The Jerusalem Institute for Strategic Studies recently ran a simulation trying to imagine the likely ramifications of annexation. They tried to anticipate not just the reactions of Israel's regional neighbors but also the reactions in America. Running a simulation can help policy-makers as they try to think through what may happen if a big decision is made and how to manage the costs and risks.
In this case, division apparently emerged about what the consequences in the United States might be. From a think tank with a rightward bent politically, that should serve as a cautionary note for the proponents of annexation. In fact, I have been struck by the strange, even contradictory posture of those favoring annexation when they speak of the reaction of the United States. On the one hand, they claim this is a unique moment with the Trump Administration and its readiness to back extension of Israeli sovereignty to 30% of the West Bank/Judea and Samaria. This moment must be seized, they argue because it will create a new baseline that the rest of the world will come to accept. That new baseline means that 30% of the territory will be seen as part of Israel and in any future negotiation that will be the starting point, not 100%.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter
Sounds good, if it were true. But what happens if Trump loses and there is a Biden presidency. Ah, the proponents tell us all the more reason to seize the moment. But if Trump loses – and that is a distinct possibility– what will be gained if Biden comes in and reverses American recognition of the annexation. No one else internationally is going to recognize the annexation, and should Biden reverse it, there is no new baseline.
On the contrary, with at least four European states signaling that they will respond to annexation by recognizing the Palestinian state in the 1967 lines, annexation may actually cement a baseline worse than the one that currently exists: the 1967 lines plus the settlement bloc areas. (When even such a long-time Israeli friend as British Prime Minister Boris Johnson makes a plea directly to the Israeli public not to annex, it should be a clear signal that Israeli is alone on this internationally except for the Trump Administration – and even it is showing little enthusiasm for annexation that is divorced from the rest of its plan.)
Again, proponents have an answer: Biden is a friend of Israel and while he may not like the unilateral Israeli move, he won't reverse it. True, Biden is an instinctive, even emotional, friend of Israel. But he has been very clear that he is opposed to all unilateral moves – whether Israeli annexation or a Palestinian declaration of statehood which he believes make it much harder to achieve eventual peace.
He has explicitly said he opposes annexation. And lest there be any doubt about his readiness to reverse Trump recognition of annexation, note what Biden recently said to a group of Jewish donors: "I'm going to reverse the Trump administration steps which I think significantly undercut the prospects of peace."
Apparently, Biden sees reversing Trump as a political winner, not a loser. And, if Trump loses his bid for re-election, there will be little cost or hesitancy in reversing his positions, including his recognition of Israel's annexation.
Of course, I have heard proponents also say Israel must annex because Biden will come with a big peace plan and Israel needs to pre-empt it. (How that squares with their argument that Biden won't reverse annexation is never explained but the two cannot both be true.) But this argument also does not reflect what I know about Biden and those around him on their approach to the Israeli-Palestinian issue.
While I certainly don't speak for Biden or any of his advisors, I have known them a long time and believe that they see big initiatives as bound to fail, especially when the gaps between the parties are so great both substantively and psychologically. Instead, I believe a Biden administration would be much more likely to pursue diplomacy with Israelis and Palestinians that is far more low-key and much more geared toward trying to create the circumstances on the ground that could make progress possible over time.
Regardless of whether there is going to be a Biden administration and what it might do on the issue of annexation, there is another dimension that needs to be considered when thinking about the implications of annexation in the United States. At a minimum, going ahead with annexation over clearly articulated opposition of Joe Biden and nearly all prominent Democrats in the Congress will deepen the political divide over Israel in this country. Israel historically has been a bipartisan issue – it was an American interest not a Republican or Democratic interest. But its non-partisan image is already at risk and annexation will only make matters worse.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
In addition, on Israel, annexation will dramatically boost the left-wing of the Democratic party which increasingly identifies with Palestinians as victims, and which fails to see the pattern of Palestinian rejection of all American peace proposals even prior to the Trump plan – proposals that would have provided for a viable Palestinian state. With justice an issue of increasing importance in the United States, Israeli annexation will feed the Palestinian narrative of victimhood and resonate here. What will also resonate here is an emerging Palestinian mantra of equal rights and one person, one vote, if one state is the only possible outcome. Who will oppose that in America?
One can debate the pros and cons of annexation and such a debate is worthy of having. But it should be an informed debate and based on reality. It is, unfortunately, an illusion to think that annexation will come with no cost here in America. It will, and if the gain is illusory, why take the risk?
