Risks for peace?
Last week Congressman Robert Wexler (D-FL), a friend of Israel and a supporter of Pres. Obama, was in Jerusalem dispensing advice to the Israeli Government. He met with several officials, including PM Netanyahu. His advice, as presented to the Jerusalem Post, was basically that Israel must take the step of freezing settlements and then see what happens.
"I want to call their bluff," Wexler told the Jerusalem Post, referring to the Arab countries. "I want to see, if Israel makes substantial movement toward a credible peace process, whether they are willing to do it. And if they are not, better that we should find out five or six months into the process, before Israel is actually asked to compromise any significant position." Wexler added: "And if the Arab world fails to deliver, you can rightly say that all bets are off."
It's rather easy for Wexler, who doesn't live here, to say "I want to call their bluff," putting Israel and its citizens in the status of guinea pigs, we do the experiment, we take the risks for peace, and then we'll see what happens. We've heard that refrain before.
At the same time, Dov Weisglas, the former advisor and Bureau Chief of PM Ariel Sharon, also spoke to the Post and strongly supported Sharon's former policies, of disengagement from Gaza and accepting the Road Map peace plan of Pres. Bush. Although he sees both of these as victories, the fact is that the Israeli public rejected Kadima in favor of the right and we now have a Likud-led coalition. It is clear that this Government is taking a new look at the situation as is the Obama Administration. It seems that there is no going back.
Intense negotiations are continuing between Israeli Defense Minister Barak and US Special Envoy Mitchell in various locations. Perhaps as a result of these talks and in order to establish some actual Arab responses to Israel's concessions there have been several reports in the media, to wit: 1. Pres. Obama sent a letter to King Abdullah III of Morocco urging him to play the role of intermediary between Israel and the rest of the Arab world. In this letter he mentioned as a matter of fact that Israel would have a freeze on settlement activity; 2. The Israeli Foreign Ministry leaked a report that Saudi Arabia would not interfere if Israeli planes over-flew their territory to make an attack on Iranian nuclear sites (understandably the Saudis denied this report). Apparently this agreement resulted from an Israeli delegation meeting Saudi representatives, a unique occurrence (if it happened). 3. Pres. Assad of Syria invited Pres. Obama to visit Syria in a friendly gesture for July 4, following the appointment of a new US Ambassador to Syria after a 4 year hiatus.
These items gleaned from the media, show that there are activities under way between the US and the Arab world that are presumably a response to Israeli Government concerns that it is being asked to take a major step and make a major concession, while there are no concrete concessions from the other side. At the same time PM Netanyahu once agian commited Israel to "two states for two peoples" at the public opening of Sunday's Israeli Cabinet meeting.
It is easy to be confident of the responses of the Arab world while sitting in Washington or Florida, but not so easy from Jerusalem. Before PM Netanyahu makes any change in Israeli policy there must be definite and concrete commitments from Arab States, and the pressure on the Arabs to make such concessions should be as public as the US pressure on Israel.
On Sunday, when asked on ABC's This Week about Israel's right to preemptively attack Iran should it develop a nuclear weapon, VP Joe Biden said "Israel can determine for itself - it's a sovereign nation - what's in it's interests and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else." So it seems that Israel can act against Iran ("you're on your own buddy") but cannot act independently vis-a-vis the Palestinians, in that case Israel must be told by the US and the world what to do.
"I want to call their bluff," Wexler told the Jerusalem Post, referring to the Arab countries. "I want to see, if Israel makes substantial movement toward a credible peace process, whether they are willing to do it. And if they are not, better that we should find out five or six months into the process, before Israel is actually asked to compromise any significant position." Wexler added: "And if the Arab world fails to deliver, you can rightly say that all bets are off."
It's rather easy for Wexler, who doesn't live here, to say "I want to call their bluff," putting Israel and its citizens in the status of guinea pigs, we do the experiment, we take the risks for peace, and then we'll see what happens. We've heard that refrain before.
At the same time, Dov Weisglas, the former advisor and Bureau Chief of PM Ariel Sharon, also spoke to the Post and strongly supported Sharon's former policies, of disengagement from Gaza and accepting the Road Map peace plan of Pres. Bush. Although he sees both of these as victories, the fact is that the Israeli public rejected Kadima in favor of the right and we now have a Likud-led coalition. It is clear that this Government is taking a new look at the situation as is the Obama Administration. It seems that there is no going back.
Intense negotiations are continuing between Israeli Defense Minister Barak and US Special Envoy Mitchell in various locations. Perhaps as a result of these talks and in order to establish some actual Arab responses to Israel's concessions there have been several reports in the media, to wit: 1. Pres. Obama sent a letter to King Abdullah III of Morocco urging him to play the role of intermediary between Israel and the rest of the Arab world. In this letter he mentioned as a matter of fact that Israel would have a freeze on settlement activity; 2. The Israeli Foreign Ministry leaked a report that Saudi Arabia would not interfere if Israeli planes over-flew their territory to make an attack on Iranian nuclear sites (understandably the Saudis denied this report). Apparently this agreement resulted from an Israeli delegation meeting Saudi representatives, a unique occurrence (if it happened). 3. Pres. Assad of Syria invited Pres. Obama to visit Syria in a friendly gesture for July 4, following the appointment of a new US Ambassador to Syria after a 4 year hiatus.
These items gleaned from the media, show that there are activities under way between the US and the Arab world that are presumably a response to Israeli Government concerns that it is being asked to take a major step and make a major concession, while there are no concrete concessions from the other side. At the same time PM Netanyahu once agian commited Israel to "two states for two peoples" at the public opening of Sunday's Israeli Cabinet meeting.
It is easy to be confident of the responses of the Arab world while sitting in Washington or Florida, but not so easy from Jerusalem. Before PM Netanyahu makes any change in Israeli policy there must be definite and concrete commitments from Arab States, and the pressure on the Arabs to make such concessions should be as public as the US pressure on Israel.
On Sunday, when asked on ABC's This Week about Israel's right to preemptively attack Iran should it develop a nuclear weapon, VP Joe Biden said "Israel can determine for itself - it's a sovereign nation - what's in it's interests and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else." So it seems that Israel can act against Iran ("you're on your own buddy") but cannot act independently vis-a-vis the Palestinians, in that case Israel must be told by the US and the world what to do.
posted by Jack Cohen at 7:15 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home