The good news from both U.S. and Israeli perspectives is that the leaders are meeting and talking without the acrimony and sniping that characterized relations in the Obama presidency. “The embassy in Jerusalem, the two-state solution, how to handle the Palestinian Authority, settlements and above all the Iran nuclear deal: They’ll have a lot to talk about,” said the Israel hand.
While it may seem like ancient history, before the Obama presidency there was actually a workable understanding in place between the Israel and U.S. governments regarding building, one that gave encouragement for then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to give back land (the Gaza pullout alas did not bring peace) and ease transit between the West Bank and pre-1967 Israel.
Back in 2009, President George W. Bush’s deputy national security adviser Elliott Abrams wrote:
On April 14, 2004, Mr. Bush handed Mr. Sharon a letter saying that there would be no “right of return” for Palestinian refugees. Instead, the president said, “a solution to the Palestinian refugee issue as part of any final status agreement will need to be found through the establishment of a Palestinian state, and the settling of Palestinian refugees there, rather than in Israel.”On the major settlement blocs, Mr. Bush said, “In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949.” Several previous administrations had declared all Israeli settlements beyond the “1967 borders” to be illegal. Here Mr. Bush dropped such language, referring to the 1967 borders — correctly — as merely the lines where the fighting stopped in 1949, and saying that in any realistic peace agreement Israel would be able to negotiate keeping those major settlements.On settlements we also agreed on principles that would permit some continuing growth. Mr. Sharon stated these clearly in a major policy speech in December 2003: “Israel will meet all its obligations with regard to construction in the settlements. There will be no construction beyond the existing construction line, no expropriation of land for construction, no special economic incentives and no construction of new settlements.”
Some refer to this as the Google Earth concept — natural growth within and upward in existing settlements is permitted, while expansion outward would not be. In other words, the perimeter would not expand. If Trump is looking for a quick and impressive win, he might reestablish that deal. (Frankly, it was an understanding between the countries that never ceased to be effective; Obama simply ignored it.)
In very clear terms, the return to our 2004 position would highlight a reset to before the Obama years, a commitment to work out differences privately (“no daylight” between them publicly) and dedication to incremental improvements in the Israeli-Palestinian relationship that might one day be the basis of a more comprehensive peace. In other words, forget about getting along with Putin (our foe); let’s enjoy a reset with our closest ally in the Middle East.
