The announcement that President Barack Obama will arrive in Israel on March 20 comes after his impressive victory in the 2012 election and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s relative weakening after the January Israeli elections. This is an opportunity for Obama to redefine the terms of reference for the Palestinian question. To do this, it is important that the United States reaffirm that the West Bank and East Jerusalem, occupied in the June 1967 War, is indeed occupied territory and rebuff the ongoing Israeli position that they are not an occupying power there. It is crucial that Obama clarify this legal issue prior to requesting some form of a return to “negotiations” with the Palestinian Authority (PA).
Furthermore, asking Israel to “freeze” settlements — the unfortunate error that Obama made during his first administration — rendered the issue of occupation ambivalent. According to international law, all settlements in an occupied territory are illegal and thus should be dismantled — not frozen. If this issue is clarified, it definitely will include East Jerusalem, where the Netanyahu government continues to allow creeping annexation, a fait accompli. If this is allowed to continue, it would deny the future Palestinian state its rightful capital in East Jerusalem. It is hoped that the president on this visit does not simply ask for a return to “the negotiating table” with the PA, because negotiations under the present conditions cannot be a fishing trip during which the Palestinians are supposed to discover whether they have a right to East Jerusalem as their capital and to the dismantling of settlements in the West Bank. Otherwise, and in light of the developments throughout the Arab world, equivocation on Israel being dealt with as an occupying power would trigger further delays in resolving this crisis in a manner that responds not only to the rights but also to the aspirations of the Palestinians.
