In recent days, we have been exposed to a series of security-political measures that Israel is required to provide in preparation for President Biden's visit.
"Achievement" Biden's brief move to Israel, when in fact on his way to Saudi Arabia, is accompanied by significant concessions from Israel to the Palestinians.
In less washed-up words, Bennett or Lapid's photo-op with the US president - whoever wins "VIP survival" - prime minister and alternate - involves a fee.
Considerable.
At the top is the general demand from Israel to "calm the area."
There is nothing like retrieving this so asymmetrical equation to lead to a chain of unilateral concessions from Israel.
Like the need to calm the spirits during both Ramadan and Pesach, even now the request from Israel not to be a factor in her heart - does not cause any shock among the prime minister, his successor or anyone in his government.
Israel is also being asked to refrain from demolishing Palestinian homes, which has already led to the demolition of the homes of the murderous terrorists from the terrorist attacks in Dizengoff and Ariel.
There will also be avoidance of evacuating Palestinians, such as the requirement for the IDF not to enter Area A, in order to prevent escalation, of course.
Alongside these lawsuits, which produce a false picture of IDF activity in Judea and Samaria (as such that does not stem from daily Palestinian aggression or murderous attacks), other proposals have been made that are nothing less than an explicit appeal to Israeli sovereignty.
Such a request, presented in an almost trivial tone, is the placement of Palestinian "officials" at the Allenby crossing, about which we have been told that in any case most of the passers-by are Palestinians.
Just forgot to mention that the officials - are representatives of the Palestinian Authority;
The crossing - is Israel's international political border;
And all this is happening on the border of the Jordan Valley, with all the security-strategic implications that come with it.
Also, after Bennett and Lapid almost succeeded in attributing to them the achievement of preventing the establishment of an American consulate for the Palestinians in Jerusalem, it became clear that within the same gestures the "Ministry of Palestinian Affairs" was established - in Jerusalem.
The unit will be directly subordinate to the US State Department, and not to the US Embassy in Israel.
This change was perceived on the American side as the infrastructure for the same consulate, which had only "avoided" its establishment.
Finally, it was further stated that during the visit itself there will be a tour of the east of the city, without official Israeli escort.
And if it seemed like it was just a symbolism, in practice the discussion of the construction plan in the E1 area would also be stopped.
This first course, which is served ahead of Biden's visit, was preceded by the aperitif presented by Lapid and Bennett during Foreign Minister Linken's visit last March.
The infrastructure was laid even then.
What was called in innocent terms "the summit of the Negev," and ostensibly revolved around the strengthening of the Avraham agreements, was nothing less than a political act to reverse their meaning.
The agreements, which were first and foremost peace agreements between Israel and the Gulf states, agreements that anchored the (new) principle of "peace for peace", while removing the "Palestinian problem" from its necessary position in any other political outline in the region - became a regional alliance That there is a lever - for the sake of the Palestinians.
Accordingly, the speeches that signed the conference, from all foreign ministers, no longer mentioned the alleged Iranian threat to his name, but spoke, unfortunately, about the need to promote a two-state program, namely: a Palestinian state.
Therefore, despite trying to paint a political drama, it does not really matter if Bennett or Lapid will side with Biden in a few weeks.
The political infrastructure has already been laid.
Biden will not conclude his visit to the region without a direct political achievement.
And such an achievement will, of course, involve another significant political concession - and it too will not be accompanied by Israeli resentment.
Since the prime ministers are unwilling to oppose any American policy, either, on the Iranian issue or on the Palestinian issue, the only question left is: what will be the main course?
Whether served by Bennett or by Lapid - its taste will be no different.
The two, at most, are begging for a policy handed down to them as representatives of a protectorate.
Were we wrong?
Fixed!
If you found an error in the article, we'll be happy for you to share it with us