MK Oded Forer is disappointed by the coalition’s opposition to the legislation calling for sovereignty in the Jordan Valley, accusing it of prioritizing the security of the coalition over the security of Israel, but he promises that when a similar legislation is proposed by the government, his party will support it.
A curious incident occurred recently in the Knesset. It was when the chairman of Yisrael Beiteinu, Member of Knesset Avigdor Lieberman, proposed legislation calling for application of Israeli sovereignty in the Jordan Valley, a move that enjoys broad national consensus and is supported by the entire coalition, but ultimately, although it was supported by members of the opposition, members of the coalition voted against.
It is difficult for MK Oded Forer, a senior member of Lieberman’s party, to conceal his disappointment at the coalition’s decision to oppose the bill, but adds, “Unfortunately, this is not the first time I have been unpleasantly surprised by the coalition’s conduct. We have been accustomed to the fact that Netanyahu says application of sovereignty and votes against it, but that people from the coalition who support the move and have proposed legislation on the subject, mobilized to vote against it, was a great disappointment for me.”
Forer notes that perhaps one could have understood a coalition vote of this kind had there been a significant left-wing component in the coalition that demanded it and there was concern that the government would collapse. But in a coalition that characterizes itself as a right-wing coalition, a vote of that kind is difficult to understand. “After all, this is not some meaningless, inconsequential declaration, but a vital step for Israel’s security, certainly at this time.”
Declarations by ministers who explained their vote by saying that the political conditions had not yet ripened, remind MK Forer of statements by left-wing Knesset members. “This is confusing,” he continues to mock the members of the government and adds, “I thought, perhaps that due to pressure from Biden they voted against, but Trump was elected and the administration is Republican. I do not understand what the political excuse is for this opposition.”
However, in response to our query, Forer clarifies that at the moment that similar legislation is proposed by the government, he and his party will vote in favor. “Of course we will vote in favor,” he says, and reminds, “I am also a co-signer on a covenant that was signed in the Knesset during 2023. I do not think that the question of coalition and opposition is relevant here, but rather one of agenda, certainly when it comes to so significant an issue that is in the consensus. After all, there is no dispute about sovereignty in the Jordan Valley even on the international level. In both the demographic and the security aspects there is no question, and therefore, even in plans presented by the Left, the Jordan Valley is under Israeli control.”
Regarding the content of the legislation, which, as stated, was defeated, and the status of the Arabs of the area to which it relates, Forer says that their number is low and that granting citizenship to those among the Jordan Valley Arabs who are interested, should not create any demographic problem. The Jericho region, which is not currently under Israeli control, is excluded from the proposed legislation that intended to apply sovereignty over the region that is already under Israeli control and includes the Jewish communities, industrial zones, open areas, roadways, archaeological sites and the like. “This would not have hurt anyone, and therefore I do not understand the objection. I would have expected a right-wing government to pounce on this proposal. What better opportunity will you have to garner a consensus of this kind even from those parts of the electorate for whom the issue is not at the core of their agenda, e.g., from parts of the National Camp and Yesh Atid parties who joined the support
Autonomous independence for Arab cantons
And what of Judea and Samaria? In this regard, MK Forer has no magic solutions and is open to hearing suggestions, e.g., autonomous Arab enclaves, mini-emirates of sorts in the format raised by the Middle East scholar Dr. Moti Kedar, but “certainly not a Palestinian state.” Meanwhile, he says, until a solution is found for Judea and Samaria, “we must move forward in places where there is Israeli control and it is possible, e.g., in the settlement blocs and the Jordan Valley.”
“Declarations about sovereignty lead to the fact that we pay a price without actually applying sovereignty. Specifically in the Jordan Valley there was already a declaration by the Prime Minister and there is also a broad consensus in Israeli society, and therefore we should act wisely. Acting wisely means applying sovereignty in the Jordan Valley.”
These statements by MK Forer regarding Judea and Samaria appear to ostensibly contradict the familiar political program of his party chairman, MK Lieberman, according to which territorial exchanges will take place between Israel and the Palestinian state. Forer reiterates his rejection of the term “Palestinian state” and clarifies that the idea behind the move is the principle that without loyalty there is no citizenship. “If the residents of Umm al-Fahm do not consider themselves loyal to the State of Israel, there is no reason that they should have Israeli citizenship. I need not uproot them from their homes. They will continue to live there but their identity card will be Jordanian or of some other country. But they cannot remain Israeli citizens.”
Regarding past statements regarding moving the border in a manner that would remove Arab cities from Israel’s borders, Forer reiterates that “we are not talking about a Palestinian state and there will not be a Palestinian state between the sea and the Jordan. There is no question about that. We are talking about what citizenship there will be and who will control the territory. Our plan speaks of cantons that would be under Palestinian self-rule. Dr. Mordechai Kedar’s plan is excellent in that it provides control in accordance with the local tribal character of each area, which is in keeping with the characteristics of this society. I do not believe in Palestinian nationalism as a nation because there was never one. There are tribes and clans according to regions in Hebron, Shechem, etc. Therefore, the Arabs of Judea and Samaria do not consider the Palestinian Authority a government that is acceptable to them, but rather as a hostile takeover by a crime family of sorts.”
The interview was first published in Issue 18 of the Sovereignty Journal. Click here for the issue.