Kerry to Israel: We support you but can't defend ‘right-wing’ agenda In a hard-hitting speech, the secretary of state says, ‘My job above all is to defend the United States of America.'

In a lengthy, at times bitter speech boiling over with frustration, outgoing Secretary of State John Kerry on Wednesday accused the Israeli government of risking future prospects for peace with the Palestinians by adopting the right-wing agenda of the mushrooming Israeli settler movement.

And Kerry did so knowing that, in just three weeks, Donald Trump will likely do his best to undermine everything he just said.


“We cannot in good conscience do nothing and say nothing when we see the hope of peace slipping away,” Kerry insisted in a 70-minute speech in Washington. “Friends need to tell each other the hard truths, and friendships require mutual respect.”

Using language rarely heard from a U.S. secretary of state, Kerry warned that the settlers’ growing political power would eventually force Israel to make a fateful choice: “Israel can either be Jewish or democratic – it cannot be both – and it won’t ever really be at peace.”

And he blasted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in strident terms, calling his ruling coalition “the most right-wing in Israeli history, with an agenda driven by the most extreme elements.” Those elements, Kerry said, are now “defining the future of Israel, and their stated purpose is clear. They believe in one state: greater Israel.”

Kerry painted a dark picture of what that future might look like: “millions of Palestinians permanently living in segregated enclaves in the middle of the West Bank, with no real political rights, separate legal, education, and transportation systems, vast income disparities, under a permanent military occupation that deprives them of the most basic freedoms.”

Using an emotionally charged phrase drawn from America’s history of segregation, Kerry condemned such conditions as “separate and unequal.” “Would an Israeli accept living that way? Would an American accept living that way? Will the world accept it?” he asked.

Kerry’s reproach of a long-standing Middle East ally, which he coupled with a set of principles to help achieve peace between Israel and the Palestinians, came amid a final feud between U.S. President Barack Obama and Netanyahu, who immediately blasted the speech as “biased against Israel.”

Last week, over the fierce objections of Israel and Trump, the U.S. chose to abstain instead of vetoing a U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Israel’s construction of settlements on territory claimed by Palestinians. It wasn’t unprecedented, but the U.S. decision not to shield Israel from such international criticism was the first of Obama’s tenure. It led Netanyahu to accuse Obama and his aides of orchestrating the resolution, which he called a “gang-up,” and to further take the step of openly praising Trump during the sensitive presidential transition period.

Kerry forcefully defended the U.S. decision and denied that the Obama administration had originated or maneuvered in favor of bringing the resolution to a vote. He acknowledged that when U.S. officials were asked for their views on drafts of the resolution, they did not reflexively rule it out, but said that was standard because the ultimate decision would be made by the president and based on the final wording of the largely symbolic measure.

Perhaps the most striking part of Kerry’s speech was his detailed description of the flashpoint issue of Israeli settlements. Kerry laid out statistics -- the number of settlers in the West Bank has grown by 100,000 since just 2009. He discussed geography -- many of the settlements are deep into disputed areas, undermining the notion of a contiguous future Palestinian state. He noted the cost -- protecting settlers adds to the burdens on Israel’s security forces. He also mentioned legal and moral considerations -- settlements being built on private land seized from Palestinians, for instance. And he argued that the longer the disputes fester, the angrier Palestinians will become, not just at Israel but also at the United States, increasing the potential for violence.

Ahead of Kerry’s speech, Netanyahu’s office accused Kerry of “obsessively” dealing with settlements and “barely” touching on what the Israeli leader has long said is the conflict’s root cause: “Palestinian opposition to a Jewish state in any boundaries.”

In his own remarks to the media, Netanyahu said Kerry’s address and the U.S. abstention at the United Nations undermined peace efforts, noting that the resolution singled out East Jerusalem, which includes major Jewish holy sites, along with the West Bank.

"Secretary Kerry said that the United States cannot vote against its own policy, but that's exactly what it did at the U.N.,” Netanyahu said. “And that's why Israel opposed last week's Security Council resolution because it effectively calls the Western Wall occupied Palestinian territory, because it encourages boycotts and sanctions against Israel -- that's what it effectively does -- and because it reflects a radical shift in U.S. policy towards the Palestinians on final status issues, those issues that we always agreed, the U.S. and Israel, have to be negotiated directly, face to face, without pre-conditions."

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, in a statement read out by an aide and reported by Israeli media, declared he was committed to restarting the peace process, with conditions.

“The minute the Israeli government agrees to cease all settlement activities, including in and around Occupied East Jerusalem, and agree to implement the signed agreements on the basis of mutual reciprocity, the Palestinian leadership stands ready to resume permanent status negotiations on the basis of international law and relevant international legality resolutions, including [U.N. Security Council Resolution 2334], under a specified timeframe," Abbas said.

Kerry did not give the Palestinians a free pass. He decried acts of terrorism perpetrated by individual Palestinians and groups such as Hamas, which he said was pursuing “an extremist agenda” and refused “to accept Israel’s very right to exist.” But his harshest words were reserved for Israel and Netanyahu in particular.

“We’ve made countless public and private exhortations to the Israelis to stop the march of settlements. In literally hundreds of conversations with Prime Minister Netanyahu, I have made clear that continued settlement activity would only increase pressure for an international response,” Kerry said, noting that he had “advised the prime minister repeatedly that further settlement activity only invited U.N. action.

“Yet the settlement activity just increased, including advancing the unprecedented legislation to legalize settler outposts that the prime minister himself reportedly warned could expose Israel to action at the Security Council and even international prosecution before deciding to support it.”

Kerry laid out a handful of principles he said would be key to bringing about a lasting peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians. They included several items that have long been considered likely parts of a final agreement, such as having two states along the lines of borders after the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, with agreed land swaps and offering proper compensation to Palestinian refugees. His description of the need for the Palestinians to recognize Israel as a Jewish state included a reference to a 1947 U.N. resolution that called for two states, which could prove a basis for future talks.

But although Kerry has been dogged in his attempts to get the Israelis and Palestinians to come together, like many before him he’ll be leaving office having failed to achieve much and, by his own admission, seeing a hardened lack of trust on both sides.

Well before Trump won the election, Washington foreign policy circles had buzzed with speculation that Obama and Kerry would make one last attempt at bringing Israelis and Palestinians together, though many believed they would do so in the context of a White House win by fellow Democrat Hillary Clinton. On Wednesday, some observers said the fact that Kerry went ahead and gave such a speech sent a poor signal.

“If the administration was really trying to create some sort of a dialogue that led to a two- state solution, why not sequence this in a way that doesn’t make it appear Israel was getting blindsided at the UN and also at the 11th hour?” asked Jonathan Schanzer of the right-leaning Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “This is not the time to be issuing major policy speeches. It’s a time to be wrapping up loose ends, not picking fights with allies.”

Still, Kerry vigorously defended America’s commitment to protecting and supporting Israel, insisting no administration has done more for Israel’s security than Obama’s. He noted that the Obama administration had recently negotiated a 10-year, $38 billion military aid package for Israel and that more than half of America’s foreign military financing goes to the Jewish-majority state.

Kerry’s speech drew flak from Republican lawmakers even before he delivered it. “After allowing this anti-Israel resolution to pass the UN,” House Speaker Paul Ryan tweeted, “Secretary Kerry has no credibility to speak on Israeli-Palestinian peace.”

Netanyahu, meanwhile, has enthusiastically welcomed Trump’s election, with the latest example being a tweet Wednesday indicating that he’s looking past Obama and his aides: “President-elect Trump, thank you for your warm friendship and your clear-cut support for Israel!”

The Israeli government urged Trump to intervene ahead of the 14-0 vote at the Security Council and has since accused the U.S. of initiating the resolution put forth by Egypt.

"We have it on absolutely incontestable evidence that the United States organized, advanced and brought this resolution to the United Nations Security Council. We’ll share that information with the incoming administration. Some of it is sensitive. It’s all true," Netanyahu said in his remarks after Kerry’s speech.

National Security Council spokesman Ned Price on Wednesday sharply rejected allegations that Kerry and national security adviser Susan Rice met with Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat earlier this month to set up a backroom deal, although Kerry did meet separately with Erekat on Dec. 12.

Trump has taken several steps that indicate he will heavily favor Israel during his time in office, to the dismay of Palestinians.

He has chosen David Friedman, a bankruptcy lawyer with close ties to the settler movement, as his ambassador to Israel. Friedman has dismissed the possibility of a Palestinian state and wants to move the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, a move sure to infuriate many in the Arab world who view the ancient city as contested.

In a pair of tweets Wednesday morning, Trump suggested the Obama administration has treated Israel with “total disdain and disrespect.”

“They used to have a great friend in the U.S., but not anymore,” he wrote. “The beginning of the end was the horrible Iran deal, and now this (U.N.)! Stay strong Israel, January 20th is fast approaching!”