The enthusiasm in Israel for the normalization agreement with the UAE has caused some to lose their heads. The Jerusalem Post published an editorial on August 19 claiming that there was no reason for Israel to worry about the proposed sale by the U.S. to the UAE of the top-of-the-line Stealth fighter jet, the F-35, because the UAE – who could ever have thought otherwise? — has no intention of using them against Israel, but only against their common enemy, Iran. So chillax, Israelis, the UAE is truly, madly, your BFF. That was what the Jerusalem Post, and many others, want us to believe. Some suggest that Israel had to give the UAE something – and dropping its opposition to the sale of the F-35s is that something. Apparently, Israel’s decision to halt the extension of its sovereignty over part of the West Bank doesn’t count. Meanwhile, Israel’s military are appalled at the prospect of that sale of F-35s to the UAE
Now come the Saudis to rain a bit more on the parade. The former head of Saudi intelligence, and former ambassador to the United States, the stony-faced Prince Turki al-Faisal, a very powerful man in the Saudi royal lineup though for now he holds no official position, has just published an article in Asharq Al-Awsat, insisting that Saudi normalization of ties with Israel will come only after a Palestinian state is established, “with Jerusalem as its capital.” And in order to create that state, Israel must withdraw to the “1967 lines” — that is, to the 1949 armistice lines that, given the modern and gigantic arsenals the Arabs now possess, would be impossible to defend.
Prince Turki al-Faisal’s remarks are here.
Saudi Arabia’s price for normalizing relations with Israel is the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, a senior member of the Saudi royal family reaffirmed on Friday.
Prince Turki al-Faisal was apparently responding to US President Donald Trump who said on Wednesday he expected Saudi Arabia to join a deal announced last week by Israel and the United Arab Emirates to normalize diplomatic ties….
“Any Arab state that is considering following the UAE should demand in return a price, and it should be an expensive price,” he wrote in the Saudi newspaper Asharq al-Awsat.
“The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has set a price for concluding peace between Israel and the Arabs – it is the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state with Jerusalem as capital, as provided for by the initiative of the late King Abdullah.”
“That 2002 Arab League plan offered Israel normalized ties in return for Israeli withdrawal from all territories – the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem – captured in the 1967 Middle East war, and a Palestinian state there.
“But Prince Turki also voiced understanding for the UAE’s decision, noting that Riyadh’s close ally had secured a key condition – a halt to Israeli annexation plans….
In other words, Turki al-Faisal wants the Arab world to know, the UAE’s example is not to be emulated. The Arabs should demand an “expensive price” from Israel for doing it the great favor of normalizing ties. The Saudi position remains exactly what it was in 2002, when the Saudi King Abdullah’s “peace plan” was adopted by the Arab League. That plan was for Israel to be squeezed back within the 1949 armistice lines, with a nine-mile wide waist at its narrowest point, from Qalqilya to the sea. Israel would have to remove all of its settlements, which now means uprooting nearly a half-million Israelis from their homes in the West Bank, and another 220,00 from their homes in East Jerusalem. Israel would, in the 2002 plan of King Abdullah, again have to give up the Old City, which would mean Jews would no longer be able to pray at their holiest site, the Western Wall, just as they had been prevented from doing between 1949 and 1967.
The Saudi demand entirely ignores – does not mention, does not recognize – the claim Israel has to the entire West Bank, which was part of the territory assigned, according to the Mandate for Palestine, to the future Jewish National Home. Prince Turki al-Faisal has no use for the League of Nations’ Mandate for Palestine, which was based on the widespread recognition, by the civilized powers, of the 3500-year continuous Jewish presence in, and attachment to, the Land of Israel.
Prince Turki’s demand ignores, too, the meaning of U.N. Resolution 242, unanimously passed on November 22, 1967, according to which Israel was allowed to retain territory it won in the Six-Day War if needed so that it might have – in the Resolution’s key phrase — “secure [i.e., defensible] and recognized boundaries.” He appears to believe that U.N. Resolution 242 means what the Arabs tried to make it mean, and failed. They kept demanding that the main author of that Resolution, Lord Caradon, insert a phrase to call for an Israeli withdrawal from “the territories” or, still worse, from “all the territories” that Israel had won “in the recent conflict” (the Six-Day War). Lord Caradon most emphatically rejected those Arab attempts, and U.N. Resolution 242 calls only for an Israeli withdrawal “from territories” it had won in that war. Israel was entitled to hold onto any territory it needed to ensure it had — let’s repeat it one more time — “secure [i.e. defensible] and recognized boundaries.” Both Israeli and American military men have long concluded that for security reasons Israel must hold onto the Jordan Valley, that sits athwart the invasion route from the east. The chief settlement blocs also provide another sort of security, insufficiently recognized: all Israelis, men and women, serve in the IDF and have undergone military training. Israelis in the settlement blocs can be quickly mobilized, in case of need, should major hostilities break out in the West Bank.
Those who thought that the UAE ‘s recent move would lead to the Saudis having a change of heart, who were convinced that the Saudi Crown Prince would follow his good friend the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi in normalizing relations with Israel, that the Saudis surely must have recognized by now the benefit, to them, of a strong Israel – i.e., an Israel not forced to withdraw to the 1949 armistice lines — in confronting their common enemy Iran, now have to think again. Sudan, Oman, Morocco – yes, it would be nice for Israel to have “normalization of relations” with all of them. But it is Saudi Arabia – stony, dour, unrelenting Saudi Arabia – that really counts in this calculus. Perhaps it is time to curb our enthusiasm.