There's no peace of the weak
Obama's basic error was linking the Palestinian-Israeli conflict with his reconciliation policy with the Muslim world.
By Yoel Marcus Tags: Benjamin Netanyahu Mahmoud Abbas Barack Obama Israel newsThe camera caught Hillary Clinton and Benjamin Netanyahu in an affectionate, cheerful pose, as if they were about to burst into a waltz. The U.S. secretary of state was smiling broadly, and the prime minister's eyes were closed with pleasure. The fear that Clinton would land here as a version of the old lady in the Durrenmatt play "The Visit" - who came to settle a score - was proved false. She came to tell us that the administration welcomes Netanyahu's initiative for a partial, temporary construction freeze in the settlements, and it wasn't a precondition.
Those who expected her to harass us were surprised to hear her reject Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' uncompromising terms. She said the peace negotiations must be resumed for compromises to be reached, and that the Palestinians' demands were not conducive to peace. To soften U.S. President Barack Obama's statements she stressed that the United States was committed to Israel's security. Netanyahu also received a promise for a meeting with Obama. The prime minister will now also take part in the Jewish Federations' General Assembly in Washington.
A few weeks ago The Jewish People Policy Planning Institute convened in the United States. Daniel Shapiro, senior director of Middle East and North Africa at the U.S. National Security Council, attended the conference. Participants complained that Obama wasn't communicating with America's Jews and asked how far the president would go to pressure Israel. After the discussion Obama decided he would address the Jewish Federations' General Assembly.
The walls of Jericho don't come tumbling down with one speech, nor do the walls of hate for Israel in our region. Peace doesn't erupt as a result, either. The president's basic error was linking the Palestinian-Israeli conflict with his reconciliation policy with the Muslim world. Thus he drove Abbas to set every condition he could muster. What negotiations begin by making concessions in advance? And how can Obama pressure the Palestinians after tying the conflict's resolution to reconciliation with the Muslim world?
The president, meanwhile, has learned a thing or two about Jewish power in America. Next year there are elections for Congress, and he will need Jews' support to avoid losing the Democratic majority in one house or both. Obama realized just in time that he had erred and that removing settlements alone would not solve the conflict. Ariel Sharon uprooted the entire Gush Katif bloc from the Gaza Strip, and instead of receiving a counter-gesture from the Palestinians, the area we gave up became a base for firing Qassam rockets.
The main pressure has now shifted from Netanyahu to Abbas, who is setting unrealistic conditions. You don't give first, then talk. First you talk and then you give. There is only one business in which clients pay first, and it's not the peace-agreement business. Defense Minister Ehud Barak was right when he said, "what do you care if they build a little, we'll evacuate most of the settlements in the end anyway."
There is no justification for setting preconditions to opening negotiations. Everything must be open and on the table, not as dictates but as bargaining chips. Abbas did not respond to Netanyahu's "almost historic" proposal for "two states for two peoples." Israel would have to negotiate the fate of more than a quarter of a million settlers as part of this proposal. What more does Abbas want, to agree to resume talks on the two-state principle?
An observer familiar with politicians' shtick believes that Bibi is doing nothing and will continue to do nothing. "He's lucky Obama is emerging as a nothing, that Abbas is a nothing and that nothing will happen," he said.
Meanwhile, the prime minister has won the jackpot in the form of his planned meeting with Obama. He is marking time and Abbas is marking time.
In a conversation with someone who was involved in the peace process with Egypt, I broached the possibility of reenacting the Camp David Accords with an American plan and the White House's vigorous participation. He said that in Camp David in 1978, Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat knew they would be coming out with a "peace of the brave," a phrase coined by Sadat. Nothing was paid in advance.
The Camp David we knew was not a basis for a peace of the weak. The last time we were there the second intifada broke out
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
"It is there in the Holy Bible for all the world to recognise this fact." (Salmona J) Yes, this is what fundamentalist Jews believe. So, you surely are in favor of calling on all the world to convert, as a first step, to the true religion? The way Ben Laden and the Ayatullahs do? "There is nothing more contemptible or despicable than the use of religious sanctions in conflicts between nations and states." From an Open Letter to then-PM Begin, 1980, by Jacob Talmon (1916-1980), Professor of Modern History at the Hebrew U of Jerusalem. 1957 Israel Prize for Social Sciences. www.fmep.org/analysis/analysis/a-prophetic-message-from-the-past In 1980, when our settlement enterprise was still in infancy, and we had heard nothing yet of Hamas.
"Obama realized [...] that removing settlements alone would not solve the conflict." That just cannot be true. Marcus, you are inventing. Surely Obama cannot be that deluded as to have thought that removing settlements alone would solve the conflict. But it is a necessary first step into that direction. As long as it is not taken, the occupation cannot end. As long as there is occupation, no Palestinian state can be established, and neither peace nor security can come to Israel.
The spirit of Camp David lives on in an work for orchestra entitled: "A Camp David Overture (Prayer for Peace). The work was inspired by the Camp David Accords and is dedicated to Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat. It will have yet another performance in the U.S. on November 19th. Excerpts of the work are available at www.bruceroter.com/cdoinfo.html Sincerely, Dr. Bruce Craig Roter Composer of "A camp David Overture (Prayer for Peace)"
"Obama realized [...] that removing settlements alone would not solve the conflict." That just cannot be true. Marcus, you are inventing. Surely Obama cannot be that deluded. No clear-minded person would say that removing settlements alone will solve the conflict. But is is a necessary first step into that direction. As long as there are settlements, the occupation cannot end. As long as there is occupation, no Palestinian state can be established, and no peace can come to Israel. Is that, Mr. Marcus, really beyond your grasp?
This is what Israel is headed for. And if the laws of the democracy are solid in protecting the minority it will not turn into an islamist country because the democratic principles will be built in.
I hope Obama has learned something about the ME shadow boxing game. He now needs to put on REAL boxing gloves and take some boxing lessons.
So would Nethanyahu agree to negotiate if Palestinians were sending suicide bombers into Israel and Hamas sending rockets into Israel? For Palestinians, settlements are the equivalent of similar violence from Israel. Both sides have pre-conditions, the difference is that Israel's pre-conditions have been met and agreed to by Abbas. This is what was agreed to in the roadmap.
"Israel has no partner for peace but plenty of enemies who want to take Israel's land away." (Ben Kahan) Well, they have not much time to wait before taking possession. It will inevitably happen, when we Jews are a minority in the Land. They have just to keep being non-partners. Having today no partner for peace has been hard for our leaders to achieve. In summer 2005, they finally succeeded, brilliantly one must admit. They can rest now. "Battle of the numbers: Jewish minority by 2020", Jerusalem Post, Oct 25, 2007. by Professor Sergio Dellapergola, of the Harman Institute of Contemporary Jewry, the Hebrew U in Jerusalem. Senior Fellow at the Jewish People Policy Planning Institute. http://www.jpppi.org.il/ (News & Events -- From the press) "We must either have a Palestinian state in our neighborhood, or we will become a Palestinian state." Yehoshafat Harkabi (1921-1994), head of Military Intelligence (1955-1959), then professor and director of the Institute of International Relations and Middle East Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. "Harkabi was the only commander of military intelligence to have had a good command of Arabic, in addition to genuinely professional knowledge of Arab civilization and history, and of Islam." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yehoshafat_Harkabi
While Netanyahu is busy winning against Obama and Abbas -- both of whom are western allies anyways - Iran is humming its reactors. Netanyahu hit a jackpot, yes - but he is scoring goals in his own court. And a "meeting with Obama" is considered a "jackpot" now?? Israeli PMs didn't need jackpots to visit the White House.
Israel gave up the Sinai... Yoel Marcus rightly points the aftermath of Gush Katif. Barak seems to think the removal of 250 000 "settlers" is a fait accompli. How will these 250 000 settlers be absorbed? Will all the refugee camps for the Palestinians suddenly be emptied out? Of which there are millions spread throughout the ME? And if Iran plans to tip the rockets it sends to Hezbollah? And these rockets end up in the Golan? Worst-case scenario of course.
My dear friend from London, let's not get carried away with the "pathetic big dog." The House Resolution, which was also backed and supported by JStreet, advocates to the White House not to support the Goldstone Report in the UN. New Players--the Obama Team--must remove the diversion of Goldstone Report, which could be a huge hurdle for peace. This could be the last "blind support" for the Netanyahu government.
Your title didn't bother me; but your line about Obama having different plans perked my interests. The difference is simple: Obama started on Mid-East peace (primarily Israeli-Pal) the first Days in office. And secondly, Obama wants and envisions a comprehensive peace which means-- Sryia and Lebanon differences also get resolved. Israelis do not like Obama because he's pushing for peace and actions. Bush did nothing for eight years, except Annapolis, and Israelis assumed that would become norm.
Yoel Marcus has joined his colleague Bradley Burston in blaming the latest impasse in the peace process on Obama's diplomacy. Can't Israelis get it through their heads that after 40 years of settlement building which went on even while the parties were negotiating, the Palestinians have said enough. A settlement freeze has been part of the roadmap demands ever since Bush announced the roadmap. Marcus quotes Barak as saying why all the fuss about a few thousand more houses in the settlements, they are all going away anyway. Really? Aluf Benn reported on Oct. 9 that Netanyahu concurs with the position paper published by a rightwing think tank which says Israel must hold on to Area "C" in any final deal. If so we are not just talking about the 3% to 6% of the West most people think is at issue. We are talking about 60% of the West Bank continuing to be held by Israel, with a Palestinian "fried chicken" state in the other 40%. this was unacceptable even to George W. Bush.
Yes I also entirely agree : one state, the state of the Land of Israel,of the entire Jewish people with Jerusalem united for ever as the eternal capital of the sovereign state of Israel.It is there in the Holy Bible for all the world to recognise this fact.Jerusalem is mentioned in the Bible over 700 times. Not once in the Muslim Quraan
Today the U.S. Congress is likely to vote a condemnation of the Goldstone Report showing the power of Israel over the United States. The tail wags the pathetic big dog.
... so it seems to Marcus at the moment... ... but it's by no means 'gospel' indefinitely... ... the Pres of the USA has different plans... (no matter how much we discount him...)
Settlements are not an obstacle for peace. At the end of the day, the frontier will be redraw. Part of the settlements will be included within Israel new border. In exchange part of Israel, probably the "triangle" with Umm el Fahen at its head will be included in the Palestinian state. No person will be removed from its home. Small settlements deep inside Palestinian territory will either become Palestinian citizens or will return to Israel. Israel message to its settlers will be... "Israel withdraws....Do as you please. Or palestinan citizenship or back home." This is the model of De Gaulle's Algerian resolution which will be adopted by Israel. Palestine on the other hand will be home of the refugees, and Palestine will recognize the jewish state. At the end of the day there will be no more removing of population, but just redrawing of frontiers. Why? Because there is no other rational solution.
The militant hostility of the PLO is alive and well. Israel has no partner for peace but plenty of enemies who want to take Israel's land away.
"The president, meanwhile, has learned a thing or two about Jewish power in America. Next year there are elections for Congress, and he will need Jews' support to avoid losing the Democratic majority in one house or both." I like that! But the trouble is President Obama, who is a sharp politician, knows that "no sucking up to the Jews no votes". So, there must be something else at work. No, it could not be the balloon boy stunt that blacked out his new-orleans speech. Nor could it be Dr. Nozette's arrest, though it could be a serious matter; some sensitive info could make Netanyahu more influential in the US than in Israel. In my humble opinion, it is the Obama administration's strategy: Perturb, observe, calculate and decide. Now my personal advice: Do not expect outsiders to help in an internal family feud. If there is ever to be peace in the Middle East it would spring from the region. So the cousins should get together and with some give and take find a way out.
I suggest that the caption of the article should read: The humbling of Obama and the Mendacity of Hillary.
It's time. One state. One man. One vote.
Perhaps the fact that the WB settlements grew so much during the Oslo peace process, including during Rabin's, Perez, and Barak's adminstrations is the very reason why everyone, Palestinians, Americans, and Israelis who actually believe in the two-state solution should be very concerned about continued settlement expansion. Ehud Barak's comment is especially disingenuous--why would the Israeli government want to continue building in settlements that they would eventually leave anyway? Answer, they never intend to leave in the first place... It seems, due to the incredibly weak, short sighted Israeli governement the two-state solution is almost dead. Long live the one state solution!
Both sides need to come to terms with what is happening to ordinary citizens. (getting killed everyday) If both are serious about peace then, Why waste time? We are spending Billions to negotiation while those funds could be used to re-settle both Israel Settlers and the Palestinians.
"Peace of the brave" was coined by De Gaulle (regarding Algeria) and taken up by Arafat after Oslo. Sadat had nothing to do with the phrase.
An observer familiar with politicians' shtick believes that Bibi is doing nothing and will continue to do nothing. "He's lucky Obama is emerging as a nothing, that Abbas is a nothing and that nothing will happen," he said. Thanks for clearing that up. I'm sure the White House is impressed with the official line on our President.