Carrots,
Not Sticks, Can Stop Israel's Settlement
Growth
Ironically, while the United States
offers carrots to the hostile regime
in Iran to encourage it to change its
policy on nuclear enrichment, the administration
seems bent on using sticks on its ally
Israel to force a change in its settlement
policy. The approach is counterproductive
and should be changed to one focusing
on offering incentives for Israel to
freeze settlements and evacuate Jews
living outside the blocs of “consensus”
settlements. Here are a few possible
incentives to explore:
1) Set a deadline for eliminating
Iran’s nuclear facilities. If the U.S.
takes out Iran’s capability, then Israel
has no more existential threat to worry
about and does not have to take risks
to do the job itself. Israel would
be thrilled, but there’s little evidence
Obama has any intention of taking the
necessary measures to stop the Iranian
program and few American officials
are willing to risk the consequences
of a military operation. This would,
nevertheless, be the most powerful
incentive to change Israeli policy.
2) Sign a formal defense treaty with
Israel. Though the United States has
said it will defend Israel, a formal
treaty would significantly reduce the
threat of an Iranian strike and would
also enhance its deterrent against
groups such as Hezbollah. Many Israelis
fear the constraints such a treaty
may place on their freedom of action,
but why not give them the choice?
3) Admit Israel to NATO. Israel’s
army could contribute to the alliance
and the alliance could all but eliminate
the Iranian threat because it would
force the Iranians to abandon the idea
they can win a nuclear war with Israel.
NATO forces would also be more reliable
than UN peacekeepers to patrol borders,
which would make it easier for Israel
to make territorial concessions to
the Palestinians as well as the Syrians
and Lebanese. As with a U.S. treaty,
Israel would have some trepidation
about the restrictions NATO might seek
to impose, especially with regard to
nuclear weapons. The U.S. also could
not make this deal alone.
4) Offer a generous compensation package
to relocate settlers inside Israel.
It is anathema to many U.S. officials
to pay Israel to reverse a policy that
America has long opposed, but any peace
agreement will inevitably involve a
significant financial role for the
United States, so why not make a down
payment on peace now? The most ideological
settlers will still resist, but most
settlers moved to the territories for
economic reasons and will be receptive
to financial incentives to relocate.
5) Pressure the Arabs to purchase
the land from the settlers. Jews bought
land from Arabs to build their state,
the Arabs should adopt the same tactic.
This would be a good test for the Saudis,
in particular, who feign concern for
the Palestinians. Let them offer settlers
money for their land. The Arabs will
claim it’s already their land, but
saying it won’t make it so.
6) Provide Israel with a large number
of Joint Strike Fighter aircraft. These
planes could help Israel achieve a
significant upgrade to its air capability.
As it is, Israel is expected to get
some planes but cannot afford the large
numbers it would like. There would
be little downside to making the offer
though it may not be a significant
enough benefit to offset the political
risk of abandoning the settlements.
7) Finance the Red-Dead water project,
which involves building a canal from
the Red Sea to the Dead Sea. This project
will significantly increase the water
supply in the area and thereby address
one of the most critical issues affecting
the economies of Jordan, the future
Palestinian state and Israel. An even
better solution would be for Obama
to find partners to help pay for the
project.
Benjamin Netanyahu may offer the best
chance for progress in the peace process
because his national security policies
give him greater credibility in Israel
to make risky decisions. Beating him
with a stick, however, is likely to
bring down his government. This would
only put negotiations off by months
or years and his successor may be no
more malleable to Obama’s will.
If the president wants to stop settlement
growth and move toward a peace agreement,
it would be wise to drop the stick
and offer Israel carrots.
|