Fateful Triangle

Israel and Palestine: Historical Backgrounds2044.2.2 ReactionsThe immediate occasion for Benvenisti’s revelations was the recentlyannouncedReagan Peace Plan, which called for a settlement freezewhile stating that “America will not support the use of any additionalland for the purpose of settlement.” The latter statement was a bitironic, as the U.S. press was kind enough not to observe, in the light ofReagan’s role in setting off the land grab that led to the currentsituation. The statement is also false, since the Reagan administrationmoved at once to increase aid to Israel, and as noted earlier, the U.S.government has always been scrupulous in avoiding any supervision orother arrangements that might serve to restrict the use of the lavishAmerican funding in conformity with the stated policy of denying supportfor settlement in the occupied territories. In fact, in his meetings withBegin, Reagan was careful to avoid the question of settlements, a factbrought out in a “well-documented” analysis by Senator John Glenn,whose plausible conviction is “that what heads of government say toeach other through emissaries or in public pronouncements is far lessimportant than what they say to each other in private, face to face.”“The consent that the Israelis have obviously read into a consistentrecord of silence on the part of the President over at least a year and ahalf has carried the de facto annexation of the West Bank by Israel veryclose to, if not beyond, the point of no return.” 58 The message sent byliberal Democrats was still clearer, as they spearheaded the effort toincrease aid to Israel even beyond the increases advocated by theReagan administration.To put the matter in slightly clearer terms than those employed in themedia and other commentary, the U.S. once again expressed its supportfor further settlement in the occupied territories, on two levels: first,openly, by offering—in fact, increasing—the aid that will enable theseClassics in Politics: The Fateful TriangleNoam Chomsky