized the West Bank, Gaza Strip , Sinai Peninsula and Golan Heights — the United States joined the U.N. Security Council in approving Resolution 242, whose salient clause recognizes the “inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war.”
Over the succeeding 44 years, no U.S. administration has veered from that principle, and Obama must not allow Netanyahu’s pressure tactics to sway U.S. policy. For the Palestinians to emerge from a peace accord as “neither its (Israel’s) subjects nor its citizens,” as Netanyahu told Congress, both sides must negotiate land swaps based on the pre-1967 lines.
Nothing excuses the horrendous choices made by Palestinian leaders to undermine their own negotiating position. The constant resort to violence and terrorism has made the work of U.S. mediators difficult, if not impossible. Corruption has drained Palestinian resources and spurred the rise of Hamas radicals in Gaza.
They’ve given Israel every justification to rebuff proposals for a Palestinian state because Palestinians have failed repeatedly to prove they can govern themselves responsibly and control their most violent elements.
Still, despite Netanyahu’s hardball tactics, the Obama administration cannot back away from the longtime position rejecting the seizure of territory by force. Unwavering support for Israel must not come at the expense of America’s stand for what’s right.
