Latest Editions

Jewish settlements and peace talks

Audio: Play | Download

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Download MP3
The World’s Matthew Bell reports on the challenges facing the Obama Administration as it tries to get Israel to change its attitude toward Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

Read the Transcript
This text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

KATY CLARK: As difficult as the Golan Heights question is, it may be a breeze next to the issue of Jewish settlements in the West Bank.  Israel’s expansion of these settlements over the years has lost it many friends.  And the Obama administration has called for a complete freeze on settlement growth.  But expansion under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has continued, as have Israeli attempts to justify the settlements.   The World’s Matthew Bell reports on how Israel’s settlement rhetoric has evolved over the years.

MATTHEW BELL:  For Netanyahu, the political stakes are high when it comes to Jewish settlements in the Israeli-occupied West Bank.  His right-wing coalition supports the settlement movement.  Some members of his cabinet actually live in West Bank settlements.  That includes Yuli Edelsteen, Minister for Information and Diaspora Affairs.  In a recent interview with this program, Edelsteen referred to lands in the West Bank by their Biblical names, Judea and Samaria.  Here he is talking about why he believes Washington’s demand for a settlement freeze is wrong.

EDELSTEEN:  So right now, to say that part of the Judea and Samaria should become, pardon me for saying that this way, but Judenfrei – Jew-free, absolutely – I’m not sure that this is the approach that behooves any country.

BELL:  The expression “Judenfrei” was used by the Nazis during the Holocaust to describe areas ethnically cleansed of Jews.  Other Israeli officials have been using similar provocative language in recent weeks.  It’s not clear yet how that message is playing here in the US.

ELLIOT ABRAMS:  I think it has the chance of persuading some people in the United States that, on this very controversial issue, the administration’s gone too far.

BELL:  Elliot Abrams was a key advisor on Middle East policy to George W. Bush.

ABRAMS:  When you say, “Gee, the Israelis shouldn’t be allowed to build in occupied territory, a lot of Americans are likely to say, ‘Yeah, that sounds right.”  But when you say, “Wait a minute.  Are you saying there are neighborhoods where Jews shouldn’t be allowed to live?  Why would that be?” That of course sounds like a lot more attractive argument.  So I think from a public relations point of view, it’s a smart way, and I would argue a fair way, of casting the argument.

BELL:  Abrams says it was the Obama administration that started this public fight with Israel over the settlements.  The Israelis are simply responding by framing the issue for maximum effect and trying to rally their base of support.  But the settlement enterprise has always been a tough sell, even among American supporters of Israel.  Aaron David Miller is a former State Department advisor on Middle East affairs, who’s now with Wilson Center in Washington.

MILLER:  The whole idea particularly when it’s financed, or appears to be financed with American dollars, kind of doesn’t play well here.  There’s a certain illegitimacy of that enterprise which most Americans simply will not identify with.

BELL:  This is the dilemma for the Israelis.  The more secure the country is, the more illegitimate its West Bank settlements appear to be.  In the early years after the 1967 war, Israeli leaders said they needed a presence there for security reasons.  Israel seemed very much under threat from its Arab neighbors.  Now, nearly 300,000 Israeli civilians in West Bank settlements.  And Israel’s military is the region’s strongest.  As the security argument has faded away, the settlements have been described in religious terms.  Proponents cite Biblical language about the Jewish people’s God-given right to the Holy Land.  These arguments too have become less persuasive to mainstream Americans.  They’re less persuasive to many American Jews as well.  But Philip Wilcox, of the Foundation for Middle East Peace, says American Jews are torn over this issue.

WILCOX:  There is a deep ambivalence in the American Jewish community who want smooth and warm relations between the United States and the state of Israel.  And while intellectually and conceptually they understand that settlements are wrong and they’re a mistake, they are very wary of a confrontation between the United States and Israel.

BELL:  That ambivalence comes from an understanding that the rhetorical flourishes surrounding the issue of settlements is about more than just settlements.  In a way it’s code for a whole host of larger issues.  The final status of Jerusalem, the creation of a Palestinian state, demarcation of its borders, and the question of whether Jews will be allowed to live there.  For The World, I’m Matthew Bell.

Copyright ©2009 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.