Israeli homes built on land captured in the 1967 war is the perennial go-to blame game for Palestinians' hard line at negotiations. But it's just a negotiating ploy as to which Western leaders are all to eager to engage.
The other day, for example, David Weinberg wrote in
Blame those Damn Settlements that removing the settlements would not alter threats to Israel or Muslim rejectionism of a Jewish national entity:
If it wasn't for the settlements, you see, the Palestinians undoubtedly would recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas would formally forgo the so-called "right" of return for Palestinian refugees. Hamas and Fatah would bury the hatchet. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry would win the Nobel Peace Prize, twice. And the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement would stop seeking to demonize and delegitimize Israel.
If it wasn't for the settlements, the Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Hassan Rouhani would announce an end to Iranian nuclear enrichment activities and the dismantlement of all related nuclear facilities. The Iranians would also stop shipping missiles to the Islamic Jihad and Hamas.
After his litany, Weinberg, of course, acknowledged that he was being facetious and observes, "Settlements are an issue for negotiation, a solvable matter of dispute." It is easier to use settlements as an excuse for the lack of peace. Doing so, lets the Palestinians off the hook. It assumes that Israel has a partner for peace.
When he met with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas earlier this week, that's the approach that President Obama took. Obama said: