Netanyahu and Smotrich's Settlement Policy Outperforms Lieberman's Plan

The current policy of Prime Minister Netanyahu and Minister Smotrich, which focuses on expanding Israeli presence and infrastructure in the West Bank, offers a tangible advantage by altering the ground reality without committing to a final status agreement and its potential concessions. This approach allows Israel to achieve gains while maintaining flexibility for future political decisions. The success of this policy will be tested by its ability to preserve these achievements after the era of Palestinian Authority President Abu Mazen.

In contrast, Minister Lieberman's plan proposes dismantling the Palestinian Authority, abrogating the Oslo Accords, and annexing Area C. He suggests transferring civil administration and public order in Areas A and B to Jordan, while Israel retains security responsibility. This aims to prevent a hostile Palestinian state without burdening Israel with governing millions of Palestinians. However, Lieberman's plan faces challenges, including the lack of Jordanian commitment to manage Palestinian cities and the potential for Hamas to exploit any power vacuum.

Netanyahu and Smotrich's policy, driven by Smotrich's push for expanded control and sovereignty, with Netanyahu setting political and security boundaries, has led to the approval of over 100 new settlements and billions in funding for settlements and roads during the current government's term. These actions are creating a foundation for deeper Israeli control, changing the starting point for future discussions about the territory. Netanyahu has stated that a Palestinian state will not be established while he is Prime Minister, aligning with the strategy of blocking a hostile state, strengthening settlements, and preserving Israeli security freedom without assuming full civil responsibility.

The article argues that this approach allows Israel to achieve significant gains without paying the price of a comprehensive settlement upfront. A political agreement could necessitate territorial concessions or loss of operational freedom, while dismantling the PA might impose responsibilities Israel is unprepared to transfer. By strengthening settlements, developing infrastructure, and deepening control, Israel preserves its options for future political frameworks. This flexibility is crucial, especially as alternatives depend on partners whose positions may shift. Delaying a final decision allows Israel to approach it with more assets and fewer required concessions.

The policy's success hinges on continued civilian construction and security operations, particularly distinguishing between the West Bank and Gaza. The lessons from October 7th necessitate preventing enemy buildup, not just relying on deterrence. While IDF operations in the West Bank continue to thwart armed groups, allowing for the deferral of a final status decision, Gaza presents a different challenge. The article also notes potential challenges to the current policy, including the PA's potential collapse, unresolved Palestinian resident status, and increasing international pressure, citing US opposition to annexation and shifting Republican youth sentiment.

An alternative long-term direction is proposed by David Friedman, former US Ambassador to Israel, suggesting Israeli sovereignty in the West Bank alongside Palestinian self-rule without voting rights in the Knesset. Israel would hold political and security authority, while Palestinians manage civil affairs. This conceptual proposal aims to establish Israeli sovereignty from the Jordan River to the sea, shifting the discussion from dividing the land to living within a sovereign framework. The success of this idea would require a sustainable civil arrangement.

Finally, the article emphasizes the need to prepare for the succession of Abu Mazen, identifying Hussein al-Sheikh as a key figure. Israel must prepare for both an orderly transition and potential power struggles, requiring engagement with local and regional actors, alternatives for maintaining civil services, and preventing terrorist organizations from taking control. Maintaining law and order, including addressing Israeli transgressions, is also crucial for security and settlement stability. The commitment that a Palestinian state will not be established under Netanyahu must become a policy that endures beyond leadership changes in both Israel and the PA.