Why, however, is this so controversial and upsetting?
By MOSHE DANNA view of the Maale Adumim settlement in the West Bank, Jan. 28, 2020. (photo credit: MENAHEM KAHANA / AFP)
Predictably, on cue, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s announcement that he intends to extend Israeli law and sovereignty to Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”) has elicited a tsunami of opposition, fears of dire consequences, threats of sanctions by the EU and threats by Jordanian and PLO leaders to abrogate treaties and agreements. Why, however, is this so controversial and upsetting?In Jerusalem, Hebron and other areas, there have been Jewish communities since the First and Second Temple periods. After the destruction by the Romans, they rebuilt.In Hebron, a Jewish community was reestablished in the Byzantine period, and then reconstituted in the 16th century. It was destroyed in August 1929, when 67 Jewish residents were murdered.Jewish communities such as Gush Etzion, built in Judea and Samaria during the 1920s and 1930s, were destroyed during the 1947-1949 war and were rebuilt and expanded since the 1967 Six Day War. About half a million Jews live in 121 “settlements” in Judea and Samaria.PLO leaders and the international community recognized Israel’s claims to these areas (in Area C) in the Oslo agreements in return for creating a Palestinian National Authority under the PLO.Why, then, do plans to extend Israeli law and sovereignty provoke such extreme responses? It seems to be nothing more than confirming what already exists and has been agreed upon.For starters, it shatters the delusion that Jews will be forced out of their homes and communities as was done, for example, in Yamit (Sinai), the Gaza Strip and several communities in northern Samaria, and in Amona. It refutes PLO/PA demands for a state along the 1949 armistice lines. But it is even more devastating.It denies arguments that “settlements are illegal,” that “Jews have stolen Palestinian land” and that Jews are “occupying Palestinian territory.” In short, it destroys the false narratives and propaganda that fuel hatred of Israel and Jews. If Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria is acceptable, promoting a PLO state and its agenda is not. Accepting Israeli sovereignty, therefore, is not only an admission of defeat for Israel’s enemies; it is the recognition that Israel’s claims are legitimate. It is the admission that anti-Israel campaigns are based on lies and are motivated by bigotry.
Extending Israeli law and sovereignty would correct the anachronistic and undemocratic governing administration from military to civilian rule. This in itself is consistent with modern enlightened concepts of political authority and nationhood.A thorough examination of the legality of settlements by legal experts was commissioned in 2012 by Netanyahu. Led by the late Supreme Court Justice Edmond Levy, the Levy Report provides significant support for applying Israeli law and sovereignty in all areas liberated by the IDF in 1967. A symbol of integrity, extending Israeli sovereignty is not motivated by nationalism or conquest, but expresses the connection between the Jewish people and its ancient homeland, a resounding statement of Zionism’s meaning and purpose.
