I ran into two excellent and very interesting articles this week regarding the current situation in Israel and Palestine. One is written by famous Israeli peace activist Uri Avnery and deals with the idiocy of rejoicing in Arabic internal confrontations and the fallacy of believing they are good for Israel's interests. The other is written by Haaretz's journalist Zvi Bar'el and deals with the failure of Israeli and international sanctions on Hamas and Israel's pathetic incapacity to present the Palestinian people with a decent diplomatic alternative.
Small fragments, the links and a humble opinion after the fold.
If Arafat were Alive
Bush and his henchmen and henchwomen are trying to set up a pro-American bloc consisting of Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Abbas and Siniora. On the opposite side there is the "axis of evil" consisting of Iran, Syria, Hizbullah and Hamas.
But is this good for Israel? It is good for the continuation of the war against the Palestinians, for annexation and the building of settlements. It is not good for the termination of the historic conflict with the Palestinians, the ending of the occupation and the laying down of arms.
There is no chance of making peace with Mahmoud Abbas, nor would it have any value, without the full support of Hamas. But even a Fatah-Hamas partnership would not be broad enough to ensure a peaceful future for Israel. It would need the support of the whole Arab world...
...This can be achieved, provided the Palestinian people are united and the Arab world is united. That means the agreement of Syria, Hizbullah, Hamas and also Iran, which is of course not Arab.
Therefore, if one wants peace, one will not rejoice in face of the bloodshed in Gaza and in Lebanon. We have nothing to laugh about when Arab hits Arab. Woe to such laughter.
As long as we impose sanctions
The Israeli assumption that it would be enough to apply heavy economic pressure and arrest members of the Palestinian parliament and government ministers to overturn the election results, turned out, as expected, to be mistaken. Like in Iraq, which existed for 13 years under a regime of sanctions, or Libya, which endured 11 years of sanctions, the citizenry suffers and barely survives, yet does not take to the streets to protest against the failures of the government that represents it. Standing steadfast against sanctions imposed by an occupier is still considered national heroism. Donations, waiving salaries and a great deal of voluntary activity somehow manage to keep the health and education systems in operation. They are continuing to teach at the universities and even artistic work has not come to a halt.
But unlike other sanction regimes, Israel is setting conditions but not promising anything in return. Thus, even if Haniyeh starts wearing a skullcap and Khaled Meshal begins humming Hatikva, and even if Abbas makes it mandatory to teach the heroic story of Masada in Palestinian schools, Israel does not want and is unable to propose a diplomatic alternative that would lead to the establishment of an independent and democratic Palestinian state. It does not want to - because any such proposal would mean a withdrawal from most of the territories and the dismantling of most of the settlements. It is unable to - because there is no government of Israel.
Peace is slipping away faster than ever and guess who is not helping but instead making the situation worse. By exacerbating internal warfare among Arabs and supporing Olmert in his reckless sanctions, the United States is making sure a peaceful solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains impossible. At this pace, the Messiah will take a lot less in bringing God's kingdom than the Israelis and Palestinians will take in signing a permanent-status agreement.
If I'm going to support a presidential candidate in the primaries, he better have some really good ideas.
So far, I'm hearing only excuses.
I would apreciate any comments, even more if they can remain civil and focused on the substance.
Salam
Shalom