On Dec. 8, five days after a Palestinian organizer was sentenced by an Israeli military court to almost ten months in jail, the European Union voiced its disapproval. Murad Shteiwi, a resident of the West Bank town Kufr Qaddum had been called a “prisoner of conscience” by Amnesty International, and European diplomats echoed the distinction. The EU missions in Jerusalem and Ramallah described Shteiwi as “deeply committed to non-violence.” His prison term, they said, was “intended to prevent him and other Palestinians from exercising their legitimate right to protest.” They also claimed to be “concerned by…his further suspended sentence in case he again participates in demonstrations.”
“Mr Shteiwi was arrested on 29 April on charges of participating in and organizing illegal demonstrations,” the European envoys noted–a reference to the Israeli military law under which Palestinians in the occupied territories live, and the protests that Shteiwi had led.
While they declined to publicly appeal for Shteiwi’s freedom, the Europeans’ rather timid statement nonetheless contrasts with the State Department’s complete silence on his treatment–a void confirmed to The Sentinel last week.
“In response to your query, we don’t have anything on Murad Shteiwi and defer to the Israelis,” a department spokesperson said in an email sent on Dec. 23. The query had been submitted by The Sentinel four days earlier.
The difference highlights the US-EU rift on Israel-Palestine, and what seems to be European foreign ministers’ diminishing threshold of tolerance for Israeli abuses.
This has come to the fore in recent weeks, as the US and EU have pushed competing visions for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. The European Parliament, on Dec. 17, voted overwhelmingly in favor “recognition of Palestinian statehood and the two-state solution” dependent on “the development of peace talks.” The move came after similar symbolic resolutions were passed by national parliaments in Britain, Sweden, Ireland, and France. The US–ahead of a possible UN Security Council resolution on the creation of a Palestinian state–is reiterating that it opposes a “unilateral” call for Israeli withdrawal; a stance that puts the State Department in line with Israel.
Given the prerequisites attached to the resolution passed by Brussels, the discrepancy might be a clash of style more than substance. But by rushing to defend Israel’s line, Washington is effectively undermining whatever else it says about supporting lasting peace and Palestinian statehood – backing the Israeli position means greenlighting the erasure of Palestine. In July, after Israeli forces started leveling Gaza, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said there “cannot be a situation, under any agreement, in which we relinquish security control of the territory west of the River Jordan.” This is perfectly in line with the Prime Minister’s rank-and-file. His party, Likud, does not recognize a Palestinian state, and refers to the occupied territories as “Judea and Samaria.” Meanwhile, the population of Jewish-only West Bank settlements has grown by 25 percent between 2009 and 2014, outpacing the population growth of Israel by almost three-fold. And on Christmas Eve, Israeli officials announced approval of 380 more illegal settlements in occupied East Jerusalem. The only real “unilateral” action on statehood here is Israel’s ongoing destruction of what remains of Palestine.
Europe, on the other hand, is at least attempting pressure Israel to restart negotiations—even if its calls for Palestinian statehood are based on conditions, and fail to reflect the desire of many in the occupied territories. This reflects what The New York Times reported as its diplomats’ “years of mounting frustrations” over Israeli settlements and its military’s brutal tactics. In the wake of Israel’s often-indiscriminate and brutal offensive in the Gaza strip, European foreign ministers issued a joint statement saying that the “future development of relations with both the Israeli and Palestinian partners will also depend on their engagement toward a lasting peace based on a two-state solution.”
It must be noted that this, too, is controversial to many Palestinians who argue that a two-state solution will preserve Israel’s apartheid system. The injustice at the heart of the conflict, they say, is not the effective disappearance of 1967 borders, but Israel’s 1948 creation, which resulted in mass expulsions, and the establishment of a system that withholds full citizenship from people of certain religions. A single secular state, they argue, is the only system that can create long-term stability.
But US commitment to the already-contentious two-state solution is questionable, as mentioned before, given the way American officials seem unperturbed by the expansion of Israeli settlements. In a Dec. 4 Ha’aretz story, an anonymous source claimed the Obama administration was considering punishing Israel for continuing its colonialist project–via UN Security Council votes, or bans on material support for their colonial entities. While White House spokesperson Josh Earnest said that settlement expansion is “counterproductive,” he described the report as “completely unfounded and without merit.”
In this vein, too, the US and Europe don’t seem so different. A top EU diplomat denied last month that Europe is prepared to sanction Israel. But, again, in this arena, notable differences between the US and EU exist. The denial, from EU high representative for foreign affairs Federica Mogherini, came only after draft sanctions were published by Ha’aretz. While Al-Jazeera contributor Sharif Nashashibi described the proposed penalties as “not particularly strong,” he also noted the existence of them to be “not cause for Israeli celebration.”
“The tide of European public opinion continues to turn against Israel–this cannot be indefinitely ignored or defied,” he wrote.
Which could explain why the EU decided to tacitly rebuke Israel for imprisoning Shteiwi. He embodies Israel’s determination to wipe Palestine off the map, and the resulting outcry around the world. Since 2011, Shteiwi has led weekly peaceful protests in Kufr Qaddum against road closures and land theft by the nearby Israeli settlement of Kedumim. It was for these activities he was arrested in the spring – “under Israeli ‘Military Order 101’ of 1967 for organizing and participating in the weekly protests,” the Palestinian news website Electronic Intifada reported.
Europe’s recognition of this — albeit a superficial one — reinforces the narrative it’s becoming less politically palatable for EU leaders to tolerate Israel’s actions. US silence on Shteiwi’s imprisonment signals to the world that it doesn’t even believe its own statements about settlements being “counterproductive.”
