Israeli Reactions to Netanyahu's Bar Ilan Speech

Israelis respond to Binyamin Netanyahu's Bar Ilan speech today.

Nahum Barnea in Yediot Acharonoth:

Three words will remain from the speech at Bar Ilan University: "demilitarized Palestinian state." These are not new words. Ehud Barak uttered them at Camp David, Ariel Sharon said them at Latrun, Ehud Olmert said them at Annapolis. Nevertheless, under the circumstances, they have significance.

 They clarify that if there should be a resolution to the conflict, that is what it will look like. Not autonomy, not something less than a state, not annexation to Israel, not a return to Egyptian or Jordanian sovereignty. A state. Except for Benny Begin, Ruby Rivlin and some of the national-religious public and Shas, that is the consensus.

The Greater Israel zealots will say that Netanyahu founded the Palestinian state at Bar Ilan. They have made similar statements about every prime minister since Rabin, including Netanyahu. That is the nature of the Palestinian state: Israeli prime ministers found it, each one in his turn, and it is not established.

Netanyahu, through his own fault, got into a stalemate in his relationship with the president of the United States. The speech was written as a rescue tool. Netanyahu calculated the manner in which the White House would receive his speech so carefully that he took the trouble to telephone Vice President Joseph Biden at 5:00 PM yesterday afternoon to tell him its main points. What he kept secret from his ministers and his assistants he told Biden, in the hope that when the officials of the White House heard the speech, they would hear the right things.

Ben Caspit in Ma'ariv:

It was one small step for the peace process, on giant leap for Binyamin Netanyahu. Even the most difficult of treks has to start somewhere. Yesterday, at Bar Ilan University, Netanyahu took his first small and hesitant step. Welcome, Mr. Prime Minister, to the twentieth century. The problem is that we're already in the twenty first. If Netanyahu had the slightest belief that there was some chance that the Palestinians would be capable of acquiescing to any of the conditions he had set, he would have refrained from saying what he did. That said, Ariel Sharon didn't believe he'd ever evacuate settlements all the while he was building them. The right wing will say today that now the slippery slope has begun, the left wing will say that this was too little too late, but what is really important is what the Americans will say. They are saying that this is an important first step. Now they are waiting for additional ones.

Netanyahu spoke for half an hour yesterday. Thirty minutes of sheer right wing rhetoric aimed at concealing one small leftist statement.

One, single, isolated but significant statement. In the end he uttered those horrible words, what he had only alluded to until today. He said "Palestinian state" and was able to remain alive. Looked to his right, looked to his left, felt for his vital organs and realized much to his amazement: everything is still where it should be, in peace (and security).

Netanyahu wrapped up his painful concession yesterday with almost impenetrable defensive layers. This was not a political initiative, this was an Independence Day speech, or perhaps an address for the eve of Memorial Day. Netanyahu was visibly excited, he erred here and there, which actually goes to show that he is human after all and thus provided some validation to his words. An Obama he is not, but his words yesterday worked for something like three quarters of the people residing in Zion. From this aspect, he did a pretty good job.  If he had delivered this speech before the UN, maybe someone might have been convinced. The "courage and integrity" which he promised were equally divided between the two sides: for almost half an hour Netanyahu displayed honesty and integrity in our favor, and for about half a minute in their favor. However - and one must not forget this - Netanyahu did his best to return home in one piece. To leave Bar Ilan University standing on two feet. In this sense, he was successful. He said the frightening words and ran. Whoever says that only the right wing can make concessions of this kind is correct. Ariel Sharon proved this. Netanyahu has to prove this now.

What was the speech lacking? As promised, there was no road map. He reiterated, just barely, that Israel is committed to all previous agreements, but did not say the name explicitly. Despite the beseeching of both Lieberman and Barak, Netanyahu decided that he does not like the road map and regards it as a kind of death trap. He made no mention of this phrase and as far as he is concerned the road map is better off vanishing in the dark.

 Also the freeze in settlements was not really mentioned. Yes, the settlers are "our brothers and sisters," said Netanyahu and they must be "taken care of", but one must not forget that also Ariel Sharon, until his last day of consciousness, thought that that the orange folks were our brothers and sisters, that even Zambish and his friends were his flesh and blood, and it was for this reason that he formed the Disengagement Administration. So Netanyahu made great efforts not to aggravate the Americans. What will this mean for Maale Adumim, Ariel and the Etzion Bloc? We'll know in the next few days. Will the Americans jump on the two-state statement and allow  construction in the settlements. This is rather hard to believe.

Shimon Shiffer in Yediot Acharonoth:

In Binyamin Netanyahu's Bar Ilan speech one must pay attention to what he did not say together with what he did.

Netanyahu discussed some of the subjects using well-oiled expressions that allowed him to step carefully and annoy no one. He deliberately chose not to mention other subjects at all.

Thus, for example, Netanyahu mentioned - finally, and almost at the end of his speech - the two words "Palestinian state," but did so in a negative, conditional context. Once, he said, "without these two conditions (recognition of the Jewish state and demilitarization), there is real fear that an armed Palestinian state will arise alongside us that will turn into another base for terrorism." The second time, he said, "We cannot be expected to agree in advance to the principle of a Palestinian state without assurance of its demilitarization." The third and most important time, he said, "If the Palestinians recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people, we will be willing, in a future agreement, to reach a solution of a demilitarized Palestinian state alongside the Jewish state."

Netanyahu also spoke about Jerusalem, but settled for a mention of "Jerusalem, the capital of Israel, will remain united" without mentioning the words "Israeli sovereignty," which he used a great deal in the past every time the subject of Jerusalem was mentioned.

Netanyahu refrained from making clear statements even on the subject of halting construction in the settlements.  Which subjects were not mentioned at all in Netanyahu's speech? The illegal outposts, for example. The Obama administration's unequivocal demand of Israel to dismantle the outposts did not get even a trace of a mention from Netanyahu.  

The Golan Heights were not mentioned at all, either. It is possible that Netanyahu believes that at the moment, the American administration does not expect him to open a front in his coalition regarding Syria, or that the Americans believe that Bashar Assad should be allowed to sweat first under their demand that he stop supporting terrorism.

The person not mentioned in the speech was Palestinian Authority Chairman Abu Mazen. Netanyahu mentioned the Palestinian Authority, but not its chairman. He did take the trouble to mention the names of the president of Egypt and King Abdullah of Jordan.

Israel Radio News interviewed Benny Begin, a Likud Minister and son of former Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, about Netanyahu's speech:

Q: A demilitarized Palestinian state-do you agree with these three words?

"Naturally, I do not accept the idea of the establishment of a sovereign Arab state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. But as to your question, and in response to things I saw in the newspaper, I should say that I was not surprised that this phrase was included in the prime minister's speech, which also included important facts that are often missing from the public discourse, particularly in Israel and overseas, and he said important things that relate to the roots of the conflict between us and our neighbors."

Q: When Netanyahu says a demilitarized Palestinian state, can you sleep well at night?

"The prime minister said: it cannot be expected of us to agree from the outset to the idea of a Palestinian state without its demilitarized being assured. He also said: we must first receive answers to our security needs. His conclusion was: we therefore, today, ask of our friends in the international community, first and foremost the US, an explicit commitment that in the final status arrangement, these restrictions be in place. So all of this is not ripe, this is all in the future.

"This has to be accepted by our neighbors. It must recognize that the Jewish people have the right to establish a nation state in the Land of Israel, which they consider Palestine in all of its parts. And we heard their response. Now we have to wait 1,000 years, as the PLO leaders said. So you have to look at the matter as a whole."