It is such a shibboleth in U.S. foreign-policy discourse these days– to say that such-and-such an issue on the final-status agenda between Israelis and Palestinians “must be solved through direct negotiations between the parties”. But why? Why on earth should the Palestinian representatives be forced into a position of being shut in a room one-on-one with representatives of their Israeli occupiers/dispossessors, with that highly unequal “negotiation” being the only one that’s allowed?
I mean, after Saddam Hussein had occupied and politicided Kuwait in 1990, did anyone in the U.S. and elsewhere say to the Kuwaiti Emir that if he wanted his people’s rights restored he should sit one-on-one in room with Saddam, with that negotiation being the only one that was allowed??
Of course not.
So why should Washington be continuously trying to force the Palestinian negotiators to resolve their issues with Israel
Look, I think I understand where this demand– which was originally an Israeli demand– that the various Arab parties should sit down and negotiate peace with them directly, face-to-face, came from. It came from the sense that many in earlier generations of Israelis had, that they were upset at the refusal of their Arab neighbors to give their state due recognition as a neighboring state in the region; and they said that it would give them a lot of useful reassurance if they could gain the “recognition” of having their Arab neighbors deal directly and respectfully with them.
I have two comments on that:
- 1. The PLO already gave the State of Israel full recognition, in the letters that were exchanged at the time of Oslo in 1993. And after that, PLO leaders sat down with the Israelis to negotiate both a final peace and numerous ‘interim’ agreements, on too many occasions to count. But none of those ‘direct negotiations’ led to anything like a workable final peace. Indeed, from the Palestinian point of view, the situation on the ground continued to get progressively worse after Oslo, as with every year that passed the Israeli authorities continued to gobble up more and more Palestinian land for their settler colonies.
2. The Israeli leaders, and increasing portions of the Israeli public, don’t actually seem to give a toss these days about either the “acceptance” of their Palestinian or other Arab neighbors, or even the alleged “value” of direct negotiations with them. Right now, this seems to have become much more an American shibboleth and demand, than it is an Israeli one.
So on the one hand it’s moderately good news when Hillary Clinton or someone says that Israel should absolutely not be building new settler housing in East Jerusalem. But it is really pretty appalling that in the next breath she will say something like, “because the final status of East Jerusalem should still be on the agenda of the direct negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians.”
Like downtown Kuwait City? They expected the Kuwaiti Emir to sit down and negotiate that with Saddam, with no other factors intervening?
Okay, I am a realist, and I understand it is highly unlikely that anyone in the international community as it’s currently configured is going to do for Palestine what the international community did for Kuwait in August 1990. The U.S. and U.N are not, this time around, about to assemble a massive international military force and end the Israeli occupation through brute force.
But there is still such a thing as international law, and international legitimacy; and they, surely, should be the guide to the final outcome in Jerusalem and the rest of the OPTs and OSTs, just as much as they were in Kuwait, 20 years ago.
International legitimacy: “The inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force”, as stressed in resolution 242 and reiterated in 338. International law: The outright ban on any occupying power moving parts of its own civilian population into occupied territory. Etc., etc.
The whole concept of ‘direct negotiations’ between Israelis and Palestinians has been given an extraordinarily long run for its money. It started in the backdoor negotiations that led to Oslo, and continued in one way or another until, really, Sharon turned his back on the whole idea of negotiating with the PLO/PA, back in 2003-05. I guess Olmert and Condi Rice tried to kick some life back into the concept at Annapolis. But that whole sorry experience just proved how dead the horse was by then.
It strikes me that the continued insistence on just trying to resolve this conflict through direct negotiations, without any application of international law or international legitimacy, or any real support from outside for those important pillars of the international system, is a recipe for either the Israeli sumo kings ramming a highly inequitable (and therefore unsustainable) “peace agreement” down the throats of the Palestinian negotiators– or, for continued deadlock and conflict, under the cover of which Israel’s settlement construction program will continue apace.
For an “unsustainable” agreement achieved in just this way, think back to Israel’s short-lived peace with Lebanon, 1983.
… It strikes me, too, that this fondness that ways too many members of the US political elite have for “direct negotiations” stems to some degree from a fuzzy but dangerous misreading of what happened in South Africa. There is always this stress on “where’s the Palestinian Mandela?”, isn’t there? And this idea that through the sheer force of his personality, vision, and whatever else, Mandela was quite “miraculously” able to soften the Afrikaners’ hearts and persuade them to see the error of their ways, “allow” full political rights to the disfranchized 85% of the citizens who were not “White”, and join in singing Kumbaya, etc.
Baloney.
The Afrikaners found themselves “persuaded” to negotiate as a result of many factors. Among them: the fact that they’d suffered a damaging military setback in Angola, as a result of the over-extension of their forces there; the fact that the ANC’s mass-civilian arm, the UDF, had sustained a huge, rolling intifada throughout just about the whole of the country over a number of years, making massive tracts of it quite ungovernable; and the ANC still sustained a modest military capability (which had been founded, remember, by that very same Nelson Mandela, a man with a nuanced view of the relationship between mass movements and military threats)… PLUS, back in the 1970s the UN had declared apartheid to be a “crime against humanity”, and by the end of the 1980s, South Africa’s “Whites” were certainly feeling the effect of having been systematically shunned for several years by many of the international constituencies they cared most about.
So it wasn’t the sheer “magic” of Nelson Mandela sitting in the conference room near Pollsmoor prison with Pik Botha and F.W. de Klerk that led to the unraveling of the settler-colonial project in South Africa. It was Nelson Mandela, backed up by a powerful and disciplined ANC movement– and also, by that time, by just about the whole moral and economic power of the international community.
If F.W. De Klerk and his minions had had full and continuing access to U.S. arsenals and U.S. and E.U. free trade agreements in 1989-90, do you think De Klerk would have been suddenly “transformed” by having one-on-one meetings with Mandela??
So why do we imagine that Benjamin Netanyahu or any other Israeli leaders would be any different?
Get real, America. Stop engaging in all these fuzzy misreadings of what went on in South Africa. And let’s get back to upholding the real and very necessary principles of international law and international legitimacy– and using all the instruments of our national power to back them up.
HC: “So why should Washington be continuously trying to force the Palestinian negotiators to resolve their issues with Israel through direct negotiations with the very state and government that has occupied and continues on a daily basis to spatiocide them?”
And, I would add, why should Washington condemn the Palestinians for resisting this occupation with force, when that is an historically acceptable way to deal with illegal occupations? (In this case, an occupation that was declared illegal by unanimous vote of the UN Security Council over 42 years ago.)
Well, we know why. It’s because Washington has totally taken the side of the occupiers, causing the US to demand that the occupieds negotiate with the occupiers, with pre-conditions placed on the former, and we also know that nothing has changed in this regard with the new administration. Nothing.
The Palestinians refuse to negotiate, particularly on US/Israeli terms, and I don’t blame them. History is on their side (one state). The US/Israel side doesn’t really want to negotiate either, in spite of their pretenses, but they are (typically) short-sighted.
You are right about SA and Mandela, Helena.
Also about the role of the Cuban expeditionary force that outmanoeuvred the SADF so comprehensively. The debt we owe to the Cubans is greater than to any other component of our multi-faceted and worldwide struggle. They died for us in their thousands.
BTW there is going to be a conference from 12 April 2010 in Pretoria that looks like a soft-hasbara revival rally for I/P two-state baloney, featuring two-staters of yesteryear like Ronnie Kasrils.
In other words, for as much as “Israeli Apartheid” is a stick to beat the Israeli colonialists with, so also is the SA two-state clique that Thabo Mbeki fostered a weapon in the hands of the obscurantists and the temporisers.
I believe in direct negotiations and armed struggle should work toghter and go hand in hand in order to reach to a final agreement for the exesitance of two state solution. If we look at Israeli policy they are always talking about negotiation but its implement of military forces enforcing the expantion of settlements are continuing.
Hafid
Hafid, I admire very much your belief in armed
struggle, but don’t understand why you don’t
join up with Palestinian freedom fighters yourself
instead of always hiding out in the safety and
comfort of your living room and urging other people to fight. Why don’t you go to Gaza tomorrow and join up with your friends in the peace movement who are already there? El Al Airlines has many flights to Tel Aviv, and they have a good safety record.
A Donnerwetter: Why don’t you grow up?
When you do you will recognise that, in making light of the atrocious crimes being committed by Israel, you place yourself firmly in the company of the more debauched elements of the SS.
Bevin, you do me an injustice. I am
merely calling on Hafid to take up
arms in the same way way that you
and so many other brave freedom
fighters on this website have done.
“We pledge to fight to the last Palestinian”
is your motto, isn’t it? By the way, could
you fill Hafid and myself in on what you
mean by “the more debauched elements
of the SS.” I confess that neither of us
possesses your expertise on these matters.
Helena, I had understood you to be a Quaker. Your personal views are your own, of course, but you seem to view violence with equanimity, perhaps even approval. I had understood Quakers to be pacifists: am I wrong?
Hello Donnerwetter,
I did sign every comment a wrote with my proper name and didn’t hide out in the safety and comfort of my living room and urging other people to fight as you siad. To let you know I am a son of a martyr I lost my father when I was a little child of two years and six months. I suffered under the french colony and I believe the national cause could be only reached and taken by armed struggle.
I wish you sign with your proper name as I do without hiding yourself behind x name called Donnerwetter.
Hafid
Hello Donnerwetter,
I always write comments with my full proper name.
I did never hide out in the safety and comfort of my living room and urging other people to fight as you said. As a son of a myrtur who lost his father because of french colony when I was a little child of two years and six months. I suffered the occupation and I know well what it is for this reason I do believe in armed struggle at the same time I wish is things be settled peacefully.
I appreciate if you could be kind enough to mention your proper name as I do and don’t hide it behind an X name called Donnerwetter.
Hafid
Hafid,
My name actually is DONNERWETTER, it is German for “thunderstorm” or “stormy weather.”
I am sorry to learn that you lost your father. The Palestinians could have had a state in 1948
alongside Israel, and in the past 60 years have refused many opportunities to create one. Gaza is what it is today because Hamas choose to launch rockets as opposed to creating a state. The Palestinians will never have a state until they first make peace with themselves and then
directly negotiate borders and security arrangements with Israel. People who call on the Palestinians to engage in armed struggle are not their friends, especially when they do it from far, far away over the internet.
Hello Donnerwetter,
Thank you for your sympathy.The Palestinians didn’t choose armed struggle but they are reluctant to take it. The Palestinians are also conscious of their national cause and don(t need anyone to give them lessons about it. To be honest with you, even I have some diffrent views with you I don’t want to argue with I do share with you some other points you mentioned.
Hafid
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/786656–diplomat-hammers-liberals-over-lost-principles
The gentiles are saying it loud and clear: enough is enough hijacking our democracies had become a burden on our national interests . Canada is following ”’
He was brutal in his assessment of the Conservative government’s foreign policy.
He said the Conservatives must “accept the reality and importance of the ironclad link between . . . continuing turmoil and volatility in the Middle East and the rise (and) growing strength of international terrorism.”
But, he said, doing that means confronting Israel, as it “builds ever more settlements in illegally occupied territories in contravention of a myriad of international judgments.”
He said Canadian politicians — and here he seemed to suggest both Liberal and Conservative politicians — refuse to acknowledge that reality for fear of being labelled anti-Semitic.
“It is there for all to see, but apparently politically incorrect to draw attention to it.”
Moreover, he accused Canadian politicians of formulating foreign policy, on the Middle East and on other issues, only with a view to winning votes and scoring political points at home.
He said politicians are merely engaged in “the scramble to lock up the Jewish vote in Canada (and) selling out our widely admired and long-established reputation for fairness and justice. I have no reason to love Islamic extremism or indeed terrorism of any stripe, jihadi or political, but I do deplore the abandonment of our hard-won reputation for objective analysis and decency as a result of our reckless Middle Eastern posturing.”
Thank you, World Peace, for the link to the article in The Star. Canada really must rid itself of its Israel Lobby affliction which under Harper’s Conservative govt. has been becoming steadily worse.
My hope is that the Likuknik Asper family losing most of its control over their CanWest media empire will result in a less toxic editorial policy on matters pertaining to the ME. (Has this indeed been the case?)
Unfortunately, the Globe’s editorial board seems, inexplicably, to have been infiltrated by B’nai Brith. A few editorials the Globe ran during the Gaza onslaught were as morally depraved as anything one would find in the WSJ or Washington Post.
Further observations on the state of play of coverage of Israel/Palestine would be most welcome.
The mother of all fallacies, the alternative to direct negotiations would be indirect negotiations, not some imposed intervention.
Israel would accept a reasonable peace through any indirect process, just bring it. Be my guest, have entity X come with a scheme that satisfies Hamas, Fatah, and Israel and call it a day.
The Palestinians can just show up for the signature, no need to have any direct contact.
As for the lack of a a big entity backing the Palestinians that is Baloney square. Had six Arab countries fight wars for them, had the Russians and the eastern lock behind them, have Iran now plus Syria and the violent half of Lebanon. Have the petrodollars, the voting blocks, the extreme left and the extreme right. From Baader Meinhof to Al Qaeda, from the IRA to Hizbulla, al there.
Just need a Mandela or a Ghandi, but that won’t happen.
The Palestinian Ghandis and Mandelas have either been arrested or assassinated by the IDF.
Anymore Hasbara chestnuts for us?
This is interesting and my take on it is the “Peace Process” is a total fraud engineered by the Likudniks (The only true face of Israel always through time) both in Israel and their “Running Dogs” here in the U.S. It works by keeping the world distracted while Israel swallows the West Bank by inches as a Python would a pig. They’ll keep on with it until all that’s left will be Brazilian style gated enclaves with islands of Palestinian ghetto communities populated with enough day laborers to fill settler needs for cheap car repair, lawn care,drywall hanging, etc. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either taken in by the fraud or part of it.
At this juncture, the only hope for Palestinians is a “one state solution” where they can hope for economic pressure and moral censure from the “international community” to force Israel to cede political rights to them and compel a South African style outcome. Will this ever happen? Ultimately it must, as history dooms the “members only” Israeli state. But it will take a long time.
Oh dear. Sorry.
Try “Gandhi”.
And “Mandella” perhaps? No, maybe not.
You are definitely correct, Agog. Yassir Arafat was the Palestinian Gandhi until the Mossad gave him the dreaded AIDS.
Erik brings up the sensitive issue of “cheap car repair,” which I believe is the first time this important subject has been discussed here. As you know Erik, many of us who count on this blog for reasoned discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict are ourselves in dire need of cheap car repair, particularly Bevin and you. So, with Helena’s permission, I am wondering whether we could start some kind of movement on this website
for providing out-of-work Palestinian mechanics with emergency visas for entering the U.S. providing they agree to make their services available at an attractive price to members of the progressive peace movement. I think AIPAC and the other Zionist groups would be too embarrassed to raise any serious objections and you and Bevin hopefully could get your cars back on the road, where they deserve to be.