LAFF Society

CLIPPINGS

A New Approach to the Arab-Israeli Conflict

 

From Jewish Week of NY - May 22, 2009 by Robert B.Goldmann

The ritual of the “peacemakers” is about to resume in the wake of the visit of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington. It has been going on for a half-century, as prime minister after prime minister and U.S. president after president have given their best to the negotiations and failed.

To be sure, some principles have been agreed upon, such as the “road map”, of which nothing has been heard of lately, and the “two-state” solution, which makes neither the Palestinians, and especially Hamas, nor Israel's current government , happy, but was accepted as a basis of negotiation'last in Annapolis over a year ago. The year-long talks failed. Over the past half-century, three heads of government were serious about making peace: Anwar Sadat, Menachem Begin and Itzhak Rabin'and two had to pay with their lives for it.

The problem is that outside powers, America in the lead, wanted to solve the problem more than the parties themselves. It was in the common interest of western Europe and America because they see peace in the Middle East as a vital component of their global interests'chief among them the region's oil Their eagerness to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict clashes with the reality that both Israel and the Palestinians want the same piece of land. A “two-state solution” is at odds with Israel's craving for security, which, all major political parties in the Knesset see it, requires an Israeli presence on parts of land that would be the Palestinian state and is incompatible with even the most modest Palestinian aspirations.

Might it not be more realistic and achievable to aim at an internationally supervised armistice, without time limit, as on the Lebanese-Israeli border? It would avoid stirring up the disappointments and resentments of failed negotiations, and cut down, perhaps even end, bloodshed. Neither party would have to give up any claim, and negotiations would be postponed sine die.

Since the Arab world sees the United States as pro-Israel, and Israel has no confidence in the United Nations, the logical candidate for the supervision of the armistice would be the European Union, which enjoys the respect of both parties.

An armistice along these lines would also give the main source of danger in the region – Iran'a less attractive target for interference. On this both the western world, the predominantly Sunni Arab countries of the region and Israel have a joint interest, and it is unlikely that Russia or China would object

But what about peace, would be the question and objection from Washington, Brussels, and moderate elements in the region The answer is that another failed peace negotiation would be likely to strengthen extremist elements like Hamas and Hezbollah, might spark another Intifada and cost lives. Failure must be presumed in light of past experience and the steady growth of extremist Arab movements and .Israeli objections, even among moderate elements, to abandoning positions deemed essential to security in a hostile neighborhood. Even the peace with Egypt and Jordan remains cold and largely one-sided, with Israeli tourists visiting the sights in these two countries, but not vice versa.

A permanent armistice may not be acceptable to some on both sides, most importantly the Palestinian Authority, which has justifiable objections to the status quo. Yet the conflict centers on Palestinian claims of land and property within Israel, and Israel's very existence is at stake. What Israel should do is give more access to Gaza, to compete with the tunnel system that now lets supplies enter the Strip, and cease the expansion of settlements on the West Bank, as a new beginning in the relationship with Ramallah.

If the guns remain silent, if negotiations that lead nowhere but merely strengthen the irreconcilables on both sides, are postponed, and a new generation takes over, new thinking may emerge that makes the pursuit ofpeace a realistic objective. At that time, discussions aiming at a solution should resume.

 

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed in these pages are the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the LAFF Society.


 

Members log in to comment