With July fast approaching, the US seeking an agreement between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his alternate, Benny Gantz, and no map of where Israel will apply its laws made public, speculation has been rampant that instead of going for the whole 30% of the West Bank that the Trump peace plan offers, Israel will approach it in phases.
What would happen this summer varies, depending on who is floating it. It could be sovereignty over just Ma’aleh Adumim; it could be Ma’aleh Adumim, Gush Etzion and Ariel; it could be the major settlement blocs, but not all settlements.
None of the sides involved have openly put the option on the table. But it certainly could become a serious one between now and July, when Netanyahu has promised he will move forward with sovereignty in the West Bank.
At the same time, it’s an option that doesn’t make much sense.
Back in January, Netanyahu had a different phased annexation plan. Right after Trump presented his “Vision for Peace” in the White House, Netanyahu’s political spokesman said there would be a cabinet vote on settlement annexation within days. The idea was to hold a vote only on the settlements and a later vote on the full 30% of the West Bank.
But Jared Kushner, senior adviser to the president, reportedly bristled at the idea because it would mean multiple waves of international backlash.
Kushner’s logic is still sound.
In the five months since the Trump plan came out, the world’s response has been overwhelmingly negative toward it and the idea that Israel would annex the settlements.
Talk of economic sanctions seems to be overblown, with none of Israel’s top trading partners – the EU, UK, China and certainly not the US – threatening them in response to the step. But there are other, smaller punitive measures by the EU and its member states on the table that can still hurt Israel in a big way.
Jordan’s King Abdullah has said annexation will cause a massive confrontation with Israel. The United Arab Emirates said it threatens normalization steps in the region.
So it’s not war or sanctions, but it’s still a significant cooling of Israel’s international ties.
Partial sovereignty seems like Israel would be risking all of that with minimal gains.
Politically, it would not give Netanyahu many points. A fairly significant portion of his voting base thinks that even the Trump plan, which would make all of the settlements part of sovereignty Israel, is not far-reaching enough because it leaves an opening for a Palestinian state.
There will be some very loud voices on the Right that won’t be satisfied with a smaller move, and surely some will suggest that the limited sovereignty could be the final, not the first, step on the matter and determine Israel’s borders.
Plus, Ma’aleh Adumim and Ariel are Likud-voting towns anyway, so Netanyahu won’t be winning over anyone there.
Security-wise, there wouldn’t be a major difference, because Israel would maintain security control over the entire West Bank in either scenario.
If a smaller step is, indeed, what the government ends up taking this summer, it will be because of Gantz.
The Trump peace plan released in January suggests that Israel extend sovereignty to all settlements and land surrounding them, plus the Jordan Valley, amounting to 30% of the West Bank. But what is more important to the Trump administration at this point is that Gantz agrees to whatever ends up happening.
The Trump administration wants Israel to move forward with its plan in a way that could be accepted and preserved even if Democratic candidate Joe Biden wins the presidency.
In addition, between coronavirus and mass protests across the country, the US has plenty going on right now without having to deal with Israel’s problems, and they want this move to go as smoothly as possible.
Gantz is far less enthusiastic than Netanyahu about annexation; in fact, it seems that he would prefer that it not happen at all. In his few public remarks on the matter, Gantz and Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi have emphasized the peace and dialogue aspects of the Trump plan, and they are concerned it will threaten the peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan.
Since Netanyahu is determined to push sovereignty through this summer, and he has the majority to do it, the Blue and White leaders are thought to be eyeing a slower start.
But Gantz may want to do a cost-benefit analysis and consider that partial sovereignty will likely still have all the negative consequences with very little gain.