Ami Isseroff on Israel and Palestine
I find much good sense in Ami Isseroff's comments here (below my intro) and join him wholeheartedly in his call to end the 'blame' games and winner-take-all aspirations and to get on with real peace efforts in which the extremists on both sides are held in check. Ami and I met on one of Hank Roth's PNEWS lists years ago and were cordially in touch until I inadvertently violated one of his taboos by mentioning the hazards of occupation illustrated in the "Nazi" years -- this parallel was verboten. However, I have had to agree with the wider point made by Machiavelli in The Prince -- that occupation inevitably produces resistance -- unless it is accompanied by extreme destructive violence that wipes out the enemy leadership and enables the residency in the newly occupied territory by the head of the conquering power.
Ami's MEW daily postings of Middle East matters are an invaluable source of information. I strongly recommend that any who care about things there sign up for them: mailto:mewnews-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Here are the subject headings of this morning's:
Topics in this digest:
1. Suicide bomber hits Iran pilgrims in Iraq, 12 dead
From: News-M
2. Top Hamas official shot dead by unknown assailants in Gaza
From: News-M
3. Gaza: 2 killed, 12 hurt in IAF strike [2 reports]
From: News-M
4. Police arrest five senior Hamas officials in East Jerusalem
From: News-M
5. Zarqawi successor 'in Egypt jail'
From: News-M
6. Iranians killed in Iraq blast
From: News-M
7. 'Eight dead' in Gaza air strikes
From: News-M
8. 14 Palestinians killed since start of incursion Thursday
From: News-M
9. Palestinians, leftists evacuated from disputed settlement edifice
From: News-M
10. Hamas calls Gaza to arms
From: News-M
11. Father of abducted IDF soldier calls for prisoner exchange
From: News-M
12. Arab states circulate draft UN resolution slamming IDF raid
From: News-M
13. At least 7 killed in Iraqi gunbattle
From: News-M
14. Hamas sources confirm report on possible deal on Gilad Shalit
From: News-M
15. PA Interior Minister calls on armed forces to fight IDF troops [IDF
From: News-M
16. Gaza Division commander: Palestinians in shock
From: News-M
17. Fatah strongman Zubeidi, Jihad head elude IDF raid in Jenin
From: News-M
18. London bomber video aired
From: News-M
19. Iran: Response to nuclear deal soon
From: News-M
And here are Ami's summary judgments on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict:
These observations, while very general, are applicable to the current
standoff in Gaza and to every other aspect of the Palestinian - Israeli
conflict, or any other conflict for that matter.
The basis of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the competition between
two legitimate claims on the one hand, and the fact that as often
happens, each side ignores the claims of the other.
At one time there were several options to solve those claims that might
have worked, such as a binational state, partition with economic union
etc.
However, while very little effort was invested in advancing and
protecting workable solutions, a huge effort was invested in advancing
non-solutions that took into account the needs of only one side. This
effort succeeded in perpetuating the conflict and narrowing the options
for workable solutions.
These dead end non-solutions were invariably based on the assumptions
that:
a- one side is "to blame" and
b- if only we push hard enough, the other side will be pushed either
into the sea or into the desert.
The lobby against peace is huge. It includes Greater Israel people, most
Arab and Muslim states, doctrinaire anti-Zionists and extremist groups
like Hamas. In the 1930s it was fueled by the Axis powers. In the 1950s
-80s by the USSR. In the 70s and 80s it was fueled by US complicity in
Israeli settlement activity, because US had to be for anything USSR was
against.
Most of the people working against peace (often under the guise of
working for peace) have no real interest whatever in the welfare of
either side. The Arab states just want to get rid of Israel and don't
care what happens to the Palestinian Arabs or the Jews. Despotic Muslim
and Arab regimes use the Israel issue to divert discontent from their
own shortcomings. Professional anti-Zionists, regardless of cant about
"compassion" and human rights and "justice," are not interested in
peaceful solutions or Palestinian rights, but rather in vindicating
their anti-Zionism. As long as Israel is constantly delegitimized and
eventually, they hope, destroyed, it doesn't really matter to them what
happens to the Arabs of Palestine or how many generations of Palestinian
Arabs will suffer in refugee camps.
Every group with "Justice" for Palestine in its name is out to destroy
my country and evict me. In addition to any personal objections I might
have to such "justice,' it will not serve the interests of justice or
really bring lasting peace. They are only offering programs to advance
their own ideology at the cost of great misery to Arab and Jew alike.
The same is true of the vocal and fairly large groups of Zionist
extremists in the USA, who want to defend "the territories" to the last
Israeli soldiers, and to evict the Arab Palestinians or subjugate them,
because GOD gave the land to them.
By now the ideologues have all built up a great literature of blame.
Hundreds and thousands of pages "prove" conclusively that one side or
the other is exclusively to blame for the conflict, and each new event
is assimilated to this literature on each side. This does nothing to
solve the conflict. On the contrary, it is fuel for the conflict.
Likewise, all the great powers have at bottom always been seeking to use
the conflict to best further their own interests, rather than actually
working for peace. The USA wants peace, but it has to be a peace that is
attuned to US interests. This even came down to US interference with the
schedule of Israeli-Jordanian negotiations in order to make sure that
President Clinton got the right photo-opportunity and credit for making
peace. From the point of view of the USA, the major features of "peace"
are that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict should "go away" at least to
the point where it doesn't interfere with US relations with Arab and
Muslim countries, and that the US should get the credit for making the
peace and should be vital to maintaining it, so that regional countries
are dependent on the US. That is the essence of Henry Kissinger's
policies, and has not really changed except for nuances.
The USSR did not want peace, nor did they really desire the destruction
of Israel. Rather, they wanted a perpetual conflict situation that could
be used to embarrass the United States and further Soviet influence.
This very competent if diabolical Soviet foreign policy left us a legacy
of rhetoric about Zionist colonialism that does nothing to advance
either peace or our understanding of the conflict. The European Union wants peace, but they want to play the part of the Americans, making and get the credit and influence for it, and so they try to trip up US efforts. Like the USSR in its time, they are also not too dissatisfied if Israel remains an embarrassment for the US. Therefore, each party chooses someone to blame, and someone to help.
Many billions of dollars have been invested in creating and maintaining
and nourishing this conflict, based on the "who is to blame" model, and
very little effort was invested in solving the problems. Therefore the
refugees are still in camps, so that Israel can be blamed for that, and
the Israelis are still in settlements, and the Hamas are nourished along
by indirection and "benign" neglect, and the siege of Gaza is tolerated
and ignored along with the
rain of Qassam rockets on Sderot.
The result of nurturing the blame game is that over the years different
options closed out. We cannot have a binational state or a one state
solution, because today that is like putting 50 dogs and 50 cats in a
room and locking the door. We can't have economic union because the
terror groups will use it as a means to carry out what they call
"operations" - murder of civilians.
There are only two options left - a two state solution or winner take
all. All those who justify the Hamas are supporting the winner take all
solution and closing out the two state solution, and likewise those who
support Greater Israel are making peace impossible. Each does it because
of their ideologies - luxuries that neither real Israelis nor actual
Palestinians can really afford.
There are two sides. Those against violence and for protecting the
rights of Palestinian Arabs and Israelis are on one side. Those who
justify violence and look for which side is to blame are on the other
side. The latter are always part of the problem. If anyone wants to know
whose fault the conflict is, it is their fault.
Ami Isseroff
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net
Ami's MEW daily postings of Middle East matters are an invaluable source of information. I strongly recommend that any who care about things there sign up for them: mailto:mewnews-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Here are the subject headings of this morning's:
Topics in this digest:
1. Suicide bomber hits Iran pilgrims in Iraq, 12 dead
From: News-M
2. Top Hamas official shot dead by unknown assailants in Gaza
From: News-M
3. Gaza: 2 killed, 12 hurt in IAF strike [2 reports]
From: News-M
4. Police arrest five senior Hamas officials in East Jerusalem
From: News-M
5. Zarqawi successor 'in Egypt jail'
From: News-M
6. Iranians killed in Iraq blast
From: News-M
7. 'Eight dead' in Gaza air strikes
From: News-M
8. 14 Palestinians killed since start of incursion Thursday
From: News-M
9. Palestinians, leftists evacuated from disputed settlement edifice
From: News-M
10. Hamas calls Gaza to arms
From: News-M
11. Father of abducted IDF soldier calls for prisoner exchange
From: News-M
12. Arab states circulate draft UN resolution slamming IDF raid
From: News-M
13. At least 7 killed in Iraqi gunbattle
From: News-M
14. Hamas sources confirm report on possible deal on Gilad Shalit
From: News-M
15. PA Interior Minister calls on armed forces to fight IDF troops [IDF
From: News-M
16. Gaza Division commander: Palestinians in shock
From: News-M
17. Fatah strongman Zubeidi, Jihad head elude IDF raid in Jenin
From: News-M
18. London bomber video aired
From: News-M
19. Iran: Response to nuclear deal soon
From: News-M
And here are Ami's summary judgments on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict:
These observations, while very general, are applicable to the current
standoff in Gaza and to every other aspect of the Palestinian - Israeli
conflict, or any other conflict for that matter.
The basis of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the competition between
two legitimate claims on the one hand, and the fact that as often
happens, each side ignores the claims of the other.
At one time there were several options to solve those claims that might
have worked, such as a binational state, partition with economic union
etc.
However, while very little effort was invested in advancing and
protecting workable solutions, a huge effort was invested in advancing
non-solutions that took into account the needs of only one side. This
effort succeeded in perpetuating the conflict and narrowing the options
for workable solutions.
These dead end non-solutions were invariably based on the assumptions
that:
a- one side is "to blame" and
b- if only we push hard enough, the other side will be pushed either
into the sea or into the desert.
The lobby against peace is huge. It includes Greater Israel people, most
Arab and Muslim states, doctrinaire anti-Zionists and extremist groups
like Hamas. In the 1930s it was fueled by the Axis powers. In the 1950s
-80s by the USSR. In the 70s and 80s it was fueled by US complicity in
Israeli settlement activity, because US had to be for anything USSR was
against.
Most of the people working against peace (often under the guise of
working for peace) have no real interest whatever in the welfare of
either side. The Arab states just want to get rid of Israel and don't
care what happens to the Palestinian Arabs or the Jews. Despotic Muslim
and Arab regimes use the Israel issue to divert discontent from their
own shortcomings. Professional anti-Zionists, regardless of cant about
"compassion" and human rights and "justice," are not interested in
peaceful solutions or Palestinian rights, but rather in vindicating
their anti-Zionism. As long as Israel is constantly delegitimized and
eventually, they hope, destroyed, it doesn't really matter to them what
happens to the Arabs of Palestine or how many generations of Palestinian
Arabs will suffer in refugee camps.
Every group with "Justice" for Palestine in its name is out to destroy
my country and evict me. In addition to any personal objections I might
have to such "justice,' it will not serve the interests of justice or
really bring lasting peace. They are only offering programs to advance
their own ideology at the cost of great misery to Arab and Jew alike.
The same is true of the vocal and fairly large groups of Zionist
extremists in the USA, who want to defend "the territories" to the last
Israeli soldiers, and to evict the Arab Palestinians or subjugate them,
because GOD gave the land to them.
By now the ideologues have all built up a great literature of blame.
Hundreds and thousands of pages "prove" conclusively that one side or
the other is exclusively to blame for the conflict, and each new event
is assimilated to this literature on each side. This does nothing to
solve the conflict. On the contrary, it is fuel for the conflict.
Likewise, all the great powers have at bottom always been seeking to use
the conflict to best further their own interests, rather than actually
working for peace. The USA wants peace, but it has to be a peace that is
attuned to US interests. This even came down to US interference with the
schedule of Israeli-Jordanian negotiations in order to make sure that
President Clinton got the right photo-opportunity and credit for making
peace. From the point of view of the USA, the major features of "peace"
are that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict should "go away" at least to
the point where it doesn't interfere with US relations with Arab and
Muslim countries, and that the US should get the credit for making the
peace and should be vital to maintaining it, so that regional countries
are dependent on the US. That is the essence of Henry Kissinger's
policies, and has not really changed except for nuances.
The USSR did not want peace, nor did they really desire the destruction
of Israel. Rather, they wanted a perpetual conflict situation that could
be used to embarrass the United States and further Soviet influence.
This very competent if diabolical Soviet foreign policy left us a legacy
of rhetoric about Zionist colonialism that does nothing to advance
either peace or our understanding of the conflict. The European Union wants peace, but they want to play the part of the Americans, making and get the credit and influence for it, and so they try to trip up US efforts. Like the USSR in its time, they are also not too dissatisfied if Israel remains an embarrassment for the US. Therefore, each party chooses someone to blame, and someone to help.
Many billions of dollars have been invested in creating and maintaining
and nourishing this conflict, based on the "who is to blame" model, and
very little effort was invested in solving the problems. Therefore the
refugees are still in camps, so that Israel can be blamed for that, and
the Israelis are still in settlements, and the Hamas are nourished along
by indirection and "benign" neglect, and the siege of Gaza is tolerated
and ignored along with the
rain of Qassam rockets on Sderot.
The result of nurturing the blame game is that over the years different
options closed out. We cannot have a binational state or a one state
solution, because today that is like putting 50 dogs and 50 cats in a
room and locking the door. We can't have economic union because the
terror groups will use it as a means to carry out what they call
"operations" - murder of civilians.
There are only two options left - a two state solution or winner take
all. All those who justify the Hamas are supporting the winner take all
solution and closing out the two state solution, and likewise those who
support Greater Israel are making peace impossible. Each does it because
of their ideologies - luxuries that neither real Israelis nor actual
Palestinians can really afford.
There are two sides. Those against violence and for protecting the
rights of Palestinian Arabs and Israelis are on one side. Those who
justify violence and look for which side is to blame are on the other
side. The latter are always part of the problem. If anyone wants to know
whose fault the conflict is, it is their fault.
Ami Isseroff
--
"A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope." (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
--
Ed Kent 718-951-5324 (voice mail only) [blind copies]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PeaceEfforts
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Israel_Palestine
http://BlogByEdKent.blogspot.com/
http://www.bloggernews.net
posted by Ed Kent at 9:47 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home