Window on Israel: The problem with settlements

In advance of President George W. Bush's pending visit to Jerusalem, we have heard a great deal about Israel's failure to remove "illegal settlements" from the West Bank. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has also stated that she opposes construction in some neighborhoods within the municipal boundaries of Jerusalem.
 
Let me be so rude as to offer an elementary lesson in political science, which is embarrassing not only in light of the fact that the Secretary of State is a former professor of political science, but because it may embarrass Israel's recent prime ministers.
 
Both Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert may have exceeded their mandates when they committed themselves to remove those settlements.
 
The problem is not so much in the realm of legal authority, but of political feasibility.
 
An American president cannot make certain commitments without noting that implementation depends on Congressional approval. A treaty requires the approval of the Senate. Programs of financial aid or technical cooperation depend on appropriations approved in both Houses of Congress.
 
An Israeli prime minister is bound by a somewhat different set of constraints. They are not complex. Most political science undergraduates ought to be aware of them.
 
Insofar as no political party has ever won a majority in a national election, each government is a coalition of different parties. Often the coalitions are fragile. They may keep a prime minister, or any other minister, from implementing something close to their heart, even if they are the subject of international understandings.
 
This seems to be the case with respect to the "illegal settlements." According to a recent report in Israeli media, there are about 100 of these, with some 3,000 residents in total. Conversations among attorneys on national television reveal that criteria for making a settlement "legal" are complex. The result is that some locations well within Israel have been "illegal" for years. The issue is a bit of an embarrassment, insofar as it reveals that this law-abiding democracy may fall short of following all the rules that it imposes on itself.
 
Whatever the details, there are two parties in the government coalition (SHAS and Israel Our Home) that seem dead set against withdrawing settlements. There are members of other parties in the coalition that would prefer not to withdraw anything. They might abstain or even vote against their own government should the issue be put to a vote.
 
Were Prime Minister Olmert to embark on a serious effort to withdraw settlements, he could lose his government and his job.
 
The reason is not entirely ideological. It has something to do with the several thousand rockets fired against legal settlements within Israel after the government of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon withdrew the Jewish settlements in Gaza. It also has something to do with the 1,100 Israelis killed in this upsurge of Palestinian violence labeled intifada al-Aqsa. Those who oppose withdrawing illegal settlements say, among other things, that the issue's position in the so-called Roadmap to Peace, as an equivalent of the Palestinians stopping the violence, reveals a lack of moral balance. There is no clear sign that the Palestinians have worked seriously to stop the violence. A gang affiliated with the Palestinian security forces, presumably under the control of President Mahmoud Abbas, killed two Israeli hikers only a week ago. And the rockets keep coming toward Israel out of Gaza.
 
Until all that stops, there seem to be enough Israeli ministers and Knesset members set against withdrawing settlements to make the Prime Minister's feelings on the matter insufficient to proceed toward implementation. It is as if an American president expressed a personal commitment, but Congress failed to provide the money.
 
Prime Ministers Sharon and Olmert may be at fault for not hedging their commitments by their capacity to garner the approval of their government colleagues. 
 
There is another problem associated with the president's visit. The Sharkanskys have tickets to the series of the Jerusalem Baroque Orchestra. The next performance is set for the day the president arrives, in the concert hall of the YMCA, across the street from the King David Hotel and its presidential suite. The police have announced that the area will be "sterile." That means no cars, problems for pedestrians, and fouled public transportation for blocks around. Officials of the orchestra tried to change the site of the concert, but without success. Maybe someone out there can convince the president to change his hotel reservation. Or otherwise tell us how to get where we want to go.