What Peace Talks?
When Israel was reeling under constant suicide attacks by Arab terrorists using their bodies as human bombs to detonate themselves in buses, in restaurants, in crowded areas to dispatch as many Israelis as possible, in an explosive confetti of blood, flesh, sinew and muscles torn asunder, it was clear something had to be done. A wall, separating Israelis from Palestinians was slowly built, and the suicide bombings decreased in number, and finally were halted.
The world denounced Israel as a brutal apartheid state, and continues to do so. One can overlook such criticism when the result of the separation has been the safeguarding of one's people. But it is an aggravating reality that to protect the population of a state by using the only means at their disposal of a practical nature, shrill condemnation rains down on the 'humanity' of the decision to separate people. Given the alternative, the decision was a wise one.
Imagine, if Israel instead decided to wantonly lob poison gas over the border at the West Bank to 'chastise' Palestinians, that if they continued to act in such a viciously aggressive manner, more would follow. Wouldn't that bring the world to a slathering denial of Jewish humanity? Well, Egypt, a neighbour of Israel, is nervous that Gazan Arabs, who were not that long ago, Egyptian Arabs, may once again over-run its border, encouraged by Hamas.
Egypt does not relish a repeat of January 2008's event when hundreds of thousands of Gazans destroyed the fence bordering Gaza and Egypt. Both Israel and Egypt are more than a little offended at the existence of tunnels running from the borders of both countries into Gaza where anything transportable, from weapons, to kitchen appliances, terrorists to motorcars are smuggled into Gaza. Egypt thought that sinking a deep and tall metal barrier would ameliorate the situation. It has not.
Some tunnels have collapsed while smugglers were ferrying goods through them. The collapse caused by the tunnel opening being blown up. And the smugglers within meeting their end. But Egypt has other means of apprehending the busy trade that so benefits Hamas through the heavy toll they charge for the tunnels. It has been using poison gas against tunnel smugglers. Egypt has been charged by Hamas with killing 40 smugglers with the use of poison gas. Over 100 have died because of tunnel collapses.
Each country has its own method of dealing with those who insist on bringing ruination down upon themselves through novel and enterprising assaults. The point being that violence and incessant attempts at destabilization are part and parcel of life in the Middle East. Israel visualizes itself being able to live in peace and harmony with its neighbours. Instead, throughout the duration of its existence it has had to arm itself in defence of its neighbours' designs on its existence.
Peace talks, after years of violent conflict - demonstrated that Israel was no push-over, that combined Arab states' forces would not be capable of seeing the country retreat from its solid position as a lawful state - failed, one set after another. Even when Israel forced itself to surrender to demands it had no wish to fulfill, in the end, it was the Palestinians who demonstrated time and again their lack of sincerity for ending the impasse.
Israel and the Palestinian Authority descended from direct peace talks to negotiated indirect peace talks. And even those indirect peace talks have been placed on hold, because of Palestinian demands that had to be placated; primarily an end to building in Jerusalem and the West Bank. But these are pretexts for an unwillingness to negotiate. Yet indirect talks are on again, with the Arab League agreeing to support U.S. initiatives to drive both sides into negotiations.
The PA's chief negotiator insists that the talks must conclude with all of the Palestinian demands accepted, with a four-month window. What precisely is the point of talks, direct or indirect if there are demands which cannot be accepted to begin with? Israel will not accept the return of millions of Palestinians, inclusive of descendants of the original 800,000 or so that fled the area. The West Bank Premier, Salam Fayyad sensibly feels that returnees should logically settle within the West Bank; will Saeb Erekat respect that?
Would it not make eminently good sense for the two solitudes to trade land, so that West Bank Jewish settlements could be included within a re-drawn Israel border, and a new Palestinian state be broadened by scooping out an area within the current Israeli border containing Palestinian communities to be embraced by the new Palestinian state? And why divide Jerusalem again as it was when Jordan held the area, refusing Jewish entry to Judaic holy sites, when the current situation could be maintained.
The area upon which the Dome of the Rock sits is administered by Muslims, and would continue to be. The aggressive denials of Jewish entry to the Temple Mount, however, should be discontinued. Israel's ancient capital should be recognized for what it is; the heritage of Judaic presence, timeless and as infinite as any religious-social-political construct upon this Earth can be. Recognized and honoured for what it has always meant to Jews throughout the eternity of their six-thousand-year existence.
The Palestinian Authority and the Arab League insists on its pre-conditions, on their 'right' to destroy all hopes for future direct, meaningful, useful and practical decision-making, should they feel that Israel has undertaken to offend them once again by building units where Israel feels it has the legal and moral right to, and her adversaries feel otherwise. If so, talks, particularly toothless indirect talks, are doomed to failure.
Which is precisely the point, with the PA strategizing that with international support on its side a unilateral proclamation for an independent country will succeed. It was the PA that broke off direct negotiations, on the pretext that they were outraged at Israel's defensive move into Gaza to halt the ongoing rocket attacks across its border. However, given the history of peace talks between the two entities historically, and the results thereof, it's doubtful whether those direct talks would have resulted in anything meaningful.
It is the aura, the expectations, the sense of entitlements which pre-conditions on one side and not the other are to be tolerated, respected and surrendered to, that must be changed. And they will not be, not as long as the United States delivers its covert, but well understood message to the Palestinians that whatever they seek to obtain will be theirs and that Israel must struggle with the understanding that it must surrender to all demands made of it to achieve peace.
What kind of peace will result from such coercion and imbalance, in any event. A partner in peace whose dedication to ensuring that new generations are raised in an atmosphere of violent antipathy toward a neighbour, one engaged in slander and vilification of a neighbour that desperately attempts to protect itself from violence which it well knows is fomented and encouraged by those who will establish a state alongside their own.
The Palestinian Authority, in establishing their new independent state will have the assurance, as always, that the other states in the Middle East will back their existence, with diplomatic pressures and the threat of war in a combined onslaught against Israel. Israel has no assurances whatever that a new neighbour will settle down to living amicably side by side, withdrawing itself from the old familiar inspirations to assault.
Check and checkmate.
The world denounced Israel as a brutal apartheid state, and continues to do so. One can overlook such criticism when the result of the separation has been the safeguarding of one's people. But it is an aggravating reality that to protect the population of a state by using the only means at their disposal of a practical nature, shrill condemnation rains down on the 'humanity' of the decision to separate people. Given the alternative, the decision was a wise one.
Imagine, if Israel instead decided to wantonly lob poison gas over the border at the West Bank to 'chastise' Palestinians, that if they continued to act in such a viciously aggressive manner, more would follow. Wouldn't that bring the world to a slathering denial of Jewish humanity? Well, Egypt, a neighbour of Israel, is nervous that Gazan Arabs, who were not that long ago, Egyptian Arabs, may once again over-run its border, encouraged by Hamas.
Egypt does not relish a repeat of January 2008's event when hundreds of thousands of Gazans destroyed the fence bordering Gaza and Egypt. Both Israel and Egypt are more than a little offended at the existence of tunnels running from the borders of both countries into Gaza where anything transportable, from weapons, to kitchen appliances, terrorists to motorcars are smuggled into Gaza. Egypt thought that sinking a deep and tall metal barrier would ameliorate the situation. It has not.
Some tunnels have collapsed while smugglers were ferrying goods through them. The collapse caused by the tunnel opening being blown up. And the smugglers within meeting their end. But Egypt has other means of apprehending the busy trade that so benefits Hamas through the heavy toll they charge for the tunnels. It has been using poison gas against tunnel smugglers. Egypt has been charged by Hamas with killing 40 smugglers with the use of poison gas. Over 100 have died because of tunnel collapses.
Each country has its own method of dealing with those who insist on bringing ruination down upon themselves through novel and enterprising assaults. The point being that violence and incessant attempts at destabilization are part and parcel of life in the Middle East. Israel visualizes itself being able to live in peace and harmony with its neighbours. Instead, throughout the duration of its existence it has had to arm itself in defence of its neighbours' designs on its existence.
Peace talks, after years of violent conflict - demonstrated that Israel was no push-over, that combined Arab states' forces would not be capable of seeing the country retreat from its solid position as a lawful state - failed, one set after another. Even when Israel forced itself to surrender to demands it had no wish to fulfill, in the end, it was the Palestinians who demonstrated time and again their lack of sincerity for ending the impasse.
Israel and the Palestinian Authority descended from direct peace talks to negotiated indirect peace talks. And even those indirect peace talks have been placed on hold, because of Palestinian demands that had to be placated; primarily an end to building in Jerusalem and the West Bank. But these are pretexts for an unwillingness to negotiate. Yet indirect talks are on again, with the Arab League agreeing to support U.S. initiatives to drive both sides into negotiations.
The PA's chief negotiator insists that the talks must conclude with all of the Palestinian demands accepted, with a four-month window. What precisely is the point of talks, direct or indirect if there are demands which cannot be accepted to begin with? Israel will not accept the return of millions of Palestinians, inclusive of descendants of the original 800,000 or so that fled the area. The West Bank Premier, Salam Fayyad sensibly feels that returnees should logically settle within the West Bank; will Saeb Erekat respect that?
Would it not make eminently good sense for the two solitudes to trade land, so that West Bank Jewish settlements could be included within a re-drawn Israel border, and a new Palestinian state be broadened by scooping out an area within the current Israeli border containing Palestinian communities to be embraced by the new Palestinian state? And why divide Jerusalem again as it was when Jordan held the area, refusing Jewish entry to Judaic holy sites, when the current situation could be maintained.
The area upon which the Dome of the Rock sits is administered by Muslims, and would continue to be. The aggressive denials of Jewish entry to the Temple Mount, however, should be discontinued. Israel's ancient capital should be recognized for what it is; the heritage of Judaic presence, timeless and as infinite as any religious-social-political construct upon this Earth can be. Recognized and honoured for what it has always meant to Jews throughout the eternity of their six-thousand-year existence.
The Palestinian Authority and the Arab League insists on its pre-conditions, on their 'right' to destroy all hopes for future direct, meaningful, useful and practical decision-making, should they feel that Israel has undertaken to offend them once again by building units where Israel feels it has the legal and moral right to, and her adversaries feel otherwise. If so, talks, particularly toothless indirect talks, are doomed to failure.
Which is precisely the point, with the PA strategizing that with international support on its side a unilateral proclamation for an independent country will succeed. It was the PA that broke off direct negotiations, on the pretext that they were outraged at Israel's defensive move into Gaza to halt the ongoing rocket attacks across its border. However, given the history of peace talks between the two entities historically, and the results thereof, it's doubtful whether those direct talks would have resulted in anything meaningful.
It is the aura, the expectations, the sense of entitlements which pre-conditions on one side and not the other are to be tolerated, respected and surrendered to, that must be changed. And they will not be, not as long as the United States delivers its covert, but well understood message to the Palestinians that whatever they seek to obtain will be theirs and that Israel must struggle with the understanding that it must surrender to all demands made of it to achieve peace.
What kind of peace will result from such coercion and imbalance, in any event. A partner in peace whose dedication to ensuring that new generations are raised in an atmosphere of violent antipathy toward a neighbour, one engaged in slander and vilification of a neighbour that desperately attempts to protect itself from violence which it well knows is fomented and encouraged by those who will establish a state alongside their own.
The Palestinian Authority, in establishing their new independent state will have the assurance, as always, that the other states in the Middle East will back their existence, with diplomatic pressures and the threat of war in a combined onslaught against Israel. Israel has no assurances whatever that a new neighbour will settle down to living amicably side by side, withdrawing itself from the old familiar inspirations to assault.
Check and checkmate.
Labels: Inconvenient Politics, Israel, Middle East
posted by Pieface | 7:58 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home