The first hint of fall is in the air, and with it, the predictable announcement: mideast peace talks will begin.
In a demonstration of familiar American hubris, President Barack Obama has declared his intention to make peace in the region by creating a Palestinian state on the West Bank within a year.
Not sure where to begin in this analysis. Bottom line is, unless our President is planning to organize a coalition to do something about Iran, or is by some unlikely chance working behind-the-scenes with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to help Israel to do something about it, this strong-arming of a Palestinian state within a year is a bad idea, and could come at no worse time for Israel and for the free world.
Absent a massive action to contain militant Islamist fundamentalism in the middle east and to re-educate and de-brainwash populations, this Palestinian state, should it be established, will be a terror state. It will, to borrow a phrase from George Will’s column this week, constitute a third Islamic Republic (in addition to Iran and Gaza) - this one contiguous to Israel.
It is a shame that this is the case, but it is. As Will points out, one need look no further than recent history to see the writing on the (Western?) wall. Israel withdrew from Gaza, uprooting thousands of residents in a traumatic move extending even to digging up the graves of Jewish residents and re-burying these people in other territory. What was the result? Instead of becoming less militant in response to Israel’s withdrawal from “occupied” Gaza, Hamas took power in a coup, replacing a comparatively less militant leadership with one entirely devoted to Israel’s destruction.
Then there is Israel’s other recent withdrawal - from Lebanon. Following a 2006 war provoked by Hezbollah, Israel occupied land in southern Lebanon and tried to rout out the Shiite terrorist group and Iranian proxy Hezbollah. After the international community protested, due to concern about civilian casualties to the Lebanese (among whom Hezbollah terrorists had intentionally ensconced themselves to cause those casualties), Israel withdrew, leaving a power vacuum into which Hezbollah ensconced itself more firmly than ever. Since then, Iran’s terrorist henchmen have taken to importing rockets and Scud missiles from Iran via Syria. They now have Scuds that can easily reach the hearts of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.
Hate to say it, but the most telling cautionary tale for what the world can expect if Israel relinquishes the West Bank so a Palestinian state can be formed in the near future is the story of the Gaza greenhouses.
In August 2005, Israel undertook the Gaza withdrawal. The Israel Defense Forces, at the request of the the Palestinian Authority, destroyed the settlers’ homes. They left behind the synagogues in hopes the Palestinians would respect them (mistake). They also left behind, intact, $14 million worth of elaborate, high-tech greenhouses that Israelis had constructed for food production. Miracles of modern electronics and irrigation, these greenhouses might have provided a vital source of food and employment for Gaza’s Palestinian residents. In fact, philanthropists including Bill Gates and former World Bank President James Wolfensohn bought the greenhouses for the Gazan Palestinians, so that they would have a fresh start and work opportunities.
Within hours of the end of Israeli “occupation” of Gaza, Gazan residents had looted the greenhouses. Within weeks they had trashed them, and by September (two months following withdrawal) they were destroyed, their infrastructure converted for use as arms smuggling tunnels.
It is tragic and painful to acknowledge these facts, but failure to acknowledge them (and most mainstream media ignored the fate of the greenhouses) is foolish hubris. Having been to the West Bank firsthand, I can say I have met Palestinians who I believe would be ready to accept a two-state solution. But until the United States takes on a leadership role in defeating militant Islam in the region, and supporting the genuine moderates, any independent Palestinian state is likely to be seized and governed by radicals. That is the reality of what has happened in Gaza; that is what has happened in Lebanon. And it will be what happens in Palestine so long as radical Islam carries the day in the region.
That said, I am dubious this state will be shoehorned into existence in the next year, because I find it difficult to believe President Obama and others in the U.S. government truly fail to grasp these realities. Then again, American hubris is legendary for good reason. And when a U.S. President wants to add “mideast peace broker” to his resume, the default move is to put the screws to Israel. (After all, as any attorney worth his salt will admit, it’s easier to get movement in a dispute by pressing the more reasonable party). In the case of the middle east, however, the dysfunction is so deep on the side of the less reasonable party that pressing Israel will only worsen the problem. Reform is desperately needed in the Muslim world. But the world will not get there by appeasing forces of intolerance and calling it peace.
3 Comments
Netanyahu has a message for doubters of the peace talks like George Wills:
Israel and the Palestinians have a chance to surprise the world and strike a peace deal to end decades of conflict, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday.
“We can surprise all the doubters,” Netanyahu told ministers at the beginning of the weekly cabinet meeting in Jerusalem.
“But we need a serious partner,” he said. “If we have a serious partner, we can achieve an historic agreement.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/netanyahu-we-can-surprise-the-doubters-to-reach-historic-peace-1.309508
Meanwhile, Hamas has been the most negative on the peace talks:
Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal said on Tuesday that peace talks between Palestinians and Israel next week could deal a fatal blow to the Palestinian cause.
(Link omitted)
Although it is tempting to be cynical these days, I would rather place my fate with Netanyahu than Hamas. Give peace a chance!
Plus, the question is not the relative likelihood of the peace talks working, but whether it is the best option available.
Thanks for the comment, Erik.
The imperative phrase in Netanyahu’s statement is “if we have a serious partner.” If Israel has a serious partner, a Palestinian leadership with not only good intentions but the courage to stand up to the radicals, then that would be tremendous, and would open the door to a genuine peace in the region. Similarly, if U.S. leadership demonstrated the courage to stand up to forces of intolerance, such as the Iranian regime, which has become the nexus of terrorism in the region, and disable them, and to support true reform, then opportunity for peace might appear genuine.
Winston Churchill, who knew, said: “Courage is the first of human qualities because it is the quality which guarantees all others.” Without the courage demonstrated by Arab leaders like Anwar Sadat, there is no peace in the mideast. Unfortunately, recent peacemaking efforts have asked courage only of Israelis, and have not required that Palestinians and their leaders muster the moral courage to confront the forces of radicalism within their society, or even be consistent in their efforts to teach peaceful co-existence to their children. Instead, these peacemaking efforts have rewarded forces in the moderate camp who are at best weak, at worst, corrupt, and have left the radicals untouched, while not demanding any true shift in the teachings, expectations, or mindset of a Palestinian society that has grown increasingly radicalized over the years. This is a loser’s strategy, and I see no evidence that President Obama is prepared to deviate from it.
That said, your optimism is lovely. Would love to be wrong about this.
A spirited response Ms. Robinson.
However, I would rather place my trust in Netanyahu’s analysis any day. There simply is no comparison.
Netanyahu joined the Israeli Defense Forces in 1967 where he served as a commander in the elite Sayeret Matkal commando unit, taking part in many missions including the hostages rescue mission from the hijacked Sabena Flight 572 in 1972 (coincidentally under the leadership of Ehud Barak). He fought in the Yom Kippur War in 1973 and achieved the rank of captain before being discharged. Netanyahu served as the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations from 1984 to 1988, member of the Likud Party, and was Prime Minister from June 1996 to July 1999.
Meanwhile, George Will is an armchair Oxford pontificator:
Will graduated from University Laboratory High School of Urbana, Illinois, and attended Trinity College, in Hartford, Connecticut (B.A.). He subsequently studied PPE at Magdalen College, University of Oxford (B.A., M.A.), and received M.A. and Ph.D. degrees in politics from Princeton University. His 1968 Ph.D. dissertation was entitled Beyond the Reach of Majorities: Closed Questions in the Open Society.
Will might be have a better working knowledge of the Federalist Papers. However, Will has neither the experience, training or education of Netanyahu on middle east issues.
Post a Comment