Time running out to halt Israel’s new land grab

It may be a case of too little, too late, but last week’s visit to Israel and Jordan by Germany’s Foreign Minister Heiko Maas could be the beginning of the fightback by some elements of the international community against the perilous Israeli intention to annex parts of the West Bank.

In the grand scheme of things, when large parts of the world are struggling with the health and economic challenges of the coronavirus pandemic, or the social discontent emanating from racial tensions, Israel’s intention to annex a third of the West Bank is not at first sight something that deserves to be high on the international agenda; but it should be, or it will come back to haunt us.

In a complex world, without underestimating the scale of these other challenges, responsible elements in the international community still have a duty to air their concerns and state loudly and clearly the implications for Israel should it pursue this expansionist plan. If carried out, it may well be the knockout blow not only to a two-state solution, but also to any other just and fair settlement of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. The proposed annexation has far reaching implications for regional stability. The Palestinian Authority may collapse, the peace agreement between Jordan and Israel could be threatened, and Israel’s relations with Egypt and the Gulf countries could also suffer. Europe in particular is susceptible to destabilizing events in the MENA region, and annexation is clearly an undermining provocation.

For obvious historical reasons, Germany is treading cautiously in its disagreements with the Jewish state.  However, during his visit, Maas not only raised serious concerns with the Israeli government about its annexation plans, but went farther. First, though he stressed that Germany was against imposing sanctions on Israel if it should go ahead with the plan, he nevertheless delivered a somber warning to Benjamin Netanyahu and Benny Gantz that other EU countries are seriously contemplating such a course of action, and are also likely to recognize the state of Palestine.

Significantly, Maas did not say that Germany would try to dissuade other members of the EU from taking such a route. Second, following his visit to Israel Maas went to Jordan, and after a meeting with Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi, joined via video conference by Palestinian Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh, the three confirmed their commitment to the two-state solution, declaring that preventing the annexation had top priority, while Maas decried it as contrary to international law.

This may be the first sign that the more progressive minded nations and international institutions are growing impatient with Israel’s constant flouting of the rule of international law, and are ready to do something about it. President Trump’s clumsy and reality-free attempt to step into the void of the peace process has added fuel to an already explosive situation, while also encouraging the Israeli leadership and Right to believe that now is the time to apply sovereignty to most settlements and the Jordan Valley.

It was of course encouraging to hear the likely Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden condemn Israel’s annexation plans and promise to “reverse Trump’s undercutting of peace.” However, if he wins he will not enter the White House until January, and should the annexation be completed and formalized by that date it may be next to impossible to reverse it without unprecedented confrontation between the two allies.

Jordan is clearly the most perturbed by Israel’s intentions. Relations had been deteriorating for some time.  Any move to change the status quo, either in Jerusalem’s holy places or in the West Bank, especially along the long border between the countries, is bound to have a negative knock-on effect on Israel’s eastern neighbor. It would put King Abdullah in a precarious position and could endanger the stability of his kingdom. Annexation leaves no room for Jordan not to respond vigorously, considering that more than half its population is Palestinian, and developments in the West Bank are seen more as domestic than foreign events. No wonder the Jordanian king was one of the first to warn Israel of the consequences of annexation and the probable collapse of the Palestinian Authority.

In an interview with a German newspaper he sent a message not only to Israel, but also to the region and the rest of the world, that annexation is likely to end in chaos and extremism, and “would lead to a massive conflict with the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.” Other countries in the region would be in a similar position, though they will have more wriggle room to confine their response to condemnation, rather than take any tangible diplomatic or political move, or call a halt to strategic cooperation.

Among Israel’s decision makers, the calculation is that this may be the perfect window of opportunity for annexation. The Trump administration does not realize the severity of the consequences, and faces a battle for re-election in November; the Arab world, mainly in the Gulf region, would be restrained in its response as its cooperation with Israel on the Iranian issue is more pressing; and Jordan would find it difficult to cut all ties with Israel. It is left for the international community, mainly the EU and the regional powers, to demonstrate that Netanyahu is miscalculating politically and morally, and that his administration is indisputably on the wrong side of history.

• Yossi Mekelberg is professor of international relations at Regent’s University London, where he is head of the International Relations and Social Sciences Program. He is also an associate fellow of the MENA Program at Chatham House. He is a regular contributor to the international written and electronic media. Twitter: @YMekelberg