editorials
F or the past several months, the focus of most Israel
watchers has been concentrated on the Netanyahu
government’s judicial overhaul proposals. Jurists,
academics, politicians, diplomats and commentators
joined more than 100,000 Israeli demonstrators in
expressing concern about the government’s plan to
change the selection process for justices on Israel’s
Supreme Court and to empower a bare majority of the
Knesset’s 120 members to override almost any Supreme
Court ruling regarding the validity of a Knesset law.

The watchword was “democracy.” It was chanted by
protesters. It was cited by those commenting on the
plan. And while we subscribe to the guiding words of
Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who pledged to
judge the new Israeli government by what it does rather
than by what some of its new members say, we remain
troubled by the government’s steady move to enact the
judicial reform plan as law.

And then, almost out of nowhere, early last week
the Israeli cabinet did something that has the potential
to be even more problematic for the Jewish state
than the vaunted judicial reform plan. The cabinet
unanimously voted to retroactively legalize nine West
Bank settlements that, up to that point, were illegal under
Israeli law. The vote also approved the planned building
of close to 10,000 housing units in existing settlements in
the West Bank, including on land owned by Palestinians.

This was the single biggest settlement announcement
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, left,
and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
ever made. And it was endorsed by Israel’s cabinet
despite what were reported to be very clear and
very direct objections from senior personnel in the
Biden administration in private consultations before
last week’s vote.

Much of the international community considers Israeli
settlements in the West Bank illegal under international
law. And Israel’s Supreme Court has ruled that settlements
cannot be built on private Palestinian land. The retroactive
legalization of illegal settlements and approval of plans
for further construction on Palestinian land is precisely
the kind of “let’s see what they do” development that
Blinken promised would be addressed. But the public
U.S. reaction has been mild. Rather than condemn
the decision, Blinken and the White House joined four
European countries to say they are “deeply troubled”
and “concerned” about the Israeli decision, which they
“strongly oppose.” Those diplomatic expressions were
virtually ignored by most of Israel’s leadership.

There is mounting pressure for the Biden administration
to do something substantive to drive home its profound
disappointment. Some have suggested taking steps that
refl ect a mild rebuke, like canceling a planned meeting or
slow-walking the process for Israeli participation in a U.S.

government program. But until earlier this week, the real
focus was on how President Joe Biden would instruct
his U.N. ambassador to vote when the Security Council
considered a Palestinian-led resolution against Israeli
policy in the West Bank. On Feb. 20 — the day that vote
was supposed to happen — the resolution was tabled,
following what was reported to be intense lobbying by
the U.S. with both the Palestinian Authority and Israel
over a less confrontational approach to deal with the
cabinet’s settlement vote.

For now, there is calm. But we wait to see whether
there will be any consequence to the Israeli cabinet’s
unanimous message of dismissal, disregard and
disrespect to its United States partner. ■
Autocrats Ganging Up on the US
I ran’s president, Ebrahim Raisi, made a three-day visit to
China last week. He was greeted by President Xi Jinping
in an offi cial welcoming ceremony, complete with formal
honor guards. The two leaders attended the signing of
20 bilateral cooperation agreements, including on trade
and tourism. And they issued a number of statements,
including what was widely viewed as a targeted barb at the
United States and Western allies by Xi, who pledged that
“China will unswervingly develop friendly cooperation
with Iran no matter how international and regional
situations change.”
The revitalized relations between China and Iran, and
the ongoing mutual support and trade between Russia
and Iran, are raising concern. Although there is no
indication that the three autocratic states are considering
a formalized security alliance, there is a sense that they
are working hard to fi nd common ground and support
for one another in response to each country’s concerns
about their common nemesis — the United States.

The China-Russia relationship has included signifi cant
arms sales, joint military exercises and cooperation
12 FEBRUARY 23, 2023 | JEWISH EXPONENT
on technology issues. Moscow and Beijing have
worked together to support other autocratic regimes,
to challenge human rights standards and to frustrate
technological norms promoted by the West. And they
have both sought stronger ties with Iran.

Moscow and Tehran have cooperated in Syria to
prop up Bashar al-Assad’s government and to frustrate
U.S. policy in the region. In addition to a history of arms
sales that have strengthened the Iranian military, they
are increasingly developing economic and diplomatic
ties that have helped Tehran in its eff ort to minimize the
impact of signifi cant international sanctions.

Less than two years ago, Iran and China formalized
their relationship through a 25-year strategic partnership
agreement. Reports indicate that Raisi is unhappy with
China’s eff orts under the deal and used last week’s
visit to lobby for more robust Chinese support, beyond
the record amounts of Iranian oil that China is buying.

We know that Raisi got vocal support from Xi. We don’t
yet know many of the other details. On the other hand,
Russia-Iran ties are signifi cant, and growing. Among
other things, Iran is providing drones to Russia to
assist in the Ukraine war eff ort and guidance in the
art of avoiding the limitations of Western sanctions. In
return, Russia is helping Iran with its satellite program
and preferential treatment in gaining access to needed
food supplies.

U.S. diplomats, political leaders and many
commentators have raised concern about the growing
alliances between China, Russia and Iran. In the words
of Hal Brands in a recent analysis on Bloomberg.org, “It’s
easy to understand the logic of this cooperation. All three
autocratic powers seek to preserve and protect illiberal
political systems, push the US out of their geographic
neighborhoods, and roll back a post-Cold War order
dominated by Washington.” And they fi nd strength in
their coordinated eff orts.

Political, economic and strategic alliances among
like-minded nations are nothing new. Nonetheless, it is
important to keep an eye on the growing coordination
among China, Russia and Iran and to be prepared to
respond, as appropriate. ■
State Department photo by Ron Przysucha/ Public Domain
‘Deeply Troubled’ By Settlements