• Published 00:56 26.08.10
  • Latest update 00:56 26.08.10

As Netanyahu prepares for summit, ministers get all heated up over freeze

Compromise tabled by Dan Meridor likely to hold, meaning more construction in settlement blocs but none in areas likely to be under Palestinian control.

By Jonathan Lis

A week before Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is scheduled to depart for the Washington summit during which direct talks between Israel and the Palestinians will be inaugurated, Israeli ministers and MKs are engaging in intense debate over the possibility of continuing the 10-month settlement construction freeze, which expires in late September.

Tony Blair West Bank AP 25.8.2010

Tony Blair drinking water from Jacob’s Well during a visit to the Balata refugee camp, August 25, 2010.

Photo by: AP

A senior minister who belongs to the forum of seven, an informal inner cabinet with which Netanyahu consults on important matters, said yesterday it is likely that the cabinet will ultimately adopt the compromise put forth by Dan Meridor. The deputy prime minister has proposed that Israel resume construction in settlement blocs and areas close to the separation fence come September, but extend the freeze in areas that are unlikely to remain under Israeli control after a peace deal is reached, such as isolated settlements.

A number of ministers said yesterday that the government is likely to adopt this idea and were confident that it would not undermine the coalition or lead to a crisis.

However, while some ministers have made it clear that they will oppose any deal that would undermine settlement construction, others expressed opinions that may serve as the basis of understandings with the Palestinians.

Shas is expected to strongly oppose any freeze in construction, but Yisrael Beiteinu, which is considered more right-wing, is expected to put forth more moderate views.

Ministers said yesterday that if the Yisrael Beiteinu chairman, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, sticks to his current policy and does not leave the coalition, Shas will also stay in the government.

Lieberman has presented his own compromise formula regarding the settlement freeze, which is scheduled to end September 26. He said construction should resume in the settlement blocs and that any building in other settlements would be permitted only to meet "natural growth."

"This has been a formula that has always been acceptable, even to the previous administration," he said yesterday. "People living outside the settlement blocs must not be punished. A settlement like Tekoa, established under Labor, has a new kindergarten class every year. Will we punish those children and their parents because the Labor government convinced them back then to perform a Zionist act?"

Lieberman's statements were criticized by the right as well as the left.

MK Aryeh Eldad (National Union ) argued yesterday that Lieberman's formula is meant to prepare the ground for a de facto freeze. He said the statements imply that Israel is willing to make concessions on more isolated settlements, since otherwise there is no reason to impose any restrictions on construction there.

However, sources on the left argued that any formula that permits construction in isolated settlements for the sake of natural growth is a vague formula that has previously enabled Israeli governments to trick Washington and continue building in settlements, despite promises to the contrary.

Culture and Sports Minister Limor Livnat also opposed the possibility of a compromise.

"We must prepare for an end to the freeze so that it will not be continued after September 26," said the Likud minister. "I do not think that it would be right to commit to a future freeze before the negotiations with the Palestinians."

Meanwhile, Lieberman also expressed pessimism about the chances that the Washington summit would lead to a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

"We must lower expectations," he said yesterday. "No one has discovered a magic formula, one that puts us on track for a permanent settlement in a year's time."

Lieberman said the Palestinians were heading into direct talks because negotiations were imposed on them, not because they want peace.

"We should not have to pay for the pleasure of sitting with the Palestinians around the table," he said. "They must also pay."

  • Print Page
  • Send to a friend
  • Share
  • Text Size +|-
 
 
TalkBacks

Why Facebook Connect?

Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.

Add a comment

Add your reply

  • 4. 1 4
    Palestinians must pay
    • 29.08.10
    • 04:07

    Lieberman said: "We should not have to pay for the pleasure of sitting with the Palestinians around the table, they must also pay." What is the currency he's talking about? Pay in blood? Pay in lives? Pay in aggrevation? If he means land as in a land swap, that's understood; it's a given. But without defining what "pay" means his statement sounds like something a fourth grader would utter.

  • 3. 3 2
    Pay with what?
    • Adam
    • 27.08.10
    • 02:16

    The Pals have paid enough for the Israeli occupation. It's about time Israel paid all on its own.

  • 2. 2 0
    Pointing out the monumental contradiction
    • Johnboy
    • 26.08.10
    • 12:18

    "Compromise tabled by Dan Meridor likely to hold, meaning more construction in settlement blocs but none in areas likely to be under Palestinian control." This means, of course, that Israel makes a UNILATERAL determination BEFORE the talks about what territory gets annexed to Israel, and what territory gets handed over into the control of the Palestinian state. Errrr, if you guys get to UNILATERALLY determine that then what, exactly, is the point of inviting Abbas to "negotiate" with you?

  • 1. 3 0
    peace talks
    • mike
    • 26.08.10
    • 07:34

    lieberman states that the palestinians must pay too. my question to him and otheres like him what is a fair price to pay?