The news about Netanyahu was no news
The Israeli prime minister has rejected a Palestinian state for years.
By definition, news is something that changes, something new. Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu made news Thursday by saying the same thing he has for years.
Netanyahu turned aside the idea of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel. This two-state solution has been the official goal of Israel’s ally the United States for generations, and has been part of President Biden’s answer to what should follow the Israel-Hamas war.
Here's how NPR reported the prime minister’s remarks.
Netanyahu… said a Palestinian state would become a launching pad for attacks on Israel.
He said Israel "must have security control over the entire territory west of the Jordan River," adding: "That collides with the idea of sovereignty. What can we do?"
There’s a lot at the end there, the rhetorical shrug, suggesting a truth beyond anyone’s control.
President Biden suggested otherwise. Asked the next day if a Palestinian state is impossible so long as Netanyahu is prime minister, he said: “No, it’s not.”
Netanyahu is saying the same thing now that he apparently has been telling Biden for years. Here’s how he put it on NPR in 2022:
NETANYAHU: My formula is very simple. The only peace that will hold is one that we can defend. And the one that we can defend is one in which the Palestinians have all the powers to govern themselves but none of the powers to threaten our life, which means that security and whatever political arrangements we'll have, realistically, will have to remain in Israel's hands. And I said this...
INSKEEP: They won't see that as political equality, of course.
NETANYAHU: No, of course. I don't hide that for a minute. I say it openly. Joe Biden, friend of 40 years, when he was vice president was in Israel. And he said to me, but, Bibi, that's not complete sovereignty. And I said, you're right, Joe. But that's the only one that will last.
We can go back eight years earlier than that, to an NPR conversation in 2014:
INSKEEP: How can there be a fully sovereign Palestinian entity if you maintain security control over the West Bank in the long-term?
NETANYAHU: Well, I think you're going to have a long-term Israeli security presence there and that's what I was referring to and how can that be? How can you possibly reconcile a long-term security presence of a former enemy on your own territory? Well, let's see, how about Germany and American bases there? How about South Korea and American bases there? How about Japan?
INSKEEP: But you said security-controlled. Do [you] not mean control, do you just mean an Israeli base?
NETANYAHU: Well, it's not really a base in our case - we have a problem. I’ll tell you what it is…
What Israel wants is the right to strike anywhere to counter the threat of attacks by Hamas. As he has acknowledged (“What can we do?”) this is far less than full sovereignty for Palestinians.
During the Israel-Hamas war, the Biden administration has said several things: that it supports Israel’s right to defend itself; that Israel should consider what happens after defending itself; and that a long-term peace is unlikely without some pathway to Palestinian statehood. The difference remains on that last point. Many leaders on Israel’s political right have not accepted a Palestinian state, saying variously that Israel could never be safe alongside one; that all the land should be Israel’s; or that Palestinians will never agree to coexist with Israel.
Netanyahu has tried to offer something other than sovereignty to Palestinians, such as economic development. When I have interviewed Palestinians, they have contended that Israel doesn’t allow them much economic freedom either, and that they have no way to protect what little they have—which, they say, creates more support for Hamas.
Sabri Saidam, an official of the Palestinian Fatah party, told me last year as Israel responded to Hamas’ October 7 attack that Israel’s policy caused his party to lose ground against Hamas. “People are saying to us, OK, you have taken us on a ride for peace over decades. You have produced no results, so why not resort to armed confrontation?"
Ahmed Aweida, a Palestinian businessman, told me the same: “Maybe not me personally, but, you know, for people who have tried the political process for 30 years now, maybe the path of armed resistance is a solution.”
This dynamic was apparent long before Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, triggering a massive Israeli response.
So does Netanyahu’s latest remark even qualify as news? In a sense, yes: the context changed. In Washington, there has been some thought that the war with its terrible human and economic cost might shake apart the stalemate, showing the need for a new and more durable approach. Netanyahu asserted that the context does not justify a new approach—or at least not the new approach on Biden’s mind.
Thanks for reading Differ We Must. My book by that name tells Lincoln’s life story through his meetings with people who differed with him. This Substack explores our modern-day differences.
Links:
Palestinian views as reported on NPR
Netanyahu’s 2022 interview with NPR: