Patterns of rejection
There are certain repeating patterns in relation to the Arab-Israel conflict that any policy maker would do well to take note of.
The first pattern is of a right wing Israeli PM making concessions to the Palestinians that would normally be considered left wing policies. This is a result of American pressure on Israel to make concessions to the Palestinians in order to evince some reciprocal response from them.
Here are some examples: PM Rabin was a relative hawk, he was opposed to the division of Jerusalem, he believed that in any agreement Israel should retain densely Jewish populated areas of the West Bank, and that Israel needed to retain the Jordan Valley as a security barrier to Arab attack. But, under pressure from Pres. Clinton he agreed to the Oslo Accords, which proved to be a disaster for Israel and presaged not a reciprocal response from the PA under Yasir Arafat, but instead the second intifada and deadly terrorism and also resulted in his assassination. PM Netanyahu in his first term negotiated the Hebron agreement with Arafat under pressure form Bill Clinton. PM Barak of the Labor Party was a former IDF Chief of Staff, yet under pressure from Pres. Clinton at Taba he was prepared to give Arafat almost everything, including 100% of the West Bank, half of Jerusalem and recognition of the Palestinian's "right of return," but Arafat rejected it. PM Sharon, a former champion of the settler movement, made an about-face and under American pressure carried out the unilateral "disengagement" from Gaza, and formed a new centrist political party, Kadima. Instead of peace, Israel got rockets. PM Olmert of Kadima, under less pressure from Pres. George W. Bush nevertheless made a series of offers to Pres. Abbas, all of which were rejected. Finally, PM Netanyahu has been under intense pressure from Pres. Obama to make a major concession to the Palestinians by freezing all settlement construction, including East Jerusalem. After months of negotiations with the Americans, Netanyahu finally announced a 10 month freeze on all settlement construction, excluding East Jerusalem, and what happened, the Palestinians rejected the offer out-of-hand as inadequate.
The second part of this pattern is that whatever any Israeli PM concedes is automatically rejected by the Palestinians and becomes the basis for the next round, not of negotiations but of demands. For a more detailed analysis of this pattern see the article in Monday's Jerusalem Post, "More, more, more! no matter what Israel does the Palestinians and the Arab States will complain that it is not enough, that it doesn't mean anything and that they have more demands" by Barry Rubin (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellitecid=1259243034176&pagename=JPost%)
Isn't it about time that a review of Middle East policy by the Americans would reveal these patterns and result in a more intelligent and purposeful policy than repeated pressure on Israel to make concessions that are going to be rejected anyway? Isn't it about time that the US put pressure on the Palestinians instead? If you say that there are no Palestinian leaders that the US can put pressure on, then what is the point of pressuring Israel?
The first pattern is of a right wing Israeli PM making concessions to the Palestinians that would normally be considered left wing policies. This is a result of American pressure on Israel to make concessions to the Palestinians in order to evince some reciprocal response from them.
Here are some examples: PM Rabin was a relative hawk, he was opposed to the division of Jerusalem, he believed that in any agreement Israel should retain densely Jewish populated areas of the West Bank, and that Israel needed to retain the Jordan Valley as a security barrier to Arab attack. But, under pressure from Pres. Clinton he agreed to the Oslo Accords, which proved to be a disaster for Israel and presaged not a reciprocal response from the PA under Yasir Arafat, but instead the second intifada and deadly terrorism and also resulted in his assassination. PM Netanyahu in his first term negotiated the Hebron agreement with Arafat under pressure form Bill Clinton. PM Barak of the Labor Party was a former IDF Chief of Staff, yet under pressure from Pres. Clinton at Taba he was prepared to give Arafat almost everything, including 100% of the West Bank, half of Jerusalem and recognition of the Palestinian's "right of return," but Arafat rejected it. PM Sharon, a former champion of the settler movement, made an about-face and under American pressure carried out the unilateral "disengagement" from Gaza, and formed a new centrist political party, Kadima. Instead of peace, Israel got rockets. PM Olmert of Kadima, under less pressure from Pres. George W. Bush nevertheless made a series of offers to Pres. Abbas, all of which were rejected. Finally, PM Netanyahu has been under intense pressure from Pres. Obama to make a major concession to the Palestinians by freezing all settlement construction, including East Jerusalem. After months of negotiations with the Americans, Netanyahu finally announced a 10 month freeze on all settlement construction, excluding East Jerusalem, and what happened, the Palestinians rejected the offer out-of-hand as inadequate.
The second part of this pattern is that whatever any Israeli PM concedes is automatically rejected by the Palestinians and becomes the basis for the next round, not of negotiations but of demands. For a more detailed analysis of this pattern see the article in Monday's Jerusalem Post, "More, more, more! no matter what Israel does the Palestinians and the Arab States will complain that it is not enough, that it doesn't mean anything and that they have more demands" by Barry Rubin (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellitecid=1259243034176&pagename=JPost%)
Isn't it about time that a review of Middle East policy by the Americans would reveal these patterns and result in a more intelligent and purposeful policy than repeated pressure on Israel to make concessions that are going to be rejected anyway? Isn't it about time that the US put pressure on the Palestinians instead? If you say that there are no Palestinian leaders that the US can put pressure on, then what is the point of pressuring Israel?
posted by Jack Cohen at 7:14 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home