Settled?

Health care reform, which has now become law, has been the major focus of the media this week, and rightly so. However, it has been an important and fascinating week for US foreign relations. Israel is one of our strongest allies, and we are by all measures theirs. Our unique relationship with Israel started after World War II, when many Jewish people fled racism in Europe by moving to the United States, and others to a renewed Jewish homeland, Israel. Since, Israel has been the motivation (along with oil) for many of our foreign policy decisions in the region over the last 40 or so years. This week, though, has seen our relationship with the Jewish state fall to it's lowest levels in decades.

First, one must understand a partial history of this conflict. When Israel was created after WWII, many Palestinians were displaced and became refugees. Arab states in the region, who accepted these refugees, were naturally hostile towards the state. In the Six Day war of 1967, Israel fought back the aggression of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, but then took land from these countries in the aftermath. These areas became East Jerusalem, the West Bank (both formerly Jordan, and named for the captured western bank of the Jordan river), The Golan Heights (from Syria), the Gaza Strip, and the Sinia Peninsula (Egypt), which Israel eventually withdrew from in 1979. Then, Israel started building Jewish-only communities in these areas, which are known as settlements, and are generally regarded as illegal under international law, not only because they are being built on land which was captured illegally, but also because of the discriminatory nature of the settlements.

Fast-forward to a few weeks ago when Vice-President Joe Biden was visiting Israel on a "good-will" trip. The Administration had been hoping to end settlements as a pre-cursor to peace talks with the Palestinians. Yet, immediately after Biden left the country, Israel announced the building of 1,600 news settlements in East Jerusalem, considered the most sensitive of the Palestinian areas. Israel was seen as "thumbing it's nose" to the Obama Administration. Then, on Monday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke at the influential IAPAC meeting. This is an Israel lobby conference, and American officials are usually greeted with a warm welcome. Although the speech might have seemed plenty pro-Israel enough to an outsider, it was meet with a luke-warm response at the conference. "As Isreal's friend, it is our responsibility to give credit when it is due and to tell the truth when it is needed," said Clinton.

Then today, President Obama met with Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu. Unusually, there was to be no press coverage of the event. Netanyahu met with Obama for 90 minutes, then for over an hour with his staff, then again with Obama. The White House has refused to comment on what was discussed, and Press Secretary Gibbs would not classify the meeting as a negotiation. All in all, the White House seems to be handling the issue very sensitively.

It is true that when Obama was elected, there were some who promised he would be no friend of Israel, but more to the point, Netanyahu was never a friend of the Palestinians. He got elected to his position by promising not to agree to a two-state solution. These new settlements only set that possibility back even farther. So will Obama decide to go against the powerful Israeli lobby, and put his foot down with Netanyahu? The United States is Israel's only ally, and they receive over $3 billion dollars a year in aid. Many will say to do so would be political suicide, but Obama has shown a willingness for tough fights. Either way, today's, er, not-negotiations certainly appear intense. Are our interest aligned with Israel's? How long can Israel continue to ignore the world community on these issues?