Window on Israel: Gilo isn't a barrier to negotiations

Barack Obama was six years old when the Jordanian army opened fire on Jerusalem in the 1967 war. Shortly after the fighting, Israel expanded the city's boundaries. Four years later it began construction the Gilo neighborhood.

Gilo made headlines early in the 2000 intifada, when Palestinians bunkered in the nearby city of Beit Jalla fired on apartments there. Israel responded by building a wall to protect the vulnerable area and proceeded to wreak more havoc in Beit Jalla and the rest of Palestine than the Palestinians could achieve against Israelis. Some 40,000 people are now living in Gilo, construction of new homes and public facilities proceeds there as elsewhere in Jerusalem, and planning authorities have recently approved the construction of an additional 900 units. 
 
The concept of a wall protecting Israel from Palestinian violence caught on, and the project continues. The security barrier generally runs close to the 1967 boundaries, but reaches to the east in order to enclose major Jewish population centers.
 
None of these developments received the blessing of the international community. However, no government has taken any steps stronger than protesting against the unilateral expansion of Jerusalem's boundaries, or other Israeli construction in the West Bank.
 
Possession is nine-tenths of the law. I probably first heard that expression as part of a dispute on a primary school play yard, years before the 1967 war. Believe it or not, it also carries weight in international law. Claims should be bolstered with control in order to win recognition.
 
Reuters headlined its story on the recent approval of construction in Gilo with "Israel angers US by approving new West Bank homes." A White House statement indicated dismay, and accused Israel of undermining the president's efforts to resume peace talks with the Palestinians.

Really?
 
Naivete? Childishness? Chutzpah?
 
What is currently setting back peace talks is not something that has been a reality for 40 years. Israel controls Jerusalem within the borders that it declared. It also has effective control over the areas included within the security barrier. One does not know what the Israeli government would decide to do if Palestinians ever become serious about negotiating instead of repeating the tired mantra about 1967 borders and the return of refugees.

Every once in a while Palestinians indicate that they have been flexible in talks over the course of the past decade, but no details about that flexibility have come to the public's attention. The best guess is that the largely Jewish neighborhoods of Jerusalem, and the settlements on the Israeli side of the security barrier are not going to be on the table.
 
Another major barrier to the peace talks is Gaza, controlled by Hamas and its inflexible rejection of Israel's legitimacy. There is also unrelenting incitement in Palestinian schools and media, including those of the West Bank, and occasional threats of renewed violence.
 
No previous American administration has formally accepted the facts on the ground established by Israeli construction since 1967. What is notable about the Obama administration is the renewed emphasis of its alleged illegality, and the repeated inclusion of Jerusalem neighborhoods in the condemnation. No surprise that European officials and the Secretary General of United Nations the have joined the American-led chorus.
 
"Change" can be seen in the positions proclaimed by the Obama White House. Achievement is something else, and the early signs are negative.
 
If the Obama administration has contributed anything to the peace process, it's made things worse; it has hardened the Palestinians' position, provoked the Israeli Right to demand more settlement activity on both sides of the security barrier and has caused dismay among the Israeli Center and Left.
 
More important than the loss of confidence in President Obama among the Israel public is the probable loss of confidence in him among Israeli policymakers. And more pressing than routine construction in Jerusalem is the looming threat of Iranian nuclear weapons. There is no sign that the president's commitment to engagement has worked any better with the Iranians than with the Palestinians. If Israel decides to take action on its own, it will be unpleasant for many people beyond the initial suffering in Iran and Israel. No doubt that world leaders will blame Israel, but the responsibility will lay no less with Barack Obama.