- Bernd Debusmann is a Reuters columnist. The opinions expressed are his own -
Time is running out for Israel and the Palestinians. Barack Obama is probably the last American president to have the option of pursuing an accord leading to the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel, the so-called two-state solution.
If that fails, another generation will be locked into bloodshed and strife. That is the bleak scenario painted by two senior American Middle East experts in a new book, Restoring the Balance: A Middle East Strategy for the Next President. It is the product of an 18-month joint study by the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution and the Council on Foreign Relations, two pillars of the U.S. foreign policy establishment.
The authors of the chapter on the Arab-Israeli conflict, Steven A. Cook and Shibley Telhami, see American involvement in peace diplomacy as indispensable and say last month’s presidential elections opened new opportunities. But they note that after years of unsuccessful negotiations, there is a
growing sense of disbelief in the possibility of a peaceful agreement.
“More troubling, an increasing number of Palestinian and Arab intellectuals are abandoning the idea of a two-state solution and are now advocating a one-state solution in which Jews and Arabs coexist in a binational state. In Israel some mainstream voices are now arguing that the two-state solution is
unachievable…”
“Left on its current trajectory, the Arab-Israeli conflict is on the verge of moving into a potentially disastrous phase in which Israelis and Arabs broadly come to believe that the two-state solution is no longer viable,” the authors say.
Possible consequences of that belief include a third Palestinian intifada (uprising), a unilateral Palestinian declaration of independence and the collapse of the Palestinian authority.
Hamas, the Islamist movement which controls Gaza and is growing in influence on the occupied West Bank, run by the rival Fatah, would be strengthened.
To prevent the dire consequences they foresee, the authors say the new U.S. administration must give high priority to peace diplomacy and change policies on key aspects. Pressing Israel to freeze building settlements in the West Bank is high on their list. So is getting Hamas into the negotiating fold as part of a unity government. (So far, the U.S. and the European Union brand Hamas a terrorist group that cannot be a negotiating partner).
So can Obama do what is necessary to end the impasse? Is the only alternative to a two-state solution renewed, large-scale bloodshed?
NO SIGNS OF FRESH THINKING FROM OBAMA
While Obama has been critical of the hands-off approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the first seven years of the Bush administration, dismissing its efforts as “trips consisting of little more than photo-ops”, the president-elect has shown no sign that he might be willing to break with the decades-old policies that have earned the U.S. a reputation in the Arab world of backing Israel no matter what.
Would Obama, for example, use the threat of withholding U.S. financial aid to get Israel to stop building new settlements in the West Bank - where there already are 240,000 Israeli settlers - or dismantle existing ones? Not likely. Would he throw his weight behind calls for an end to Israel’s economic blockade of Gaza?
Would he, as the Brookings/Council on Foreign Relations report suggests, “recognize that Hamas’s power stems from genuine support among a significant segment of the Palestinian public..?” There’s nothing in his public statements that indicates he would and there are no pointers that he intends to depart from long-standing U.S. policies on the conflict.
That includes the two-state idea. What’s remarkable in the Brookings/CFR analysis is the concern it expresses that in the absence of a peace settlement, secular elites will turn their back on the notion of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza and instead opt for one country (Israel, the West Bank and Gaza) in which Arabs and Jews are equal. For decades, the one-state idea was the preserve of a handful of far-left Israelis and Palestinian activists. The fact that it is now bubbling up into the mainstream shows that is gaining currency.
One of the most vocal proponents of the idea is Ali Abunimah, a Palestinian-American activist and author of One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse. “All the talk of a two-state solution, all the diplomatic initiatives are divorced from the reality of what Israel is doing on the ground,” he says. “A Palestinian state requires the removal of settlements and that’s not likely to happen.”
Most Israelis reject the notion of one state for all, chiefly for reasons of demographics. Because of higher Palestinian birth rates, Israeli Jews will become a minority within the next two years if present trends continue. By December 2007, Israeli Jews made up just under 48% of the population in the area that would make up one state, Palestinians 46%.
Abunimah, a co-founder the The Electronic Intifada, a website critical of U.S. and Israeli policies, has something in common with the more moderate experts from Brookings and the Council on Foreign Relations. “Solving the Arab-Israeli conflict requires a sledgehammer,” he says, “Not a scalpel.”
Echoing that sense of urgency, the Brookings report says: “The time for incremental agreements has passed.”
You can contact the author at Debusmann@Reuters.com.
For previous columns by Bernd Debusmann, click here.
I think it's time for the Israelis and Palestinians to settle their differences without 3rd party assistance. The fact is, peace can never be imposed on this region; the answers to middle east harmony lie within the determination of the Jews and Arabs to find a way for it to flourish . Western influence and interference will get them nowhere.
Trackback
81 comments so far
Previous | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Next
Got Jewish friends? Watch this:
http://tinyurl.com/6376ne
Got Arab friends? Watch This:
http://tinyurl.com/6m222p
Bishop Desmond Tutu, the South African Nobel peace prize winner, said last week: “I think the West, quite rightly, is feeling contrite, penitent for its awful connivance with the Holocaust. Now when you are contrite, when you are penitent, you are then ready to make amends, and well that penance. The West is penitent, the penance is being paid by the Palestinians.”
As a follower of Jesus Christ, I trust in the bible as my ultimate source of authority. In the bible we read that the Israelites were God’s chose people to be set apart from other nations of the world. God made a covenant with the Israelites that said that He would give them The Promised Land and allow them to live in peace if they obey and follow Him. Sadly, it was and still is often the case that the Israelites failed to be obedient to their God and followed the ways of other gods. However, the LORD said that He would hear the cries of His people whenever they repented of their sins and came back to Him. One thing needed in Israel today is for a spirit of repentance and for the eyes of Israel to be opened to see that Jesus Christ is indeed the Messiah that they have been waiting for.
Another thing to realize is that God does as He sees fit because He is the only one who is worthy of praise and worship. He is the only one who is not self-seeking. While we don’t understand His ways, He is sovereign and good and what the bible says about Him is true. He does what He does to purify His people because He loves us unconditionally.
This is why the United States continues and will continue to back Israel - because God has chosen Israel as His chosen people who He would use to bring other people to a knowledge of God. This is what God refers to as the “blessing” of Genesis 12:1-3.
This does not mean that Palestinians and Arabs and other non-Jews should be hung out to dry. Each and every one of them is created in the image of God and He dearly loves them.
We need to pray for peace and for a deep repentance in the hearts of all people in the world to realize that our ways are not God’s ways. Only by recognizing who we are in the light of who Jesus Christ is can we sincerely love our enemies and live in peace with them. Only then can Israelis and Palestinians live together as one people with the LORD Jesus Christ at the center.
In this conflict there is an aggressor and a victim. The peace plan on the table, the so-called road map, is trying to enforce peace at the expense of the victim, the Palestinians. This, of course, is expected of a peaceful mediation led by an indifferent party: the mediator helps the stronger side to achieve most of its gains by making the weaker side believe it is the best available solution. But, you see, these kinds of solutions are not just, and therefore not long-lasting. That is not to say that peace is not possible or the two-state solution is absurd. The Middle East peace and an independent Palestine can happen and should happen. But they must happen at the expense of the wrong side: Israel.
Israel must return to the pre-war borders and find the way to compensate refugees for the inflicted wrongs, just like Germany found the way to compensate Jews for the crimes against them in the WW-II. Whether Israel sympathizers like it or not, Israel is on the wrong side of history here. It has captured and held illegally other nation’s territory, forcefully deported hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from their homes, indiscriminately killed thousands of civilians, including children, has violated scores of human rights principles and laws, used force illegally across international borders…. Under the normal circumstances, a country like this would be a pariah state. Under the normal circumstances, a country like this would be sanctioned. But, these are not normal circumstances. You see, Israel has convinced many in the US establishment that it is a staunch ally, an unsinkable aircraft carrier, an intelligence gatherer and generally a means of influence in the volatile and important region. American population has also become convinced that Israel is a tiny democracy surrounded by the ever hostile sea of enemies. Moreover, many even perceive some sort of religious duty in protecting Israel….
So what is to be done? Maybe, we, Americans, should remember that sometimes little but belligerent “eternal” friends can lead big countries to big disasters (the history is full of such examples), and having realized that, maybe we should start thinking about the US national interests first. Then, maybe we will come to a conclusion that, regardless of the fact that “the bond…between the United States and Israel is unbreakable today, tomorrow, and forever,” we should convince Israel to change its ways with the neighbors…before we become a target of somebody’s misguided vengeance again.
One should read Osama Bin Laden’s confession… he mentions that the Bush administration never actually faced the real reason for what happened: Israel. So that means that more insurgent parties will be created so long as we prop Israel up on a pedestal. This is not to say I support the rebels, but it is to say that I believe we’ve done enough meddling already.
I’m afraid after hearing Obama’s declarations that the current Israel is the way to go, that there will be no change for Israel and the other affected parties. They will continue to overstep their boundaries.
Why did we ever assist Israel in becoming what it is today, anyway? Did we feel sorry for the Jews just because Hitler happened? We’re No one is responsible for Hitler than Hitler himself. The only thing a person can do in their life is hold themselves accountable for their own actions. The US did not immediately join the war, but neither was the information on the concentration camps immediately widely known.
Nothing ever gets better by pitying a wronged party. We can only fix issues by altering how people think. Once we ‘give’ a pitied/wronged party anything, they start to believe they deserve more. They will then step past their boundaries further and further, creating more demands from those that pity them, instead of creating a real equality or acceptance. And when I say boundaries, I mean the boundaries set forth for all people, not just the oppressed people.
Two immediate examples jump to mind: the former slaves of the US and the former genocide of Jews. Although I do agree that there should be no descrimination based on gender, race, creed, religion, etc. I believe that we have misstepped in our actions. We’ve been giving special treatment to people, which actually highlights any disparities, instead of enforcing equality on the psychological level. These highlighted disparities create a fissure, in the end. Fissures do not lead to peace.
It is time, for the west to retire from the middle-east. One thought comes to mind, allow the europeans, to solve this on-going problem. Problem started because of Germany & the Brit. If the perp’s can’t figure it out, let the Israel solve the palistinian situation. Have the arabs ever grown oranges? Guess they get theirs from Florida..
The whole thing is ridiculous. Personally, I think we should do what any parent does when their children can’t stop fighting for possession of something. “If you can’t share, then nobody can have it!” Lets evacuate the people and obliterate the so-called “Holy Land”. That’ll end the conflict right quick.
Remember Albert Einstein with numerals in Arabic as a nice combo for peace in the light vein.
More than a sledge hammer needed:
1) integration of educational infrastructure
2) integration of medical professionals
3) integration of security/police forces
4) expansion of existing municipalities to include Israelis and Palestinians
5) 5 census to establish proportional leadership to address religious/ethnic representation concerns
#5 isn’t a great solution (see Lebanon) but something’s going to give. There will be a Just and Genuine Peace. Not a matter of ‘if’. It’s a matter of ‘when’ and how many will have to suffer and die, everyday, till then.
Don’t need more Pakistan/India or N. Ireland divides.
As an Indian, I am proud to say that the only place in the World where the Jews were welcomed is India treated with great respect.Maybe its time other countries learn tolerance of all faiths. If you can’t solve this problem shame on the Muslims and Jews!! After all they are cousins dating back years ago. In India, we also have the second largest Muslim population of over 300 million, despite occasional riots, we have learned to grow together to become a major player in the world economy.
With major financial problems at home in the US, I don’t believe we need to waste our time over this matter. The financial mess and rightfully so is what Obama needs to worry about, let the Israelis and Palestinians deal with their problems. The Jews where not the only group of people to suffer atrocites. Lets not forget all those enslaved under imperalism of the British, French and Dutch.
in reply to KRR
what you need to understand is that peace is actually possible without 3rd party involvement. but, dont you think Obama’s offer to give israel, the only neuclear armed state in the middle east, a nuclear umbrella, is a 3rd part involvement.
the matter of the fact is that the AIPAC in the u.s is pushing extremism in israel and ois negatively contributing to any peace settlement in the region.
There were words missing in the paragraph below. It should read:
So, Ali Abunimah’s idea of a one-state solution (which echoes early opposition to the recommendation by the 1933 Peel Commission) may be logical. It might make sense. It might show a way out of the dead end of the so-called Peace Process. But it won’t happen.
There were words missing (”early opposition”) in the following paragraph:
So, Ali Abunimah’s idea of a one-state solution (which echoes early opposition to the recommendation by the 1933 Peel Commission) may be logical. It might make sense. It might show a way out of the dead end of the so-called Peace Process. But it won’t happen.
The global economic crisis is fast becoming the new scapegoat for anything and everything the policies of our countries fail to combat. The US has has ages to rethink its policy in the Palestinian-Israeli region, yet it hasn’t.There’s no use in trying to reinterpret the goals of politicians!! There was no imminent need for (then) senators Obama and Clinton to be so prolific in their unwavering support of Israel, yet they were. American policy is obviously NOT going to change.
We also have to acknowledge that in the long term the only solution is to change the mindset of the populous in the region to stop them demonising each other. Without that there is no trust in the good faith that is the basis of any binding agreement for a solution, whatever that may be. If the USA can’t change it’s policy it would do well to at least change its rhetoric.
Are you kidding? Without pressure, Israel would never let the palestinians have their own state. Without international pressure, there would be millions of jews living int he occupied territories by now.
ALso, I doubt HAMAS wants to see a one state solution, unless that state is filled and controlled by arabs.
The 2 state solution is the only viable option, but extremists on both sides are keeping this from happening!
Jews are forgetting WWII. The atrocities on them was unimaginable. But sometimes its doing same with the Palestinians.
Putting Israel in so called promised land was BIG WRONG. What the world can do is to push Israel-Palestine be a one state. And this where non-violence and Mahatma Gandhi comes
The USA is in a weak political situation due to the state of the economy with its massive deficits. After the wars in Lebanon, and the expenditures in Irak and the state of the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Iran is in a better position than before the Iraki war. A general bargain with Iran and Syria implies the solution of the Palestinian situation (settlementes, resources, water, refugees, etc.) USA has no money for another conflict which explains the rumors about an atomic “umbrella” for Israel possible in exchange for negotiations with Iran and Syria. A viable Palestinian state is the best outcome for Israel because the tide of demography and the decline of USA economic power will place the state in serious jeopardy. J. Cervela
This columnist is right in being pessimistic about Obama bringing new ideas to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Both he and his nominee for Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, prostrated themselves to AIPAC at their Washington conventions, not only this year but also last year. It should be obvious to anyone following U.S. policy on Israel/Palestine that neither have the guts, nor the inclination to try something new despite the very obvious fact that the old approaches have failed. Nothing will happen in the so-called peace process UNLESS the U.S. brings real pressure on its favourite child, Israel.
So, listen to Hillary Clinton, who as a senator represented the most Jewish, most pro-Israel constituency in the United States: “Israel should know that the United States will NEVER (my capitals) pressure her to make unilateral concessions or to impose a made in America solution.” Translation: go right ahead, Israeli government, and continue building illegal settlements in the West Bank, or “thicken” the existing ones. We will never take you to task on that, UN resolutions be damned. You can be assured of a steady flow of military and financial aid.
As to president-elect Barack Obama, to the same AIPAC convention on June 4, 2008: “The bond…between the United States and Israel is unbreakable today, tomorrow, and forever.” And: “Any…agreement with the Palestinian people must preserve Israel’s identity as a Jewish state, with secure, recognised an defensible borders. Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel and it must remain undivided.”
Continue: “Today, I’ll be speaking from my heart, and as a true friend of Israel.”
Well, can anyone out there remember whether any sitting American politician EVER described himself as “a true friend of the Palestinians.”?
So, Ali Abunimah’s idea of a one-state solution (which echoes the recommendation by the 1933 Peel Commission) may be logical. It might make sense. It might show a way out of the dead end of the so-called Peace Process. But it won’t happen.
Let’s not forget that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is NOT a foreign policy matter for the United States. It is a domestic issue, linked to the power of AIPAC as a lobby for Israel-right-or-wrong, linked to the importance of Jewish voters in swing states like Florida, and linked to other pressure groups infinitely more efficient than the Palestinians. Who rarely fail to make moves that prove right the old saw, attributed to Abba Eban ( among others) , that the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
So, Ali Abunimah: dream on. Maybe what you want to happen will happen. But not in your lifetime!
I think it’s time for the Israelis and Palestinians to settle their differences without 3rd party assistance. The fact is, peace can never be imposed on this region; the answers to middle east harmony lie within the determination of the Jews and Arabs to find a way for it to flourish . Western influence and interference will get them nowhere.