Trump: I’m not going to condemn Israel, it’s been through enough
T. Belman. Because of Trump’s remarks this week as to whether settlements are helpful or not to achieving peace. everyone has something to say about it. At the outset let me clarify “peace” is not the same as “a peace agreement.” The peace agreement that Obama sought so ardently, if achieved, would not have achieved peace. It was a prescription for war. Maintaining the status quo is more conducive to peace, primarily because Israel is in full control of Area C which includes the Jordan Valley. Accordingly, if Trump supports Israel’s retention of area C, it would certainly be conducive to peace and the settlements would not be an obstacle. In fact they would help solidify the peace. So the object of the exercise should be to achieve peace and not a peace agreement.
Furthermore Trump should not be so quick to seek the approval of the Arab world because they would demand too much. What ever he agrees to with Israel will alienate them but it won’t matter because they need the US and Israel, notwithstanding. The Palestinians are way down on their list of priorities.
Trump also said “there’s limited land left”, implying that that is the reason Israel should’t build new settlements. True, but sure that should lead Trump to broaden the discussion to include Jordan which has four times the land mass of Israel and a smaller population. A peace agreement and peace will only come about if Jordan is factored in.
In closing, I am very happy that he is getting a lot of advice and is considering his options.
President Trump praises Netanyahu but says ‘settlements won’t advance peace’.
On Friday, Israel Hayom published an interview with President Donald Trump, the first he has granted to an Israeli media outlet since taking office in January.
The interview was released just hours after President Trump dined with Israel Hayom owner and GOP donor Sheldon Adelson at the White House Thursday evening.
Read more…







