That Old Time Religion: The G-7 Foreign Ministers' Statement on the West Bank

On July 11, G-7 foreign ministers issued a “Statement on the Situation in the West Bank.” The G-7 consists of the United States, Canada, Japan, the UK, France, Germany, and Italy, and the statement was also issued in the name of the “High Representative of the European Union.”

Nothing much new here: Israeli settlements are bad, the two-state solution is good, withholding any funds from the Palestinian Authority is bad.

On settlements, the statement says they all join in “condemning the announcement by Finance Minister of Israel Smotrich that five outposts are to be legalized in the West Bank.” This is no doubt motivated in part by their hatred of Smotrich, but the verb is quite wrong. I can see “condemning” murder, terror, kidnapping, and “rejecting” that legalization. Indeed in the next sentence they “reject the decision by the Government of Israel to declare over 1,270 hectares of land in the West Bank as ‘state lands’.” Building houses should not be treated with language usually reserved for murder.

The statement then goes on to say “The Government of Israel’s settlement program is inconsistent with international law….” It is inconsistent today, in their view, but it is worth remembering that it wasn’t yesterday. On November 18, 2019, then Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said this:

US public statements on settlement activities in the West Bank have been inconsistent over decades. In 1978, the Carter administration categorically concluded that Israel’s establishment of civilian settlements was inconsistent with international law. However, in 1981, President Reagan disagreed with that conclusion and stated that he didn’t believe that the settlements were inherently illegal.

Subsequent administrations recognized that unrestrained settlement activity could be an obstacle to peace, but they wisely and prudently recognized that dwelling on legal positions didn’t advance peace. However, in December 2016, at the very end of the previous administration, Secretary Kerry changed decades of this careful, bipartisan approach by publicly reaffirming the supposed illegality of settlements.

After carefully studying all sides of the legal debate, this administration agrees with President Reagan. The establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not per se inconsistent with international law.

So that wording from the G-7 was a slap at Pompeo and a rejection of the Trump Administration view. One has to assume a second Trump administration will reassert its view, in which case you won’t see another G-7 statement like this week’s.

There’s another problem with the G-7 statement here, and it is definitional: what exactly is the “Government of Israel’s settlement program” that’s being declared illegal? No description is offered. Does it imply that not one single Jew may settle in the West Bank? If so, isn’t that “inconsistent with international law?”

Finally, the G-7 statement says that “maintaining economic stability in the West Bank is critical for regional security. In this context, we take note of the latest transfers of parts of clearance revenues to the Palestinian Authority, but we urge Israel to release all withheld clearance revenues in accordance with the Paris Protocols….”  So, of course, does the Palestinian Authority urge this, and demand that the United States force Israel to do it. Why does Israel ever withhold such funds? Sometimes it is in the immediate aftermath of a terrorist attack. Sometimes it’s domestic politics.

But it’s worth remembering something else: the Taylor Force Act, which became law in 2018 and stated that “The Palestinian Authority’s practice of paying salaries to terrorists serving in Israeli prisons, as well as to the families of deceased terrorists, is an incentive to commit acts of terror.” Until those payments cease, most forms of aid from the U.S. government to the Palestinian Authority may not be made. The payments continue. It is not clear if the State Department is pressuring the Palestinian Authority to end them. As the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs noted,

In 2018, following the U.S. adoption of the Taylor Force Act, Israel also adopted legislation that punishes the PA for its “Play-for-Slay” policy by deducting the sum the PA pays to terrorists for acts of terror from the tax revenue. To date, the PA has lost over 3 billion shekels (approximately $820 million), a sum equivalent to the PA payments to terrorists from 2018 through 2022. So when Abbas urges Washington to release the “Palestinian clearance funds,” he is referring to the sums withheld by Israel from the taxes as a direct result of the PA’s “Play-for-Slay” policy.

Such moral considerations are entirely absent from the G-7 statement. The statement may be correct when it says “maintaining economic stability in the West Bank is critical for regional security,” But it should be obvious that ending the pay for slay program and rewards for terrorism is even more critical for regional security. It’s a pity the G-7 did not find time to mention that.