A longtime reader wrote in in response to my post below saying that I was off base since Hamas doesn’t recognize even the concept of the settlements — in the sense of distinguishing between towns in Israel proper, the pre-1967 borders and those in the West Bank. But that misunderstands my point. I don’t think Hamas makes that distinction. But I don’t think that’s the point. I thought I’d print what I wrote him in response.
I’m actually not sure how much we’re disagreeing. In many ways I agree that Gaza and the West Bank have become two separate issues — not just in terms of negotiating strategy but in terms of final outcomes. But Israel has a profound strategic interest in a viable settlement with the West Bank Palestinians. Come up with some settlement of that issue and the Gaza issue because much, much less of a big deal. But no settlement of the West Bank issue is possible with continued expansion of settlements. Indeed, I would say no settlement is possible without uprooting almost all the current West Bank settlements, with the possible exception of some in the girdle around Jerusalem. That’s the core issue. And what’s happening right now in Gaza does not change any of that. Of course, Hamas makes no distinction of the Green Line. That’s a given. But I don’t think that’s the point. Israel desperately needs the West Bank issue settled. Everything that makes that more difficult endangers the state.
