bee33 wrote:
Israel is the much more powerful member in the conflict. Israel is the one that needs to stop its attacks, stop building new settlements in the occupied territories, and stop blockading supplies to Gaza., and it is the one who needs to initiate a peace initiative. I agree that the Palestinians have used the wrong tactics by answering violence with violence, and I said as much in my first post, which I will not repeat. The articles I linked are not opinion pieces, they are chock full of facts. But f you are not interested in facts, from respected mainstream sources, then...?
Personally, I have no horse in this race. I am only interested in justice and peace, and that needs to come from both sides.
There are four separate actions that you suggest that Israel must take, but they are not all equivalent.
1) Stop its attacks: This is a contextual obligation. To the degree that her attacks are directed at viable, military targets, (i.e. locations from which rocket/mortar attacks into Israel are being launched or from which command and control of Palestinian attacks are being made), it is unrealistic to expect Israel to stand back. The United States is significantly more powerful than the Taliban, so ought she to have stood by while the Taliban sheltered the leadership of al-Qaeda? Let us remember who fired the first shots in 1948, during the Yom Kippur War and during the Six Day War. Let us remember who fired the first shots in the Second Intifada. Israel may have the greater might, but that does not excuse aggression from the less powerful adversary.
2) Stop building new settlements. I wholeheartedly agree. This is an aggressive act that is unnecessary. At the end of the day, it will be left to the United States and Saudi Arabia to buy off the Israelis for the value of settlement developments transferred to the Palestinain Authority, and Israel will still be left with the problem of integrating this population into whatever the new borders of Israel are. A policy with more foresight would have taken a different approach to Israel's housing needs.
3) Stop the blockade of Gaza. This is a foolishly shortsighted proposal. No major player on the ground, other than Hamas, wants to see this happen. The opportunity for Iran to directly supply Hamas, with no restriction would be enormously destabilizing to Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. It would lead to significant escalation in the Hamas-Fatah conflict, causing even greater harm to the Palestinian people. While Egypt is making noises that the blockade has been a failure, notice that Egypt is taking no steps to permit shipments of goods through Rafah.
4) Initiate a peace initiative. With whom? Who on the Palestinian side is both capable of and willing to negotiate, ratify and implement a durable peace? Israel has signed on to Oslo; has unilaterally withdrawn from Gaza; yet the Palestine Authority has routinely failed to exercise authority over its people.
Fatah no longer holds the reins of power. Although Mahmoud Abbas represents the best hope of moderate Palestinian leadership, the simple fact Fatah must come to grips with the corruption within its own organization, and demonstrate itself to be the way forward for a durable peace.
Hamas, on the other hand, has demonstrated that it has no intention of reaching a peaceful accord with Israel.
Fayyad and the Third Way, or Barghouti and the Independent Palestine movement might be alternatives to Fatah, but have no power base.
At the end of the day, if there is no figure within the Palestinian population who can demonstrate the capacity to establish responsible government that is capable of exercising control over its territory and its population, then a durable peace is a pipe dream.
_________________
--James
09 Jun 2010, 3:43 pm
