House Democrats rebuke State Department for 'reversal' on Israeli settlements

House Democrats rebuke State Department for 'reversal' on Israeli settlements
© Getty
More than 100 House Democrats condemned on Friday the State Department’s recent decision to state the U.S. position on Israeli settlements as being in line with international law.

The move by the State Department is being criticized as a reversal of more than four decades of U.S. policy on the status of communities built by Israel on the West Bank, territory it seized from Jordan during the 1967 Six-Day War.

In a letter to Secretary of State Mike PompeoMichael (Mike) Richard PompeoEstablishment-backed Marshall defeats Kobach in Kansas GOP Senate primary Biden offers well wishes to Lebanon after deadly explosion Overnight Defense: Marines find human remains after training accident | Fourth service member killed by COVID-19 | Pompeo huddles with Taliban negotiator MORE, the Democratic representatives wrote to express “strong disagreement" with the State Department’s decision to abandon a 1978 legal opinion that viewed the Israeli settlements as “inconsistent with international law.”

ADVERTISEMENT
“The State Department’s unilateral reversal on the status of settlements, without any clear legal justification, therefore has offered a tacit endorsement of settlements, their expansion, and associated demolitions of Palestinian homes,” the lawmakers wrote.

Pompeo announced on Monday that the U.S. believes “the establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not per se inconsistent with international law.” He said the decision came after a legal review of U.S. policy stemming back from 1978.

The 1993 Oslo Accords included that the final status of settlements would be decided in a negotiated solution between Israelis and Palestinians. Both Republican and Democratic administrations have criticized settlement expansion as harming a two-state solution.

In 2016, the U.S. abstained from voting at the United Nations Security Council on the decision affirming that Israeli settlement activity in the West Bank and east Jerusalem as a “flagrant violation of international law.”

The decision, the lawmakers wrote, has discredited the United States as an “honest broker” of peace between Israeli and Palestinians and follows other decisions by the Trump Administration that they believe has “severely damaged prospects for peace.”

ADVERTISEMENT
This includes moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, closing the Palestinian mission in Washington and halting aid to Palestinian programs in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

The lawmakers also accused the administration of emboldening Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin NetanyahuBenjamin (Bibi) NetanyahuMORE in his efforts to annex parts of the Jordan Valley outside of a negotiated peace agreement with the Palestinians.

The letter was led by Rep. Andy LevinAndrew (Andy) LevinOVERNIGHT ENERGY: 20 states sue over Trump rule limiting states from blocking pipeline projects | House Democrats add 'forever chemicals' provisions to defense bill after spiking big amendment | Lawmakers seek extension for tribes to spend stimulus money House Democrats add some 'forever chemicals' provisions to defense bill after spiking major amendment US, Mexico set for new post-NAFTA trade era MORE (D-Mich.) and joined by 106 Democrats.

Rep. Gerry ConnollyGerald (Gerry) Edward ConnollyUSAID appointee alleges 'rampant anti-Christian sentiment' at agency House committee requests hearing with postmaster general amid mail-in voting concerns GOP coronavirus bill includes .75 billion for construction of new FBI building MORE (D-Va.), a signatory to the letter, told The Hill he viewed Pompeo’s announcement as “an abrupt departure from longstanding U.S. policy, Republican and Democrat.”

House Democrats are trying to bring a resolution supporting a two-state solution to the Israeli and Palestinian conflict to a vote on the floor, held up since July. They have 220 sponsors including one Republican, Connolly said.

“I think what Pompeo did this week, I think it underscores why we should have passed [this resolution] in July. We’re now watching events on the sideline when we could have addressed it as the Congress of the United States and injected at least that forceful point of view long before events have unfolded, that make it all so much more difficult."