The latest terror attack in Israel, and its endorsement by the Hamas party, points up the fact that Hamas is as morally and politically bankrupt as its government will soon be financially bankrupt. This kind of crime cannot be excused or condoned, no matter what the other side has done (for the same reason, I hope that Israel will not retaliate in kind). Considered in terms of its political implications, it only reinforces the logic behind the newly-elected Israeli government’s policies, and the destination to which they point: an imposed settlement based on the wall that is now largely complete, followed by a complete closure of the resulting border. This won’t be a fair or just settlement, but it’s hard to see who will object, given that Hamas opposes any settlement and refuses to negotiate.
More fundamentally, the strategy of terror attacks against Israel has been a disaster for the Palestinian people, particularly over the last decade. Hamas was the leading party pushing Palestinians to reject the Oslo peace process. It’s already clear that no better chance will ever arise for a settlement, and that the eventual outcome, after another decade or more of occupation, will be worse than that on offer from Barak and Clinton.
The only real hope is that the cutoff of funds from the EU and US will bring the unreality of Hamas’ position home to the point where the movement is discredited. Hamas has been promised $50 million by Iran, and Qatar and other states may follow suit, but that won’t last for more than a month or two and it’s unlikely to be followed by more, given that Iran has its own problems.
John Quiggin 
The Palestinians should put the money in a Swiss Bank account (they already are pretty good at that) and keep it for when they need to pay for the clean up after Iran trys to turn Isarael into a glass carpark.
I can understand the USA and others cutting off aid to the Hamas controlled Palestinian Authority.
But I am unconvinced by trade sanctions. Can anybody cast any light on how these are supposed to help?
When you restrict trade you ultimately make average people more dependent on charity, handouts, the government and criminals. I don’t see how it helps to reform a nation, or to change it’s mentality. If anything it will reinforce and engender a defensive bunker down mentality.
Regime change would be less cruel than trade sanctions.
What? Another morally and politically bankrupt government? There seems to be so much of that around at the moment…
On this issue I agree with all you say John.
Have the Palestinians got anything left worth trading Terje? Not much future in hate and besides there is an abundance of competitive supply in the region. A change of management sounds good in theory, but I’m afraid entrenched work practices make any thought of provisional administration out of the question. Time for them to file for bankruptcy and move on themselves. Otherwise I’m afraid we’ll have to call in the….um err, well you know what I mean.
Agreed, PrQ. The problem is who now can lead the Palestinians? Fatah is discredited and split, Hamas was elected because it was not Fatah and was, at that point, still credible in the eyes of the Palestinians and the others seem to be nowhere. Where do they go now?
They are crazed, and they have already blown whatever residual sympathy they might have received as a result of Sharon’s harsher policies.
Here is how the Hamas spokesman described the attacks:
“The Israeli occupation bears responsibility for the continuation of its aggression. Our people are in a state of self-defence and they have every right to use all means to defend themselves”
http://smh.com.au/news/world/israel-blames-hamas-for-blast/2006/04/17/1145126060742.html?page=2
Hamas is still fighting the war from 1948. In the west we seem to dream that the war ended and that what is happening today is some type of arab brand of anti-semitism. In the middle east the Arab street sees the war of 1948 as still ongoing. They are still trying to remove the foreign power and foreign population that was foisted on them by foreign forces that divided Palestine in two. Just as the Danish fought an underground war to expel the Germans in WWII. Just as Australians would have fought a Japanese occupation.
In my view Israel should not have been created in the first place and doing so was a major blunder (by both the UN and the western allies). But obviously the omlet can not be unscrambled. There are only three futures that seem possible:-
1. Two nations side by side in a state of peace.
2. Two nations side by side in a state of perpetual war.
3. One nation annilating the other.
Of the three I think that option 2 is the most likely. It should probably be accepted and the effects minimised. Israel is in essence acknowledging this reality with the construction of the wall.
I doubt sanctions will change this situation but it will cause a lot of human suffering and hardship. It will also ultimately necessitate either the replacement of Hamas by force or the ongoing perpetual misery of the people of Palestine. Neither of which builds anything positive.
In my view a more reasonable response would be:-
1. Cut foreign aid to the Hamas controlled Palestinian Authority as proposed.
2. Prohibit the sale of military grade weapons to the Palestinians whilst they refuse to take the diplomatic route.
3. Allow trade with Palestine and encourage good economic governance so that people can focus on building a future for themselves.
4. Be realistic and accept that Israel is best postitioned to know when it should counter attack and when it should hold its fire.
The situation in Iraq is not yet as entrenched or as hopeless as in Palestine. But lets not forget who created the mess in both cases. Lets try and learn from our mistakes and not compound them with future stuff ups.
I completely agree, other than the statement “it is hard to see who will object”. Actually lots of people will object, ranging from anti-semites at one end through to idealists who hope against hope for a just outcome at the other. Realistically however, I think the best we can hope for is that 1) the wall works, keeping the death toll down and 2) there is eventually some change to its route so that the final boundary is somewhat closer to what would have occured under a just solution. Alas that it has come to this.
“the strategy of terror attacks against Israel has been a disaster for the Palestinian people”
Everything the Palestinians have achieved has come form terrorism. Why stop now
The popularity of Hamas stems from 2 fronts; its’ propriety and its’ refusal to surrender. The current policy will affect it on neither front. In fact, even if the Hamas Govt fails (as is the hope), the Hamas movements popularity will probably increase, as Palestinians will see it as having been brought down by their enemies through no fault of its’ (Hamas’) own. Especially since the current Palestinian perception is that Hamas has been behaving with laudable restraint for the past year.
And when it collapses, then what?
This is a policy that has been thought out with as much clear-headedness as to the outcome, as it was with Iraq. Same people, same policies, likely the same disasterous results.
Depravity breeds depravity. Some English would have you believe the IRA just sprouted from the ground like a potato flower, but they were borne of the injustice wrought on Northern Irish by nominally Irish Protestants not happy to relinquish their role as colonial masters. Likewise, Hamas could not exist without its counterpart- Israeli occupation & oppression, “targeted assassinations” (which usually claim more innocent lives than lives of militants), curfews, incursions, bull dozers, check points, settlement construction, firing of heavy artillery into dense urban areas, etc., etc., etc.
As inexcusable were the actions of the IRA and are the actions of Hamas, they are predictable. When you marginalize an entire people you undermine those who excel in collaborative, constructive society and elevate those that would otherwise be breaking bad debtors legs. When you do it over generations, things can deteriorate quite badly.
Terje, to say “In my view Israel should not have been created in the first place and doing so was a major blunder” is to imply that the current problems are solely due to the presence of Israel.
This was the same argument used previously in Europe.
People forget that the Jews were in Jerusalem long before Jesus and Mohammed were born.
The following statement attributes the continued violence in the Middle East to the poor leadership of the Palestinian people;
B’nai Brith Press Release
by B’nai Brith
Tuesday April 18, 2006
B’nai B’rith condemns Tel Aviv terrorist bombing
Calls those who believe Hamas can govern responsibly guilty of “thinking irrationally” B’nai B’rith International has condemned today’s terror bombing at a falafel restaurant in Tel Aviv in which at least six were killed, not including the bomber, and at least 75 were wounded – 15 of them seriously.
Responding to media reports that the new Hamas-led Palestinian Authority (PA) government called the bombing a legitimate response to Israeli “aggression,” B’nai B’rith International President Joel S. Kaplan charged, “Anyone who thinks that Hamas is willing to change – or that it is even capable of changing – or who believes that Hamas understands the responsibilities inherent in governing, is simply thinking irrationally.”
“Our hearts go out to the families of those murdered,” Kaplan continued, “and we hope and pray for a full and speedy recovery for those wounded.”
B’nai B’rith Executive Vice President Daniel S. Mariaschin, in Israel for the Passover holiday, joined in condemning the attack and expressed confidence in the Olmert government’s ability to take speedy, and appropriate, action to both punish those responsible and protect Israel from further attacks.
Kaplan and Mariaschin welcomed the response of PA president Mahmoud Abbas who today issued a statement soundly condemning the terror attack and recognized that it harmed Palestinian interests.
Looking at long-term prospects for peace in the Middle East, Kaplan observed, “As long as the Palestinian people choose to be governed by leaders who embrace and legitimize terror, prospects for any peace in the region are nonexistent.”
With members throughout the United States and more than 50 countries worldwide, B’nai B’rith International is a national and global leader in the area of international affairs, domestic policy, senior services, and Jewish identity. As the oldest and most widely known and respected Jewish organization, B’nai B’rith advocates for Jewish unity, security, and continuity in the United States and worldwide.
The B’nai B’rith Anti-Defamation Commission (ADC) is the human rights arm of B’nai B’rith Australia/New Zealand and is dedicated to combating antisemitism and all forms of racism.
Chairman: Dr Paul Gardner
Executive Officer: Mr Manny Waks
PO Box 450, Caulfield South, Vic, Australia 3162
Tel: Int + 61 3 9572 5770; Fax: 9572 5775
ADC Board of Advisers:
The Rt Hon Sir Zelman Cowen AK GCMG GCVO QC DCL (president),
Sir William Deane AC KBE
The Rt Hon Malcolm Fraser AC CH,
The Hon RJL Hawke AC,
Professor Lowitja O’Donoghue AC CBE,
The Rt Hon Sir Ninian Stephen KG AK GCMG GCVO KBE,
Emeritus Professor Louis Waller AO,
The Hon Neville Wran AC QC
Yeah rog, Israels almost 40 year illegal occupation is caused by poor Palestinian leadership. ‘They made me do it’, isn’t generally considered a great defence.
I am not sure which European argument you are refering to. If you mean the IRA then please spell it out a little. I don’t really think that the English had a lot of business invading Ireland.
I never said that Jews should not be in Jerusalem. As you correctly assert the Jews have been in Jerusalem as long as anybody can remember. My view (which you seem to have misunderstood) is that Palestine should have not have been partitioned along religious/ethnic lines (ie an Arab state and Jewish state). It did nothing to reduce conflicts. It was simply a form of racial separatism along the lines of the South African homelands policy. Of course I say this with the benefit of hindsight but only because it offers lessons for the future (in my view).
Marjorajam summed it up pretty well:-
As far as I can see sanctions will simply further marginalise an entire people. And it will not bring any objective benefit just as sanctions against Iraq achieved nothing worth achieving. With economic growth most people focus more on their future prospects and less on their current misery. To think that economic stagnation will help with the peace effort is seriously misguided.
I may have jumped the gun on the issue of trade sanctions.
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=1843403
The scope of these sanctions don’t seem to have the same breadth as the trade sanctions that were imposed on Iraq. They don’t target the private sector (ie the people), just the regime. And that is a pretty slim restriction.
Yes, the sanctions target the PA, but given that the PA is the economy, the effect isn’t significantly different. So you weren’t that far off the mark Terje.
But after having chastised and begged the Palestinians for free and fair democratic elections, what is the message to Palestinians when having done so, the result is actively undermined? Democratic change of Governement in the middle east is highly desirable. Given the general level of suspicion of democratic inititives urged by ‘the West’, this is a terribly short-sighted policy.
I imagine in future years that any lack of democracy by the Palestinians will be meet with the usual ahistorical tut-tutting, sad shaking of heads and wondering at the lack of democractic impulse amongst ‘the Arabs’.
What leads you to say this?
The PA is the main employer in the OTs. There aren’t many other economic actors that are significant. In the past the other mainstay of the Palestinian economy was work in Israel – that is all but dead.
There seems surprisingly little understanding of the economic suffering already inflicted on the Palestinians in the last 5 years- Palestinians live in a virtual medievel siege. Adding the latest round of sanctions will have a more serious effect than you might expect.
Sara Roy of Harvard is probably the most knowledgable person on the Palestinian economy, having conducted research there for the past 20 years. This is what she said 2 years ago,
” since March 2001…..there has been a contraction of the Palestinian economy by half; an average unemployment rate of between 30-40 percent over the last three years, with rates in Gaza exceeding 50 percent at times; a poverty rate that increased from 21 percent in September 2000 to 60 percent as early as December 2002, with certain regions of Gaza reaching 80 percent; a decline in overall food consumption of more than 25 percent per capita, with more than half the Palestinian population totally dependent on food aid, and over 22 percent of Palestinian children suffering from acute and severe malnutrition  levels equivalent to those in parts of sub-Saharan Africa; the destruction of, and damage to, Palestine’s physical resources, amounting to a loss of $1.7 billion through 2002; and the building of the separation barrier in the West Bank, now projected to run over 600 kilometers, cutting the territory into 16 isolated communities, effectively annexing at least 15 percent and as much as 58 percent of the West Bank to Israel, and entrapping or otherwise severely affecting over 670,000 Palestinians through loss of land and destruction of assets. “
Tejer I agree 100% on this one a bad decision from the start and shows in many areas the moral inconsistency of modern international relations.
If Australia was told we had to partition the country and give back half the land the Koori’s – the best bits the non-kooris get the desert- I don’t think many non-Kooris would take it lying down.
BTW the Koori’s are backed by the new lone super power China –payback for Australian involvement in the attempted independence of Taiwan- after the US financial meltdown and civil war the US is a shadow of its former glory, with a sophisticated army and now because the non-kooris are getting aggressive have to occupy a security zone of more land in the non-koori land. After a short war where the non-koori forces where defeated they now rely on guerrilla tactics and bombings.
The koori’s have to bomb and shell to make sure that the non-koori’s stop firing home made missiles and occasionally the is some collateral damage with civilians being killing but that doesn’t equate to terrorism as this is done with sophisticated weapons while the non-kooris uses home made bombs.
Since we now have a koori state which which is recognized by the UN -dominated by China & Russia- it is too hard to go back on the decision to partition and the non-kooris should just lump it with less land but also koori security forces controlling the borders and internal travel.
No analogy is perfect but you get the picture.
Some days you think hay Joos, what about we in the West put you up for say 5 years and we let the Palestinians in to run Palestine. Then when they’ve decimated and starved each other to death in their rubble a la Mugabe style and or the rest of Arab street is so totally fed up with their warring self-destructive ways, you Joos will be welcome back with open arms. You know it would only take around 5 years tops, but then I just get this cold feeling come over me that there would be a snag somewhere. Nah, stick with your wall Joos.
rog, reasonable estimates were that prior to the 1880s, there were a couple of hundred jews in the old city of Jerusalem, and essentially none in the rest of the Levant. So they can’t claim native title I’m afraid.
Well, we now release how complaint to the Hamas Charter
Hamas’ victory in the Palestinian elections has certainly caused a few problems; not least among the Left in addressing the question of how to reconcile the virulent hatred that Hamas has for Jews in general (and incredibly Rotary Clubs see http://weekbyweek7.blogspot.com/2006/01/hamas-charter-shopping-list-of.html ) with the idea of Palestinian sovereignty and independence.
A quick scan of the Hamas’ political and organisational charter reveals how difficult that ‘reconciliation’ will be.
Besides Joos, we’re talking here about listening to a bunch of idealists that wanted to believe regime change would be a big improvement in Iraq and Afghanistan and be a big BOL for places like Iran. By the way Joos, how much a kilometre was that wall of yours?
How long does it take for an occupying power to have moral status over land ownership?
If the Ottoman’s were still considered occupiers even after a few hundred years wouldn’t that make Australia and the US occupiers?
Alsoit is within living memory that the West targeted civilians in conflicts for survival as far as i’m concerned it won’t be until we are fighting a war for survival and not targeting civilians before we can claim any moral high ground.
So I thind it a bit hypocritical for developed first world countries who owe much of their predominance to the very things they now condemn others for.
thind interesting what novel spelling one can come up with without knowing it
It would appear that the consensus is that Israel is to blame for the dismal state of the Palestinians.
I don’t know rog the UN, UK, US and Arafat could share in differeing digrees of blame as well.
Israle could after all only be where is is for the UN partition & the unbalanced support of the US. Arafat was a crook who screwed his own people over.
Many of the Muslim states are authoritarian and only interested in their own regimes who don’t care about tyheir own people let alone an oppressed -mostly- Muslim people.
I actually agree with everything Majorajam says on this issue.
I’d add that the Palestinians have an entirely justified fear that they are destined for ethnic cleansing, and that the present leadership of Israel (Olmert) is the unapologetic – indeed proud – son of an Irgun terrorist – the Irgun having pioneered the use in this conflict of explosives in marketplaces to terrify civilians. Former Israeli PMs Begin and Shamir were executive members of the Irgun at the time when such tactics were first deployed. Use of violence and ethnic cleansing has been a constant refrain in Israel’s relations with Palestinians since before the establishment of the state. The erection of a memorial to the mass murderer Baruch Goldstein in the settler outpost in the middle of Palestinian Hebron illustrates the Israeli attitude well.
Hamas has not itself carried out bombings since its self-declared truce some year and a half ago. Whatever Hamas spokespeople may say on the issue, they are only words – there is no evidence of direct Hamas involvement in the latest bombing. It was not the act of the state or the Hamas-led government of Palestine. Israel’s assassinations, shellings, border closures, bulldozings, arbitrarily closed checkpoints, Jews-only roads, construction of fortified colonies on occupied land, land confiscations, collective punishments etc are however the acts of the Israeli state for which the government of Israel is directly responsible.
That said, suicide bombings are pathetic and useless as well as being every bit as barbaric as aerial bombing of civilian areas. The basis of a peace settlement in the conflict is well known – 2 states on the 1967 boundaries. The Hamas line has been to demand reciprocity in any dealings with Israel – including withholding recognition of Israel until Israel declares what its boundaries are. This is not an unreasonable stance, since Israel has never recognised Palestine’s ‘right to exist’ and daily expropriates more and more Palestinian land. There is a useful analysis of the opportunities and problems presented by the election of Hamas in the latest New York Review of Books by Henry Siegman at http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18939
i honestly cant believe some of the points of view expressed here on this,
the palestinians have been robbed of their home land by outside decree, turned into second class citizens if anything at all, given literally no hope for the future, dehumanised and degraded,
and now we sit casting moral judgement on their leadership and attitudes, as if despite all this they should have thrived and lifted themselves spriritually to some gandhian level,
trade sanctions, what trade? someone tell me what the non country called palestine currently trades,
as far as i am aware the only thin they have is themselves, labourers, working at israels whim, low wage, access to work turned on and off like a tap,
i would also suggest people look into the very fascinating history of hamas,
the allegations that mossad funded and armed it to provide a counter to fatah,
the fact that sheik yassin kept getting let out of prison after serving fractions of his term,
the fact netanyahu let him back into the territories,
who benefits from palestinian terrorism? not palestinians
Well no rog. I would say it was their fanatical belief in the tenets of Islam that is to blame. You’ll recall how that belief system led them to support Islam’s Final Solution with the Jews in the late sixties and after 6 days they had their Final Solution alright. Basically if you bet the pot and lose you’re out of the game. They just haven’t been able to come to grips with that and move on.
As for Islam generally I have my doubts we can coexist with it for much longer. It would appear that reluctantly the most magnanimous of souls are coming to that realisation. In the final analysis, reason must fail against fanatical belief. If that belief becomes too great a threat, we will have no alternative but to make Muslims convert to our religion or die. Increasingly that’s what militant Islam wants to do with us. The Palestinians are just another flavour of the same brand. Our brand lies with Israel naturally enough. Well, for most of us it does.
smiths, Israel didn’t exactly fund Hamas. They provided funds to the Islamist movement in general in the 70’s and 80’s. The thinking was 2 fold, one that the Islamists weren’t nationalists and would spend more time praying than worrying about the occupation and two, that they would be opposed to the secular/marxist PLO, which would undermine the PLOs support in the territories.
“In the final analysis, reason must fail against fanatical belief. If that belief becomes too great a threat, we will have no alternative but to make Muslims convert to our religion or die.”
I’m not sure that I’ve read much that is more obscenely stupid than this. Why does discussion of the I-P conflict bring the crazies crawling out of the darkness like leeches towards a blood meal?
“reason must fail against fanatical belief”. Observa, is this your explanation of why the Chimp (thankyou Katz) went to war in Iraq against the wishes of the mjaority of reasonable people?
Afterall, God told him to do it.
what the…? they funded them thinking
the Islamists weren’t nationalists and would spend more time praying than worrying about the occupation
are you kidding me? you dont need to fund people to pray,
and they were funding sheik yassin
thats from wikipedia,
mossad didnt fund yassin expecting him to pray
When Smiths says “the palestinians have been robbed of their home land”, up to the British mandate and sunsequent formation of Israel Palestine was a geographical description only not a country and peopled primarily with jews, muslims & christians.
Over the years the jews had been driven out by various regimes and it was only after international agreement by the League of Nations when they were allowed to have their own state did they return enmasse.
Michael H,
If you don’t detect a certain sad resignation in JQ’s posting here, then perhaps I am alone. Iam suggesting that he has glimpsed the fearful and foreboding notion that fanatical belief can trump reason and when it does that means war.
I can perhaps empathise with him over my support for regime change in Iraq. Perhaps I allowed my enthusiasm for the notion that Iraqis could be like us, to overrule your superior foresight and wisdom in these matters. Nevertheless, we may still be morally salvageable for being enthusiastic for some right reasons, rather than fanatical for the wrong ones.
rog
this where this always ends up, infinite hair splitting,
forget the letters, think about the spirit
people who were of arab descent lived in large numbers across the area now called israel for a very long time,
from 1945 they discontinuued living in that area en masse,
i am quite sure the ‘international agreement’ you speak of means very little to the unrepresented palestinians
‘“reason must fail against fanatical beliefâ€?. Observa, is this your explanation of why the Chimp (thankyou Katz) went to war in Iraq against the wishes of the mjaority of reasonable people?
Afterall, God told him to do it. ‘
True about going to war against the majority Michael, but of course the majority of voters did give he and Blair the nod when things were looking rosy. God made an appearance then for them too apparently.
For older folk it is within living memory that women did not have the vote in the USA and were expected to cover various bits of flesh in public. An issue that occupies our minds a lot when it comes to how other countries run things.
We make a big fuss about a whole host of human rights (which is appropriate) and then when our nations is threatened just a little we ditch them all in the name of security (ie we don’t walk the talk). I agree that we are hardly in a position to lecture. And of course those on the Arab street are quite aware of this hypocracy.
smiths, let me re-phrase that. Israel funded the Islamists becuase it thought they weere less of a real threat; the real threat being a Palestinian movement advocating a diplomatic solution.
“If you don’t detect a certain sad resignation in JQ’s posting here, then perhaps I am alone. Iam suggesting that he has glimpsed the fearful and foreboding notion that fanatical belief can trump reason and when it does that means war”
If JQ has even a scintilla of sympathy for this sentiment “we will have no alternative but to make Muslims convert to our religion or die”, I will eat my shorts.
No need to eat your shorts, Michael. Willingness to push on with war when it is obviously futile is not confined to any ethnic or religious group. Hamas is not the only example in the world at present – the backers of the Iraq war are in the same boat.
I can only hope that Hamas’ inevitable failure will give rise to the kind of war-weariness among Palestinians that leads them to put peace before nationalist/religious shibboleths, and that this coincides with similar weariness among Israelis.
JQ – do you think accepting walled-in impoverished bantustans is ‘putting peace before nationalist/religious shibboleths’, because that appears to be what the Olmert government is going to offer on a take it or leave it basis?
Michael H,
Just what proportion of (practising?) Muslims embrace ‘fanatical beliefs’ compared to say Christians Jews or Hindus? Do you have a number? An estimate?
What is your view of the rational faculties of around 60 million citizens of the US that believe in the literal truth of the genesis version of creation found in the book titled “Old Testament”?
What is your view of the rational faculties of those Jewish settlers in the West Bank who belive that “God gave this land to the Jews’, and ‘we have a God given right, nay a religious duty, to occupy all the lands of the ancient times, regardless of any laws made by the anyone because God’s word is the final word on this subject’?
What is your view of the rational faculties of those Hindus that destroy mosques in India on the grounds that the Moghul occupation of India was/is an affront to the nation of India, because only Hinduism represents the one, true and proper expression of Indian national sensibilities?
Care to comment?
JQ, I’m with Hal on this one. There is no reason to expect Palestinians to suddenly give up their national aspirations on the basis of hardship. It’s logical that they should, but if that were the case, they would have done so long ago. It’s one of those uniquely human responses where the more you are denied something the more you want it. And this is the reality of the choice which is offered – forget a real sovereign state in the West bank and Gaza and we’ll stop making your lives miserable.
I’m pretty disappointed to see the rise of Hamas, but not surprised. Back in ‘93 Palestinians were saying that if the Fatah/PLO failed, via Oslo, to create a real Palestinian state then Hamas would inevitably take their place. But it’s not all doom and gloom. The PNIs Mustapha Barghouti came second in the presidential elections, though they only got 3 seats in the parliamentary elections. It’s also worth remembering that the Hamas’ ‘landslide’ was 44% of the vote.
The bigger issue is that of democracy in the ME. What are the long-term implications of yet more meddling in election outcomes because the results aren’t quite what was wanted? It seems the US Administration has a short memory. It wasn’t long ago that Condi Rice said this,
“America will not impose our style of government on the unwilling. Our goal instead is to help others find their own voice, to attain their own freedom and to make their own way.”
The first buds of the ‘democratic spring’ in the ME are about to be burned off by a late frost, courtesy of the Chimp.
of the 1967 boundaries.Hal9000, the main nationalist shibboleth I have in mind is the “right of return”, that is, the claim that everyone descended from 1948 refugees in the male line should be allowed to return to Israel. This claim will never be accepted and shouldn’t be. As regards religious shibboleths, Hamas’ religiously based calls for the destruction of Israel are the obvious example.
This, and not the demarcation of borders was the crucial sticking point last time around. As should be clear from the post, I don’t advocate accepting the kind of settlement Olmert is likely to impose, but the only way to avoid this is to abandon the shibboleths and negotiate from the starting point of two-states with the 1967 boundaries.
I don’t accept the argument that the fact of democratic elections obliges foreign countries to provide or continue aid. If a democratically elected government chooses to make war on its neighbours, or encourage terrorism, it should face the consequences. For exactly this reason, the US should have cut off aid to Israel a long time ago, regardless of the fact that the government there was democratically elected.
Oops. Sorry michael H. My remarks were meant to be addressed to observa.
Fair enough Prof Q, and if it were so, I’d agree.
On “[Right of return], and not the demarcation of borders was the crucial sticking point last time around.” I take it you’re referring to the 1999-2000 negotiations.
This is not correct – see
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/14380
where it is clear that all the issues were sticking points and the primary problems were failure to negotiate in good faith and failure to provide sufficient detail on all the issues.
A major problem for the Palestinians is that they are divided into three now – second class citizens of Israel, residents of Gaza and the West Bank within mandatory Palestine (both original residents and refugees), and refugees outside Palestine – and facing division into five if Israel has its way. All three populations expect the PA leadership to speak for them. Remember that Arafat spent most of his adult life among the external refugee population.
Meanwhile, what to do about the millions of Palestinian refugees sitting on not much more than a pile of UN resolutions calling for them to be fairly treated? Clearly return to mandatory Palestine is not going to happen, but who should pay for resettlement, and who is going to be asked to take them? What was offered at Camp David/Taba was an undefined ‘satisfactory solution’. Surely it should be within the capacities of the wealthy nations, and Israel as beneficiary of the expropriation, to offer reasonable monetary compensation/resettlement funds for these desperate stateless people.