Report: Trump won't oppose applying Israeli law to settlements

American peace plan reportedly includes provision for all Israeli towns over Green Line to remain under Israeli control.

David Rosenberg ,

Donald Trump
Donald Trump

The Middle East peace plan drawn up by the White House includes a provision recognizing Israeli control over Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria – along with tacit acceptance of steps by Israel to apply Israeli law over those areas, according to a report by Channel 12 Sunday night.

The White House has not commented on its much-anticipated plan for a final status agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, which is expected to be released after the Shavuot and Ramadan holidays.

But according to a report by Channel 12 Sunday evening, the plan will recognize Israeli control over all Jewish communities over the pre-1967 Green Line, with the understanding that no Israeli towns will be required to evacuate.

The plan, often referred to as the “Deal of the Century”, also reportedly recognizes Palestinian Authority control over Arab population centers in Areas A and B in Judea and Samaria – areas which were granted autonomy under the Oslo agreements.

Channel 12 commentator Amit Segal reported that the Trump administration’s peace plan includes not only recognition of Israeli and Palestinian Authority control over Jewish and Arab towns respectively, but also includes tacit acceptance of Israeli steps to apply civil law over parts of Area C – which remained under the control of the Israeli military, even after the Olso Accords.

Segal suggested that Israel would not be encouraged, however, to openly declare its annexation of parts of Area C in Judea and Samaria, but instead could pass laws applying Israeli civil law to Jewish towns in Area C.

This would follow the model of Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights, Segal noted.

In 1981, Israel passed the Golan Heights Law, applying Israeli civil law directly to the Golan and ending the military administration of the area. While the move technically amounted to annexation, the law did not use the words “annexation” or “sovereignty”, but rather used the phrase “extending Israeli law”.