The mayor of the Samaria Regional Council Yossi Dagan returns from the inauguration of Trump as President with good feelings regarding a supportive administration aware of Israel’s security needs and connected to the values of the heritage of the Jewish people in Judea and Samaria, and yet he is convinced: The ball of sovereignty has never been in Washington’s court, but in Jerusalem’s.
For Yossi Dagan, mayor of the Samaria Regional Council, this was the second time he attended the inauguration of Donald Trump as President of the United States. His mobilization to the Republican campaign both in Israel and among Jewish and Evangelical Christian communities in the United States have made him a familiar figure in the corridors of the Republican Party and a personality who, for many senior Republicans, bridges political reality with biblical history.
In the interim between the two inaugurations, Dagan conducted a systematic and structured campaign to strengthen the connection between the Samarian landscape and Jewish history in the Land of Israel and the politicians who are now occupying the important and influential offices of the world. When we speak to him about his impressions from conversations with the new administration’s senior officials and their attitude toward the future of Judea and Samaria, Dagan ties these matters with the same channels of communication that have strengthened over the past decade.
An insight that emerged from the expulsion from Gush Katif and Northern Samaria was that one must operate in the political power centers in Israel and the United States. This led to the inception of a significant group in the Likud, dominant activity vis-a-vis journalists and influencers in Israel, and the activity in Washington and Brussels. “I realized that this was the way to develop and bring one million residents and sovereignty to Judea and Samaria,” says Dagan.
These connections, he relates, included reciprocal visits and hosting of members of congress along with prominent, influential American journalists at Jewish historical sites, e.g., Joseph’s Tomb, the Tomb of Joshua bin Nun and other sites, visits that were described by personalities like Mike Huckabee, the new American ambassador to Israel, as the most moving of their lives. “The visits here generate knowledge, significant force, commitment and unmediated connection to Samaria,” he says.
There are many supporters of Israel in the administration, but not exclusively
A short time before Trump’s second inauguration, Dagan launched the Congressional Lobby for Judea and Samaria. The lobby’s first mission was to take action to rescind sanctions imposed by the Biden administration on Jewish residents and right-wing organizations in Israel and to pass a law prohibiting the use of the term “West Bank” and use only of the term “Judea and Samaria” in its place. “But,” emphasizes Dagan, “above all, our objective as a state is to facilitate sovereignty. This is our overarching objective that we must establish for ourselves in the coming years.”
Is this the next significant step that Trump will take in relation to Israel? Yossi Dagan prefers to place responsibility for this and the ability to implement it on the shoulders of the Israeli government. “The ball was never in Washington’s court. It was, is, and will continue to be in Jerusalem’s court. The one who must and is able to make the decisions to apply sovereignty in Judea and Samaria is the Israeli government alone. Anyone who expects the US administration to be coerced into the application of sovereignty is either causing himself or us to fail. Trump is a great friend of Israel, but he is not the Prime Minister of Israel.
Dagan notes that while the Trump administration is composed of many supporters of Israel, it is important to be aware that there are also some who are hostile to it, even if they do not constitute the majority. He further emphasizes that Trump’s interests are manifold and global. Russia, China, North Korea, Greenland, Latin American immigration, the economy, and more fill his agenda and his considerations are wide-ranging and first and foremost, the interests of America.
“In this context I am a disciple of Ben-Gurion who determined that what matters is what the Jews do and not what the gentiles say. This principle is also valid regarding the question of sovereignty. Even in the Biden era, I contended that we should take the necessary steps for our benefit, and all the more so, now. In the current administration one may be more daring and do more, but we need not seek the approval of the United States. It is also possible to disagree with them as friends and say that we appreciate them but this is what we consider to be for Israel’s benefit.”
“I reject the statement that sovereignty is predicated on the American administration approving it in advance and in public. I reject it both on the practical level and in principle. We are a sovereign state and one of the reasons that October 7th happened to us was that we relied on doctrines that come from abroad and less on ourselves,” says Dagan.
Unprecedented admiration for the people in Israel
“For twelve years already, I have been going there to conferences in Congress and the Senate, and the amount of support and admiration we received there was unprecedented. People in the United States understand today that we are together, that radical Islam is threatening the entire world, and we are the barrier, we are the test case. What happens in Gaza and in Judea and Samaria will determine the future of human civilization. People stood in line to receive a lapel pin with the Israeli flag and the logo of the Samaria Regional Council. This admiration must be translated into action, but as one who is active and present there, it is clear to me that the decision on sovereignty is not theirs.”
Sovereignty, Dagan reminds, has always been applied in Israel in defiance of the American position, so it was in West Jerusalem, so it was in East Jerusalem, and so it was in the Golan Heights. He adds a caution against reverting to the template with which Trump sought to promote a deal in his previous term. “Then they sought to apply sovereignty only to the settlement blocs and establish a terrorist state in the heartland of the country, which would have transformed Kfar Saba into Kfar Azza. I am warning now against applying sovereignty only to the blocs, for that would mean uprooting the communities outside the blocs, including the relinquishment of security needs and of biblical sites. We are talking about red lines that the government will be unable and presumably unwilling to cross”.
“I reckon that there will be opposition from the administration to the step of applying sovereignty, but this is an administration that is both personally and ideologically tied to us, and the partnership with it is robust, so even if there is opposition and perhaps even anger, this is a positive administration that will not fight with us as a Biden administration would. Disagreement is legitimate between friends,” he says, adding an assessment that already now “there are powerful forces in the United States, including in the new administration, that are seeking to promote a peace initiative with Saudi Arabia. This is an important agreement in the construction of an alliance against the Iranians, but we must beware of those who will seek to force us to pay for the agreement by abrogating sovereignty or recognizing a Palestinian state.
We will need to clarify that sovereignty is one thousand times preferable to an agreement with Saudi Arabia. This is eternal life as opposed to transitory life.”
The interview was first published in Issue 18 of the Sovereignty Journal. Click here for the issue.