If Trump is re-elected and revives Netanyahus ambitions, Australia must have a plan to make the existing suspension permanent.

In November 1967, the passage of UN Security Council Resolution 242, following the Six-Day War, was accompanied by lively debate about language. For some UN members the resolutions call for withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict lacked two vital words. Should it not have been all territories, or the territories, ideally all the territories?

Fast forward 53 years and beneath the hoopla of the US/UAE/Israeli Abraham Accords, signed on September 15, also lurk questions of language and intent.

The joint statement issued by the three countries on August 31 said that the breakthrough in relations between the UAE and Israel (and subsequently Bahrain) resulted in the suspension of Israels plans to extend its sovereignty in the West Bank. The UAEs ambassador in Washington, Yousef Al Otaiba, said the agreement immediately stops annexation and maintains the viability of a two-state solution.

Yet at the same time, Netanyahu declared on Hebrew-language television that there had been no change in my plans for annexation, with full co-ordination with the US.

During an earlier media briefing in Washington, President Trump declared that right now annexation is off the table. I cant talk about some time in the future. He then turned to David Friedman, the US ambassador to Israel (and an unabashed supporter of Israeli settlement activity), asking: Is that a correct statement?

Yes, Friedman replied, the word suspend was chosen carefully by all the parties. Suspend, by definition, look it up, means temporary halt, its off the table now but its not off the table permanently.

Trumps senior adviser on the Middle East, Jared Kushner, offered more in this vein. Israel had agreed not to move forward without US approval. We do not plan to give our consent for some time, said Kushner. It was a discussion that would be had, though not in the near future. Asked about temporary, Kushner defined it, with Trumpian precision, as somewhere between a long time and a short time.

In early September, Reuters reported that differences in the English and Arabic versions of the August 31 joint statement had been seized upon by Palestinians to argue that the UAE had overstated Israels readiness to drop its annexation plans. According to Reuters, the English-language version of the text used suspension, while the Arabic language version talked of Israels plans to annex Palestinian lands being stopped.

A senior UAE official reportedly attributed the differences to a translation issue. The senior PLO figure, Hanan Ashrawi, countered that it was a forked tongue aimed at misleading Arab public opinion.

Whether annexation is truly dead or merely comatose, only time will tell. In the short term, two factors will decide its fate. The first is the outcome of the US presidential election. Democratic contender Joe Biden has made clear his opposition to annexation and declared he will reverse Trump administration actions which I think significantly undercut the prospects of peace.

The second factor involves Netanyahus legal troubles over allegations of corruption and whether he goes to jail. His trial is scheduled to start hearing evidence in January.

In mid-September, the Foreign Minister, Marise Payne, welcomed the normalisation of relations between Israel, the UAE and Bahrain and Israels commitment to suspend plans for West Bank annexations.

There are two things Australia should now do. The first is to use its close relationship with Israel to urge it to abandon annexation altogether, clearly and unequivocally. The second is to consider how it would respond to a perfect storm of a re-elected Trump, an at-large Netanyahu and a resuscitated drive for annexation.

This would demand more than the tardy and featherweight comment by Foreign Minister Payne on July 1 that Australia had raised its concerns with Israel in relation to indications of annexations.

Meaningful action could include marshalling an international effort to impose sanctions on Israel, as Australia did with Russias annexation of Crimea. One prompt and cost-free action would be to close Australias Trade and Defence Office in West Jerusalem.

Opened in March 2019 without fanfare and little real purpose, its stated aim is to complement Austrades work in Tel Aviv. Precisely how is unclear, given that Tel Aviv remains Israels trade and technology capital and headquarters of the Israeli defence establishment.

The perfect storm might not eventuate, sparing the government the awkwardness of taking issue with Israel. Still, the Prime Minister has declared that if need be Australia will openly rebuke a sincere friend on issues such as land appropriations and settlements. Australia should work to make suspension of annexation permanent. But is also needs a plan B.

Peter Rodgers is a former Australian ambassador to Israel who has written two books on the Middle East, Herzls Nightmare one land two peoples and Arabian Plights the future Middle East

First published in Plus61J Media.