Tough Love for Israel

For years, Washington has turned the other cheek while Israel pursued a policy of unflinching resistance to any compromise or outright withdrawal from the West Bank. However, the lesson learned from unilaterally pulling out of the Gaza Strip may be affecting continued reluctance to deal with the status of the West Bank.

But with his speech in Cairo, President Obama has on one hand thrown down the gauntlet to Jerusalem to abandon its resistance to a two-state solution with the Palestinians. On the other hand, it has opened the prospect for a permanent peace accord that will dare the Arab world to end its long time animosity toward the state of Israel. Both challenges will require unprecedented courage and statesmanship from Jews and Arabs. Nonetheless, mistrust characterizes the attitudes of both sides.

It has reinforced the Arab world's belief that the United States is irrevocably aligned with Israel and can never expect a sympathetic peaceful initiative that would lead to a peaceful resolution satisfactory to the Palestinians. The Israelis believe that neither the Palestinians or the rest of the Arab world will ever grant them legitimacy by recognizing their status of nationhood. President Obama recognizes this gulf as he explained in a surprisingly candid interview following his Cairo speech that he had with seven journalists from Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia. the Palestinian Authority, Israel, Malaysia and Indonesia.

I have visited Israel innumerable times and talked to Israeli and Palestinian political figures, journalists and academic experts since 1967 when I first walked across the Golan Heights at the invitation of the Israeli Defense Forces. Having seen the ruins of the Syrian army, knowing the fate of the Egyptian army at the hands of Ariel Sharon, I was convinced that a peaceful accord with its Arab enemies was inevitable. That hunch was furthered by a conversation I had with Moshe Dayan, the daring commander of Israel's Defense Forces whom I had met earlier in Vietnam when he went to understand the U.S. use of helicopters in combat. Dayan predicted that the occupation of the territories could not be permanent. "It would be like a cancer around our throats," he said. Unfortunately, according to Israeli historians I interviewed, Dayan never had the clout to convince Israel's political leadership of his conviction.

For decades, unfortunately, friends of Israel in the United States have been telling its political leaders that the continued intransigence with regard to the territories, both in the West Bank and Gaza, was a hopeless impediment to peace. But these voices are by no means in the majority. Other well-funded American friends have encouraged the right wing within the Israeli political system to believe that resistance to withdrawal from the West Bank, as it has from Gaza, is something that can be deferred indefinitely with little consequences.

Obama recognizes the divisions within the American Jewish community. He knows many prominent Jews from his days in law school and his years as a professor at the University of Chicago. David Axelrod, his senior staff advisor, and Rahm Emanuel, his Chief of Staff, are the first Jews ever to hold the two top staff positions in the White House. But he obviously is counting on the dynamics within Israel to have its greatest impact. That is why he has dared the Israelis to walk down paths they have never walked before by having an American president for the first time tell the leaders of Hamas and other violence-prone Arab leaders that they must recognize the legitimacy of Israel's existence as a condition of a permanent peace with the Jewish state. That's tough medicine for the Palestinians to swallow, but perhaps even tougher for Benjamin Netanyahu to believe.

Obama said he had met with Netanyahu several times, first as a senator and then as president. "In each case, I found him a very intelligent person, an excellent communicator.... So I believe (he) will recognize the strategic need to deal with this issue and in some ways he may have an opportunity that a Labor or left leader may not have."

As an unflinching opponent of peace with the Arabs in the past, the odds are heavily against the Israeli prime minister ever shocking world public opinion. But he has the opportunity of reversing course and placing the responsibility for such a daring move on Barack Obama's back. It would give Israel's right wing leader an unprecedented opportunity to strike a Nixon-like pose and reach out to the Palestinians the way the late American president did to the Chinese Communists in 1972 by going to Beijing and Shanghai to shake hands with Mao Zedong to sign unprecedented protocols that changed Sino-American relations in a profound and historic manner. It would be unheard of in Israeli as well as American circles to ever think of Netanyahu as a peacemaker. But then who can forget the Sadat-Begin meeting during the Carter presidency? That was the kind of daring move that altered Nixon's image on China before he was sunk by Watergate.

Comments

[krompessor]

Any person who sees them selves as "pro Israel" must agree with President Obama. It is ultimately in Israel's best interest to stop the occupation. If they continue on the same path since 1967, expand settlements, and deny the Palestinians their own country. Then they must give the Palestinian people the same freedom and civil rights that the Israeli citizens receive. This means the RIGHT TO VOTE. Of course that would completely change everything in Israel. So if a person who was "pro Israeli" would be wise to see that Obama is thinking of their best interest.

.....Any time a person or a leader claims "Israel is illegitimate and should not exist". Israeli government and spokesmen scream over and over claims of "anti-semetic raciscm".And insist on their neighbors to claim Israel's right to exist, YET THEY DENY A PALESTINIAN STATE'S RIGHT TO EXIST???

[jgarbuz]

The Arabs denied the right of any Palestinian state to exist when they rejected the 1948 UN partition plan, then illegally attacked Israel, and even after the first war, refused to make peace with Israel. In addition, Jordan annexed Judah and Samaria and called it the West Bank and Egypt administered Gaza till 1967. No Palestinian state was created during those nearly 20 years of Arab rule. The underlying truth is, they do not want a state NEXT to Israel, but only to eventually eliminate the UN authorized Jewish state. In fact, there were no "settlements" until 1975, a full six years after 1967 war because the Arabs refused to make peace with Israel. Now they hope to get the US to roll Israel back. I don't think it will happen.

[arvay]

The only solution is a single democratic state that gives equal rights to Arabs and Jews.

The West bank settlers don't have to move, but they'll need to adjust to several hundred thousand new neighbors.

True, israel will no longer be a "Jewish state," just as South Africa is no longer a nation constitutionally decreed to be white-led. The Israelis need to decide whether they'd rather survive in such an arrangement, or go down fighting in some grotesque, prolonged Masada.

I think these are the only alternatives. The current course will inevitably lead to more war, more fighting and possibly -- nuclear exchanges in the region.

Some Israelis are starting to discuss really crazy actions, such as clearing all the Arabs out of Israel and the West Bank to defuse the "demographic bomb." The idea that Israel could round up and expel millions of people (are they going to just get onto trucks?) without triggering a war is outlandishly absurd -- the "host" nations -- presumably Lebanon and Jordan -- would have to mobilize their armed forces to cope and three hostile armies in close contact with hordes of angry dispossessed people is a sure formula for an explosion. And Israel's nuclear weapons are useless that that range.

None of this needs to happen and if the South African blacks and whites and Rwandan Hutus and Tutsis can reconcile -- so can Jews and Arabs.

[JerryLevy]

Israel tried everything for peace except agreeing to it's own death. They signed the Oslo accords, they withdrew from territories and adhered to interim agreements and continued to negotiate even after the Palestinians suicide terrorism campaign killed thousands of innocents. Ehud Barach desperately tried at Camp David to reach an agreement but Arafat said no and launched a second illegal war. If the average Israeli thought pulling out of the West Bank and sharing E. Jerusalem would give them peace, they would do it tomorrow. It is what they offered at Camp David. Most Israelis want a 2 state solution if they can have peace but most Palestinians in poll after poll want to use the two state solution as an interim step to continue the war on Israel. They usually couch it in such euphamisms as "two state solution with right of return" which simply means the end of Israel.

[ToddHollywood]

And all Israel ever asks is that the Palestinians agree to their own deaths. The Camp David proposal was nothing less than a death warrant for the Palestinian people at the hands of the Israelis. Anyone whose actually looked at, and who isn't biased in a pro-Israel way, can see that.

[batguano]

The writer sez: "President Obama has on one hand thrown down the gauntlet to Jerusalem to abandon its resistance to a two-state solution with the Palestinians"

Surely he means Tel Aviv, not Jerusalem, that is not recognised by the international community or the US as the capital of Israel and their declared annexation is likewise not recognised. The writer seeks to push pro-Israaeli propaganda with this statement on the status of Jerusalem. East Jerusalem is occupied territory and Israel has for decaeds attempted to ethnically cleanse the area to solidify their control and colonization by Jews, while discriminating and abusing the Palestinian population. Jerusalem was supposed to have been an open city admisistered by an international body.

http://www.wrmea.com/archives/July_2005/0507016.html

[GZLives]

Jerusalem is the capitol of Israel whether you want it to be or you don't or whether every country in the world recognizes it or not.

Jerusalem has forever been the Jewish capitol city. Ask any Jew if he or she has ever heard or said "next year in Jerusalem" ? We've all been saying it since the Romans threw us out and it won't change because others object. That's a joke.

Others, like the United Nations who invites a Holocaust denier to address an important conference on human rights and is applauded by the Secretary General? Others like the European Union who's members collectively stood by and watched millions of us, then citizens of those countries, carted away in cattle cars and gassed and burned or thrown in pits like animal carcasses?
We're supposed to care that these others object?

[ToddHollywood]

The Israelis can say whatever they want. the fact is that it is not recognized as sovereign Israeli territory by many or most countries.

[JerryLevy]

East Jerusalem was majority Jewish by about 1860 and was almost all Jewish until 1947 when the Jordanians ethnically cleansed them on 24 hours notice without property. Jordan then committed the blasphamous act of destroying 50 Jewish religious institutions and holy sites. No Jews were allowed into E. Jerusalem between 1947 and 1967. Now some try to say that E. Jerusalem is historically Arab and belongs to the Palestinians.

[ToddHollywood]

And Palestine (including the land now called 'israel') was majority Arab until they were ethnically cleaned by the Jewish terrorists prior to and after the announcement of the Israeli state. But that doesn't stop you from claiming the country is historically jewish.

And the Israelis got their "revenge" by the liquidation of the Morroccan quarter, destroying property on no notice, resulting in innocent killing, accompanied by the blasphamous act of mosque destruction (something the Israelis have done repeatedly as they stole the land of Palestine.) What comes around goes around.

[Athena123]

I think it has been obvious to objective people, for some time, that a two-state solution is the only viable solution.

[MrBadger]

Sadly Israel has almost no motivation to push for peace. If there were ever peace they would have to stop their expanding acquisition of surrounding lands and deal with the issues. But as long as they can keep the Palestinians stirred up and belligerent, they have "cover" for not doing anything and continuing to slowly absorbing everything around them. Sadly, the Palestinians seem only to happy to oblige by continuing the violence. And the United States, as well as other onlookers, seem incapable of making any sort of meaningful effort to convince the Palestinians that we are aware of their plight and will actually do something about it. And the longer this goes on the more likely that it will end in something tragic on a massive scale. At least we are making some baby steps. But there are miles and miles to go before anything like actual progress is possible.

[GZLives]

The Palestinians created their "plight" ... they have rejected a state each time it was offered going back to 1947. Who are you all kidding with this myth so many of you continue to perpetuate here. Hamas rejects peace. The Arabs attacked Israel in 1947 and again in 1967.

The selective amnesia here is just out of control

[ToddHollywood]

Yeah, for over 120 years, the Palestinians have announced to the Zionists and their supporters, "Come steal our land, ethnically cleanse our villages, murder our children in cold blood." Sure, the victims are responsible for their own plight.

[SiberianRat]

Check out the Jerusalem Post (www.jpost.com)--you'll see that Israel has NO intentions of making peace. Not only that, the vitriol and hatred lobbed at Obama and the US make Limbaugh look moderate.

[courtb]

We should absolutely judge Israelis by the Jerusalem Post. Just as they should judge Americans by fox news.

[GZLives]

Check out the Jerusalem Post?
I assume you read Hebrew SIberian Rat because Israelis don't read the English version.

Apparently you're judging Israelis by what only those from English speaking countries and a handful of English speaking Israelis are saying.
Pretty silly to draw any conclusions from any of it don't you think?

[Freenation]

the road to peace will be eventually paved directly between Israelis and Palestinia­ns...Obama should make sure to lose the A.IPAC to ensure a smooth construction....

[EspressoAtNoon]

"However, the lesson learned from unilaterally pulling out of the Gaza Strip may be affecting continued reluctance to deal with the status of the West Bank."

- This Gaza point is a red herring. Israel quit Gaza and then proceeded to choke it off from all trade, from getting medicine, food, clean water, and electricity. Israel's blockade essentially created a Warsaw Ghetto. And if I were held like a prisoner in a Warsaw Ghetto, I'd be launching whatever I could into my oppressor's territory at every opportunity as well.

And now Israel has the audacity to act as though the gave freedom to the Gazans and got rockets in return? How disingenuous and misleading!

The entire Israeli perspective seems to be built upon lies, half-truths, and historic revisionism.

[SiberianRat]

So true.

[Doomestic]

Great post.

[NourCA]

Boomshakalaka! The hammer just dropped. I'd vote for you.

[courtb]

Actually...false. Israel left Gaza with the promise of an eventual airport and control of their own borders. It wasn't until the election of Hamas and their eventual hostile takeover that the blockade began.

And considering rockets have been firing since 2001, you are right, it is disingenuous and misleading. Rocket fire merely increased once the Israelis left and increased once again once the blockade began-in response to rocketfire.

[who38]

Hear, hear.

[Thaigold]

Given the situation in Palestine, it would be interesting to hear from our posters on how the Palestinians are to recover their lands - their nation.
The Israelis have F16’s, American battle tanks, and unlimited support from their friends and fellow travelers in New York.
The Palestinians? No high-tech weapons, no rich uncle in the west, no support in the UN. The Palestinians have only people who are ready and willing to give all for their families, their nation, and their God.
The Jews in Israeli are doing to the Palestinians what the Germans did to the Jews 70 years ago, only on a smaller scale. The only difference is, the Nazis did it quick-time, the Israelis are doing their own ethnic cleansing in slow motion, of course censored by American TV.
Some might ask how the nascent Israel defeated the British in Palestine and Trans-Jordan. Guess what they used? Terrorism.
May we have the alternative?

P.s. We might also ask why a Tel Aviv bombing gets top CNN billing, yet the daily deaths of Palestinian children are left in a void – totally absent from the US media.
Well, we know the answer to that one don’t we?
Please instruct, if I'm missing something please illuminate.

[EspressoAtNoon]

Yep, that sums it up pretty well. Fortunately, after Iraq and now the rush to bomb Iran, Americans are starting to wise up.

[SiberianRat]

Again, so true.

[courtb]

Actually, the terrorism got the Israelis very little. It was political lobbying that got the UN support and led to the partition plan.

And what do the Palestinians have? 57 Muslim countries, many very oil rich. Unique UN refugee status that no refugees in the world have. Aid organizations, including UN ones, dedicated to supporting the Palestinian people. How can you claim they have no support in the UN?

Finally, can we please be honest here. Point out, specifically, how the Israelis are doing the same thing as Nazi Germany. Where are the Nuremberg laws? Where are the trains? Where are the pits of bodies? Where are the gas chambers and concentration camps? Where are the death marches? Where is the Israeli governmental policy of genocide? And finally, over 1/3 of the Jewish population of the world died in less than 10 years...in more than 60 years, the Palestinian population has boomed.

[rubberstamp]

I think the nazi reference has more to do with the ghetto/refugee camps where the Palestinians are forced to live. The constant humiliation of check points. The confiscation and demolition of homes. The walling off of certain neighborhoods. The military occupation, the daily murder of Palestinians constantly under reported by the US media . The demolition of public services, the destruction of farm land, the detention of thousands, the blocking of travel, the bombardments, the redirection of water supplies. The foreign news blockade. The recent proposed loyalty oaths. These are how regimes such as the third riecht began. You can not avoid the similarities related to these matters. No one is saying they are the "same " but the actions of the nazi's arose out of tremendous fear and desperation. They tried all these forms of supression until they came to their "final solution".

[Macready]

I'm with you Thaigold . . . the 3billion that goes to israel should be going to the Palestiinians . . .they have suffered for European anti-semitism and british colonialism . . . the creation of israel was a crime

[Joel Keller]

I think it's about time for some kind of sign by the Arab side. Israel has done enough -- giving up the Sinai and Gaza. The Arabs only want Israel to "go away" or better yet, "lie down and die."

It's time for them to do something positive, if they're even capable.

[SiberianRat]

And what should the West Bank Palestinians do, go away, or lie down and die?

[whoa20]

if Judea and Samaria are given to the Arabs, the question is: what is next?

[jgarbuz]

The 21 Arab states should finally give them citizenship and work rights The solution to the "Palestinian problem" lies not in the disappearance of Israel, but in the absorption of 11 million Palestinians into the 21 Arab states.

[Doomestic]

The Arab peace initiative was laid on the table for more than 7 years with Israel outright rejecting it. It calls for collective recognition of Israel and security guarantees in return for 1967 borders, East Jerusalem and a mutually agreed path towards solving the refugee crisis.

What did Israel do? It rejected it.

[whoa20]

because the Arabs have a double standard with regards to the so-called "right of return." The definition for "refugee" for Palestinians is a different one than other refugees, which is fundamentally unfair. Why should Israel take in 4 million Arabs AND make them their own state? Wouldn't that kill the purpose? Why should Israel give up its nukes, given that they fought with the US in the Cold War, and have been attacked numerous times by Arabs?

Israel accepted a two state deal in 1936, 1948, and 2000. Palestinian Arabs did not.

[jgarbuz]

This so called "Arab initiative" is nothing but a DIKTAT. At best, if Israel withdraws to the 1949 Armistice lines, and allows in millions of "refugees" the Arabs agree to "normalize" relations with Israel. My mother was from Poland. In 1938 both Germany and Russia had "normal" relations with Poland. The problem is, neither accepted Poland's RIGHT TO EXIST and a year later eliminated it, by dividing it's territory between themselves. This is what the Arabs mean by "normalization." To wait until the time is right to eliminate it. NO way Jose. We Jews have a long historical memory and too darn much harsh experience.

[NourCA]

Terrible post Mr.Keller. Besides, this is a Palestinian-Israeli issue.

[S1m0n]

Pulling out of Gaza was a strategic decision made by Ariel Sharon. it was no kind of concession, act of generousity, or even attempt at peace. Sharon's strategy was to turn Gaza into a Palestinian 'Bantustan' into which Palestinian residents of the remainder of the OT could be pushed when Israel annexes all the territory inside its apartheid wall.

It was, in other words, another face of an aggressive military act. Not any kind of concession. The current Israeli claims that this amounted to having 'tried peace' and found it sour is laughable.

[zaz33]

simon - three reasons for pulling out of Gaza.

1. The occupation was too costly.

2. To get Israeli Jews out of harms way for the the planned "cast lead" attack.

3. Israel was drawing water from the Gaza aquifer and the water had turned saline because too much had been taken.

[whoa20]

so wait? If Israel pulls out of Judea and Samaria, will that also be making it a "Bantustan?"

Is anything good enough for you?

[Doomestic]

Yes, giving Palestinians sovereignty over their soil, Air and sea borders is good enough for me. Pulling out militarily and strangling them economically and physically is not.