Online Journal Contributing Writer
Apr 30, 2010, 00:19
Courtesy Of "The Online Journal"
Aren’t you sick of reading about solutions to Middle East peace that never seem to go anywhere? Pundits talk about a one-state solution, a two-state solution and a three-state solution. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says he’ll accept a temporary solution while Palestinian National Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is calling for a US-imposed solution. Until now, they’re all yackety-yak.
Peacemaking is hardly rocket science yet the Israel-Palestine conflict seems to go on and on without end. It’s been nearly 62 years since Israel declared independence on May 14, 1948, when over 700,000 Palestinian Arabs were either forced to flee their homes or were expelled to neighbouring countries. Today, there are millions of Palestinian refugees in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Meanwhile, the descendents of those who remained are oppressed, humiliated and deprived of basic freedoms.
Mankind has come a long way since 1948, when the Internet wasn’t even a twinkle in its inventor’s eye. We’ve sent men to the moon and discovered how to transplant hearts, lungs and faces but not even the finest minds have been able to end the impasse between Israelis and Palestinians.
During the same timeframe, Egypt kicked out its puppet king, Algeria sent the French packing, Europe was freed from the Nazi jackboot, Eastern Europe was rid of the Soviet stranglehold, Hong Kong waved goodbye to British imperialist rule and South Africa removed the yoke of apartheid. Yet the Palestinians are arguably worse off now than they ever were. A visiting extra-terrestrial other-world historian would no doubt find this situation perplexing, especially as the Palestinians have right on their side with a slew of UN Security Council resolutions to prove it.
Resolution 242 adopted on November 22, 1967, under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, calls for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from territories occupied during the Six-Day War. Ironically, Israel consistently disrespects the UN, even though it owes the organisation its very existence and promptly sent 242 to the round file. Resolutions passed under Chapter VII permit the Council to take military action against states that act unlawfully, but the UN failed to act and so that was that. There is something very wrong when Iraq was invaded ostensibly for breaching Resolution 1441, while Israel is given carte blanche to flout dozens of them.
If the international community behaved in a lawful manner there would be no need for so-called peace solutions. Resolution 242, which forms the basis of the Arab Peace Initiative that remains on the table until July 2010, should have been implemented long ago. Instead, the US has been pushing a series of peace options heavily biased in Israel’s favour.
Unfair
For example, the 1993 Oslo Accords put Israel in charge of Palestine’s external security and left 55 percent of the West Bank under Israeli control. At the failed 2000 Camp David Summit, brokered by President Bill Clinton, the Palestinians were offered only 73 percent of the West Bank divided by an Israeli highway from occupied Jerusalem to the Dead Sea. Lastly, of course, there was George W. Bush’s Road Map that was dreamt up to bring Iraq War objectors onside and consisted of little in terms of real substance.
Israelis are fond of accusing Palestinian leaders of never failing to miss an opportunity. In reality, they’ve wisely avoided being fobbed off with scraps -- with one exception. If they had filled the empty chairs reserved for them at the 1978 Camp David Summit, they would have been offered full implementation of Resolution 242 under the agreement ‘A Framework for Peace in the Middle East.’
In hindsight, their absence was a mistake. Although it was understandable, given the wars of 1967 and 1973 were still fresh in their minds and Palestinians were in no mood to relinquish one inch of historic Palestine. They still cherished the keys and deeds to their expropriated homes and were unable to come to terms with the fact that, in many cases, their villages had been leveled or that the doorframes of houses built by their grandfathers were now affixed with mezuzot (parchment inscribed with verses from the Torah) placed there by European immigrants.
Let’s put aside intellectual discussion on the various ‘peace solutions’ and get real for a moment. No Israeli leader wants to exchange occupied land for peace. As long as Israel is coddled by the US and its allies and so far as it retains its military power, it has little incentive to give up the Zionist dream of a Greater Israel. Unless the United States is prepared to force Israel’s hand by threatening to withdraw its $3 billion (Dh11 billion) annual grant along with its political and military support, barring all-out regional war, there’ll never be an autonomous sovereign state called Palestine with Jerusalem as its capital.
The key is in Washington’s hands but will there ever be an American president with the courage to silence Congress and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee long enough to open the door? There might be. If the day comes when the US views Israel more as a burden than a strategic asset, there will be a swift policy shift. There are some who believe that President Barack Obama might be veering in that direction. Veering is one thing; reaching quite another. Let’s see.
Linda S. Heard is a British specialist writer on Middle East affairs. She welcomes feedback and can be contacted by email at heardonthegrapevines@yahoo.co.uk.Copyright © 1998-2007 Online Journal
No comments:
Post a Comment