Israel’s chutzpah at the United Nations, orchestrated by Israeli ambassador to the organization, Gilad Erdan, set new records this weekend.
In response to the adoption of a Palestinian resolution to ask the International Court of Justice to decide whether Israel’s occupation of the territories is still temporary or has become de facto annexation (a decision that could lead, among other things, to recommendations for sanctions) – Erdan gave a spirited speech. Its main point: Through their unilateral measures, the Palestinians are preventing peace negotiations.
Get it? The Palestinians are the ones who are destroying a fictitious diplomatic process, which Israel doesn’t want. It’s a real philosophical conundrum: How is it possible to destroy something that doesn’t exist?
Erdan argued that Israel prefers a dialogue between the parties to the unilateral involvement of the International Court of Justice in the peace process (what peace process?), and that every state that supports the resolution is putting the final bullet in the chances for future dialogue. He added that approval of the request would give the Palestinians “the perfect excuse to continue boycotting the negotiating table” (where’s the table?). And the cherry on top: Peace cannot be achieved without bilateral negotiations and mutual concessions.
After that, Erdan moved on to threats: “Unilateral steps by the Palestinians will be met by unilateral Israeli steps.” And the grand finale: The Palestinians are exploiting the Court “as a weapon of mass destruction in their jihad war of Israel-demonization.” Nothing less. It’s a wonder he didn’t call it “judicial terror.”
The ambassador forgot that he represents the current government, one of whose foundation principles was not to conduct negotiations, and certainly not to make concessions. Suddenly he’s advancing diplomatic compromises. In his current incarnation as an enthusiastic peace activist, Erdan also forgot, or hopes the world will forget, that in every fiber of his being he represents the exact opposite – a symbol of Israel aggression and rejectionism. During his term as a Knesset member and a cabinet minister, he fostered a hawkish and conservative right-wing agenda and, among other things, he clearly supported annexing the territories. Precisely the decision he is now seeking to prevent in The Hague.
What are you afraid of, Erdan? Did you want annexation? Go ahead – the court will help. As public security minister, Erdan promoted the erosion of the status quo at Al Aqsa, or the Temple Mount in Jerusalem and led the persecution and silencing of boycott, divestment and sanctions activists in Israel and abroad. In this framework, he promoted the idea that boycotting the settlements is tantamount to boycotting Israel proper, and that the settlements and Israel are a single legal entity.
If the International Court of Justice has even the slightest sense of humor, it will use all this as evidence of the Palestinian claim of Israel’s de facto annexation of the territories, and Erdan will be summoned by the Palestinians as a witness.
Israel has for years longed for the Palestinians to abandon violent struggle, but when they adopt nonviolent means, such as turning to international institutions or encouraging a consumer boycott, it turns out that this is not allowed either. Israel is busy branding any pro-Palestinian activity as antisemitic. At the same time, negotiations with the Palestinians has become anathema to Israelis, in favor of dividing and weakening the Palestinian leadership, which was supposed to have been Israel’s negotiating partner.
For years Israel has been openly engaged in deepening the occupation, making it permanent and in the de facto annexation of the settlements and Area C, territories that under the Oslo Accords are under full Israeli military and civilian control. So there’s actually no reason to oppose the Palestinian request to recognize this officially instead of masquerading as a country that seeks negotiations. On the contrary, this is Israel’s opportunity to explain the annexation in The Hague. Especially in light of the new government that is being formed.