Meir Ettinger – The Trump Plan

The Trump Program Activation Mechanism
[the following is a google translation to English]

Many have written about the dangers of the Trump program. Meir Ettinger wants to explain what needs to be done to stop the dangerous program, and more on how to stop the following programs

As I began to write this article, I planned to devote much of it to explaining the dangers of the Trump program, a program I have written about several times over the past two years. However, in the last weeks at the mercy of the Lord there has been a significant awakening and disillusionment of many in the ideological right from the illusion of "sovereignty".  And since they are already more talented than I am, explaining and writing about the illusion of sovereignty in the "century deal" which is nothing but a Palestinian state in disguise, one can move on and engage in the question - what needs to be done to stop the dangerous plan. And more than that, how do we stop the following programs. To do this, it is necessary to analyze what mechanism or mode of thinking that repeatedly produces such "magic" solutions based on the division of the land.

Reading the American plan shows that it is based on the desire to freeze the situation as it is, and to build a "pragmatic" plan that will not require the evacuation of anyone from their home to promote the "two-state for two peoples" idea, by which the Americans want to overcome the biggest obstacle that has come in recent years:  Facing the establishment of the Palestinian state: the almost absolute majority of the Jewish public who opposes the evacuation of settlements, and the understanding that there will be no further disengagement.

The Centennial Plan is based on the existing "status quo" where Jews actually sit on less than ten percent of Judea and Samaria if we remove the Jordan Valley from the equation.

The Oslo process and the construction freeze that preceded it stopped the settlement project in Judea and Samaria, far from the goal set by the "Gush Emunim" pioneers. The country still has much left for it, but since then hardly anyone has challenged the […] concept that set the formula for a clean Arab autonomous entity from Jewish settlement. Even the most eloquent speakers of the Yesha Council accept the premise that Areas A and B are no longer in their settlement destinations.

We have been standing for over 25 years since the Oslo Accords were signed. For proportions, more years have passed in the Oslo era of colonial settlement than in the pre-Oslo era.  The right did not make a regular and practical requirement for the remedy of sin and the resumption of the settlement in all Judea and Samaria started by the "Gush Emunim".

In recent years (more or less since the disengagement), the flag of Eretz Israel, which was the symbol of the God-fearing believers in redemption by nature, was taken off the mast and replaced many flags, none of which succeeded in replacing the enthusiasm and adherence of the Jewish community. Combining a paradoxical experience of despair with a sense of exhaustion, Eretz Yisrael came down to public priority.

The century deal, and the fact that it is now clear - that even in the right, and in the settlement there is a conceptual willingness for territorial compromise under certain conditions, shows how essential it is to raise the flag of Israel again, and to act urgently to change the existing status quo, in a public struggle, and to settle it in their territory. political, legal and political.

Before I talk about the challenge that is today's order, I want to explain a significant point about how I perceive public struggles on settlement issues, and in any case touches on the time we are facing today's "Century Plan"

After a decade of struggles, almost since the disengagement, and attempts to expand the communities and exit the fences, and countless struggles with the civilian administration and a determined system to imprison Jewish settlement within its borders, in the last two years it became clear that "there is a [payment] for your action", it began with the decision of the system "release pressure "Hill Hills and an alternative to the establishment of agricultural farms, which have evolved into dozens of new settlements, at a pace of development and growth that is reminiscent of the late 1990s until the Talia Sasson report, in which dozens of outposts that have already become actual settlements were established.

The new reality also requires a reassessment of the situation, and an understanding of what the new tasks are as a result of understanding the reality. It is clear to me that the establishment of outposts such as those we fought for 7 or 10 years ago is not needed today, when the PA was breached definitions that were completely blocked a decade ago. In general, if and as the sovereignty discourse progresses, the principle struggle for territory, which was very important in the not too distant past, if we are close to the reality that free local councils will be given to build in restricted areas adjacent to localities, the outposts will change, and will look at the practical need for grip on the land in the face of hostile takeover.

This progress, like all progress, should be just a lever for us to continue the struggle for Israel. What is the point of this fight?

Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria, including the history of Jewish settlement in Eretz Israel, has always been fought in battles, and never in the way of the king. Almost every locality, every neighborhood, or street was built not in the favor of the government, or despite its laziness. When I talk to people about this fight, I usually draw the Container Line model:

The system's "containment line" is the same imaginary line that can be drawn that represents the applicant's toolbox to stretch the strap, and determine facts in the field, within what the system is ready to contain and receive. This line is dynamic and constantly changing. And it divides the activity scene into three parts. In this first part, which is within the containment line, there is the possibility of operating in a normative framework, where localities are built through building permits, full or partial, in which the vast majority of the settler establishment operates.

The second part is the containment line itself - where those who try to stretch the line without tearing it are a pioneering, high-risk, but groundbreaking arena. The course of action there is by trial and error, not every successful attempt, but resistance is met with submission and decree of fate.

On the other side of the containment line is the 'forbidden domain', these are the challenges that the system is not ready to contain now and is determined to fight with all its might. If, for example, a decade ago, the system struggled with any settlement outside the fences, it now contains, to some extent or another, new settlement points on state land, eye-catching or partially coordinated. The activity beyond the containment line is an activity of struggle - a public or practical struggle, and it is usually not rewarding;

In my opinion, the line of containment is almost always determined precisely by the activity of those snakes who jump into the forbidden field, usually they do not reap the fruits themselves. A bit like the one that storms a barbed wire fence and lies on it, until all the soldiers pass it and it stays last. The existence of sovereignty, and of new settlement, depends on our ability to understand what the new goal we must set and fight for.

A Trump Plan Map that demonstrates prominently how to draw a map that contains the existing settlement and will not prevent the partition of the country, clarifies what is the next, so urgent challenge - to change the settlement map and cancel Oslo - conceptual and practical, by deploying settlement points in the heart of the area defined in a Trump plan map as intended to establish a Palestinian state

This is not an easy challenge, it is not like setting up an outpost hundreds of kilometers or kilometers from an existing settlement, to settling in the depth of the territory, more and more in the area that is currently in practice in Arab control, not logistically, not in the security field, and not the ability to raise pioneering families, but since this is the challenge we face - it is certainly possible.

Without dismantling the Trump program's operating mechanism, which has been imposed on us since Oslo and has become a habit of ushering in the absence of a Jewish presence in the vast majority of Judea and Samaria, we will continue on the same path whose ultimate goal is to divide the land

What does this actually mean? As I wrote before, in any destination beyond the system's containment line, it is clear from the outset that success will only come after a long and complex struggle. We will not be naïve that if we only rise to settlement points outside of the strips that the system currently allows and contains, we will be able to hang on the next morning. But if we set ourselves this goal as the next challenge clearly, we will succeed in that as well.

No one knows if the "century deal" will actually come to fruition, but in any case, we must be prepared and practiced for "command day" to increase as many settlement points as we can, at the depth of the territory designated for the Palestinian state, in such a way as to disarm the same mechanism of operation - the existence of This problematic status quo. Either way, even if the EZA decides to repeal, set this target as our next goal - in order to prevent the recurrence of these containment battles every few years. I believe it is a possible and viable task in the field of practical and conceptual forces to implement it, if we succeed.

See you in a few months.