How Diplomacy Works–Cont.

Nahoohoo said no one can tell Israel what to do, yet he’s doing what we want him to do. Somebody must’ve told him about those US subsidies we might be interested in cutting off….

I love when Joe Klein talks middle east politics.

Joe:
.
I have a few comments about this:
.
For one, should you focus on Israel’s right to defend itself, and not give much attention to the fact that the Palestinians have a right to defend themselves? After all, the “settlements” are an everyday reminder to them of the fact that a slow-motion ethnic cleansing is in progress.
.
Another is this:
.
When does the failure to reach an agreement in 2000 stop being a reason for continued degradation of the Palestinian population in the WB? Negotiations failed because the Palestinians didn’t like what they were offered. Despite all the complaints to the contrary by Israelis and their supporters, it isn’t some sort of punishable offense. I remember 2000, and the Palestinians weren’t offered very much. The only claim, which is subjective and biased at best is that they didn’t take the offer because it was the best that they would ever get which may not be necessarily true.
.
As for Hamas, we all agree that they are using rockets to terrorize Israeli citizens, but there is the issue of a crippling blockade that amounts to collective punishment of Gaza’s citizens.
.
I think Joe, at some point, Ehud Barak’s point will be made with a vengeance if we don’t see change on the part of Israel.
.
They cannot rule over the Palestinians forever…

“We shall see…”

.
If there is a peace to be achieved in the middle east it will indeed take all parties to rationally, with open minds sit down at the table to work out the details.
.
I like how Joe Klein merely goes back to the 2000 effort by Bill Clinton, who by the way failed. Joe neglected to go back further to the time when we all thought that “finally, a peace in the middle east” when Jimmy Carter took his stab at bringing the factions together. That failed.
.
Perhaps it is time to ask why does any effort fail in bringing peace to the middle east? Once this can be answered you will then know if peace is at all achievable in the middle east. Forever the pessimist on this subject, I do not see Arabs ever agreeing to recognize Israel’s sovereignty. It is just not politically or culturally motivating for Arabs to ever accept an Israeli State.

Carter did bring lasting peace between Egypt and Israel. You saw that ‘D’ next to his name and dismissed the whole truth.

One of the chief reasons that peace has failed in the Middle East has been that the dictators in place throughout the region have used their opposition to Israel stance to appear strong and buy points with their population. The question is at what point, and in what countries first, will this stance start to lose its standing. After a while, people start wanting something better for themselves and realize that all the hatred aimed at the “other” hasn’t done them any good. Also, the more time goes on with Israel existing, the farther we are from the original perceived insult, and the better the chances become to have a rational discussion about it.

Of course, the better educated and informed your population is, the better chance this has of working. We’re starting to see some of this come about in Iran. For years, they could deflect questions about problems in that country by aiming frustration our way. After a while, though, people start realizing that aiming all that anger at us hasn’t made things any better for them and they set their sights on the people in charge.

The other half of it is that Israel (and the US) have to stop foolishly playing into the hands of those who would demonize them. It’s a lot easier to convince people you’re not the bully you’ve been made out to be when you’re not acting like one.

“we might now be able to get a better sense of whether the Palestinians are actually ready to negotiate a peace this time”
.
I’ll save you some time. They’re not. It was only two years ago that Abbas turned down the state offered by Olmert.
.
But I’ll save you even more time. When the Palestinians turn down a state again, it will once again be Israel’s fault.

Yea foghorn, that was a good thing. Thank you for pointing that out. How much did that “deal” cost us again?
.

“Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since World War II. From
1976-2004, Israel was the largest annual recipient of U.S. foreign assistance, having been
supplanted by Iraq. Since 1985, the United States has provided nearly $3 billion in grants
annually to Israel.”

.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf
.

“These 2 countries receive one-third of the total aid, the majority of which pays for armaments.
Yet, neither is a “developing” country. One-third of ALL US AID goes to Israel and Egypt.

.
http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/politics/us-foreign-aid.htm
.
And the citizens of the United States wonder why we are almost bankrupt. Imagine that!!

Joe,

I have always appreciated your comments regarding the Middle East peace process. However, I have to disagree with your assessment of the failures of the offers of 2000 and the recent one regarding Ehud Olmert.

I used to be a big fan of Ehud Barak. I thought with his military standing and his apparent openness, he would be able to bring Israel to the table with Yasser Arafat. However, I have had a chance to see what was offered to the Palestinians, initially, before Taba, and it was not terms of peace, but terms of surrender. No Palestinian leader could have presented such a deal to his/her people and expect it to be accepted. There would be no sovereign Palestinian state, but a puppet state subject to Israeli domination.

Now Arafat’s response was terrible, the launching of the second intifada. However, Barak’s response to the second intifada was even worse. In Taba, he finally offered something real to the Palestinians. He did this because he thought a peace deal would secure his re-election. However it was too late.

Arafat, erroneously, learned he could get what he wanted with violence, so he increased the violence. Moderate Israelis come to believe that peace with the Palestinians was impossible and voted for Sharon, and Israeli Arabs, normal supporters of Labor, abandoned the party all together. It is important to note that Sharon won the following election with fewer votes than Netanyahu had received and lost in the previous election. The rest is history.

One great Israeli once said, “The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.” The same has to be said for Israel now. In Abbas, Israel is never going to get a Palestinian leader more compliant than Abbas. Notice, we don’t hear of terrorism from the West Bank, and the Palestinians forces there spend more time hunting Hamas militants than confronting Israeli soldiers. In Fayyad, never have the Palestinians had someone with more competence in managing the daily affairs of state. One call easily remember the chaos under Arafat.

However, just as Netanyahu has to satisfy the Israeli electorate, Abbas has to satisfy the Palestinians. And the Palestinian populace is much harder to please than Abbas and Fayyad.

George W. Bush wanted democracy in the middle east and now you have a Palestinian government, which is responding to the will of the people, not catering to the desires of the United States or Israel.

Let me offer my two cents worth. This is very basic and the details are very messy, but the basic premise for peace is this:

Give up Israeli land for some settlements (suburbs of Jerusalem)

Offer symbolic Right of Return (Only 1% of Palestinians would return to homes in Israel proper).

Share East Jerusalem (We all learn to share in kindergarten)

@ 53_3

“After all, the “settlements” are an everyday reminder to them of the fact that a slow-motion ethnic cleansing is in progress.”

This must be a joke. Let us keep in mind, that Israel provides for these Palestinians not only medical aid, but food and other various utilities. The reason this issue exists in the first place, is that their Arab brothers have repeatedly refused to do anything for their own people. The “settlements” you are referring to, are a repeated reminder of the true facts on the ground, and the obstinacy of Palestinian leadership. If they truly wanted peace, they would have agreed to it (in some form) by now. If they were truly being “ethnically cleansed”, such a level of violence and terrorism would be annihilated immediately. Go to the Middle East, and see for yourself.

Folksy old sayings are timeless and apply to this concern today, 10 years ago or 20 years ago. “Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity”. But what the heck lets help the principals facilitate another peace initiative, again, and expect different results (isn’t that a definition of something else?). After that suceeds we’ll just do the same thing with the Big Guy in Iran and keep the ball rolling. The Taliban. The Osama Enterprise. The list is endless.

No, it is no joke.
.
“This must be a joke. Let us keep in mind, that Israel provides for these Palestinians not only medical aid, but food and other various utilities.”
.
“We” do keep it in mind. After all, Israel is occupying that territory and a failure on their part to provide these services would expose them to more serious charges, since they control all activity despite the presence of the PA.
.
“The reason this issue exists in the first place, is that their Arab brothers have repeatedly refused to do anything for their own people.”
.
No, that is the rationalization for the claim that Israel his the right to take Palestinian land and place their own citizens there.
.
“The “settlements” you are referring to, are a repeated reminder of the true facts on the ground, and the obstinacy of Palestinian leadership.”
.
I think it is these “true facts” (a redundant statement, if I ever saw one) really are the problem for the Palestinians.
;
Do you know what the second Amendment is for? Ostensibly, it is there to provide the average citizen a means of defending their home against the criminal element and a hostile domestic government. Of course, that is here and not there, but, if I were a Palestinian, I’d be obstinate too…
.
“If they truly wanted peace, they would have agreed to it (in some form) by now.”
.
The Israelis haven’t offered them anything that is worthy of their acceptance, obviously.
.
” If they were truly being “ethnically cleansed”, such a level of violence and terrorism would be annihilated immediately.”
.
Well first, you’re very good at dogwhistling the message that the Palestinians had better make peace because if they don’t, Israel will put ‘em through a grinder.
.
Second, I might point out, that very few peoples around the world have seen things that way, and when they get pushed to the point where living and dying have just about equal benefits (see Gaza), you find that the resistance just won’t listen to these “I am superior” arguments you present.
.
Third, ethnic cleansing is the process of displacing a population or demographic from a specific geographic region. That is the definition. The cleansing may or may not involve outright killing, but instead it can take the form of “settlements” on territory they don’t belong on (despite your rationalization, which is pointless!).

I see a compromise opportunity here! Not to mention that Rusty has now grabbed both ends of a very short stick….

mrein,

Do you think there was a reason the Palestinians rejected Olmert’s offer? Did it include East Jerusalem? What about the settlements? Did it return all of the land occupied since 1967? What about refugees?

You simply can’t take someone’s land, offer to give some of it back, and then expect them to accept what little you give them.

After all, the Arab states offered a comprehensive deal which required returning to the pre-1967 borders in exchange for diplomatic recognition. A 1967 Israeli government would have jumped at the chance to accept such a deal. A 2010 Israeli government would not. Why has Israel rejected an Arab offer for peace?

The Arabs demand a return to the exact borders of 1967 — that will not happen, those borders were indefensible, and event of the last 43 years have made those borders irrelevant.
.
The Arabs demand a “right of return” — any member of any family that ever lived anywhere within the 1948 borders would have a right to enter Israel and a right to all privileges of a legal Israeli resident, presumably including citizenship. Again, an irrelevant deman intended to prevent any agreement.
.
The Arabs continue to deny Israel’s legitimate right to exist. Again, how can one reach an agreement when the other side denies your existence?
.
Finally, the Arabs continue to foment hatred for all Israelis and all Jews, and claim it is their religious duty to kill Jews. This also makes reaching an agreement impossible.
.
Too much time has been wasted on this issue, especially by American presidents who cannot change the Arab position so they focus on forcing Israel to make concessions. GWB had an evenhanded policy, though occasionally both Powell and Rice made statements that sounded like pandering to the Arabs. But Bush kept the State Department in line, mostly.
.
Obama has done nothing to bring the area closer to peace. If anything, he has given the Arabs hope that they can get what they want without making concessions. So in this respect he has created additional barriers to peace.

Joe,

I can remember the name, but a former writer for Time Magazine wrote a prophetic book about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Though the book was written some 10 years ago, it stated the biggest problem was not between Israelis and Palestinians, but between moderates and hard-liners in both camps.

We have clearly seen this in the Palestinians, between Hamas and Fatah, to the point we have two Palestinian “states”, Gaza and the West Bank.

To the same extent, we see it in Israel between the settler movement and those Israelis who oppose or don’t support the settlement on the West Bank.

A majority of Israelis would forego settlements if that meant a peace deal with the Palestinians (Granted, that is a big IF). However, it is the hard-liners who hold sway in Israeli elections, basically, they serve as kingmakers. That is why Ehud Barak, for all the public show of being a peacemaker, actually increased settlement building during his tenure as Prime Minister.

So far, Abbas has done a good job in the West Bank of keeping militants in check, though Hamas has done a poor job of controlling even more radical groups in Gaza. It will be up to Netanyahu to keep his right flank happy, even as he discusses a peace deal.

However, as long as there is no violence, Israel has no incentive to negotiate peace with the Palestinians. They hold all the cards. Its neighbors are weak and divided, and the Palestinians have no means of self-determination.

The Israeli government, over the past several years has only responded to violence. Israel occupied Gaza and the West Bank since 1967, yet it took the first intifada to get them to do anything, and the second to offer statehood. It has constantly awarded violence. By withdrawing from Gaza without symbolic concessions from the Palestinians and instead of making Abbas look good, the withdrawl appeared to be a victory for Hamas. By offering hundred of Lebanese prisoners in a swap for a handful of Israeli bodies, but only releasing a few Palestinians, it made Hizbollah look strong and the Palestinians look weak. Now Olmert did do a better job than pervious governments in releasing Palestinian prisoners, but Israel has the power to make Palestinian moderates look good or look bad.

Oh, this is just too juicy. I shall return after a brief visit to the store. ‘Til then…

Ethanks~
.
“Go to the Middle East, and see for yourself.”
.
Funny you should mention that…
.
I’ll repost this response I wrote to Newfreedomblog (NFB) on Joe Klein’s “Pressuring Iran” thread the other day…
.
As recently as 2005, I was staunchly pro-Israel, a truth that blows your charges of Anti-Semitism out of the water. I saw Israel as a beleaguered nation fighting for its very existence. I heard the calls for a right to defend itself and a right to exist, and I thought to myself, of course. Surely, Israel should not stand defenseless whilst encircled by enemies. Still reeling from the near-death of my uncle in the attacks on the WTC, I allowed my anger to rationalize heavy-handed policies when fighting against the scourge of terrorism. I majored in Political Science, minoring in Security Studies, and I devoted myself to studying radical Islam accepting a fellowship with the very pro-Israel DC-based counter-terrorism thinktank, the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. I travelled to Israel to undertake a case-study of Israeli security policies in the summer of 2006. This is when everything changed for me. It’s very easy to justify heavy-handedness from the comfort of an American classroom, far less so when faced with the realities of human suffering on a day-by-day basis, tangible suffering that you can reach out and touch and see with your very own eyes. During 12-hour days at Tel-Aviv University, I became increasingly unsettled by the chauvinistic seminars by IDF, Shin Bet, Mossad, and government officials. They were presenting two narratives that I could not reconcile. On the one hand, they were stressing the vulnerability of Israel to myriad threats, the overwhelming odds they faced, the daily battle that all Israelis deal with, living in terror and anxiety of annihilation. On the other hand, they gloated about their military prowess, their sheer superiority, and the feckless ineptitude of their Arab counterparts. These seeming contradictions were accentuated by the daily media reports (Israeli media) documenting the death and carnage being waged against Lebanon and in Gaza by the IDF, while Tel-Aviv remained a bustling, thriving, upbeat city. The nightlife was enthralling, with packed restaurants, pubs, and nightclubs, Israeli girls in miniskirts and American tourists as far as the eye could see. The piers in North Tel-Aviv remained awash in youthful party-goers well into the night, while one could recede to Jaffa for a more quiet ambience, with candle lit restaurants awaiting the more romantically inclined. Hardly the picture of an embattled people fighting for their very survival. Over the course of several more weeks, I was steadily exposed to more and more of the harsh realities of Israel’s policies, as the misthruths of Israel’s propaganda become all the more evident. In a Jewish settlement near Ramallah I saw first hand the immoral disparity between security and standards of living for the Jewish residents and the Arab residents, this despite the fact that we were on Arab lands, i.e. the West Bank. Again, in Jerusalem, I saw the symptoms of occupation, the matured emptiness in the eyes of otherwise youthful Palestinian children, the dilapidated conditions in East Jerusalem, the constant presence of Israeli soldiers at every turn, harrassing and haranguing local Arab vendors, that is until they noticed foreigners in their midst. They clearly have two fronts, one the reality, and one they try to show the world. But, occupation is a nasty business, and you simply cannot hide it anymore. Something I’ve come to realize, most poignantly in my travels throughout Israel and the West Bank. I could go on detailing my visit to an Israeli prison near Jerusalem where I interviewed imprisoned members of Hamas, Fatah, and Islamic Jihad, or my experiences crossing the border into the West Bank. I could passionately convey my heartbreaking return to the region to volunteer in Gaza in 2007, an experience that still leaves me in absolute shock at the world’s inhumanity. But, to what end? For you are secure in your conviction, NFB, as I was once, and nothing but reality can alter those perceptions. All the rhetoric, all the textbooks, all the media hype and bloviated discourse are meaningless. Reality is reality, and until you actually see it, you’ll never know it.

I’ve seen that during the Bush years, too.
.
It’s a dichotomy I never liked here, and I had a name for this penchant for standing off so clinically from the wars that were wreaked:
.
“The Nintendo Effect”.
.
A couple interesting points, because I’m not attempting to hitch my wagon to yours with the intent of implicitly imparting beliefs you may not share with me about the Bush years:
.
When 9/11 happened, I was outside our complex with a very diverse crowd, all yelling, waving American flags at passersby. They honked and we cheered.
.
When we attacked Afghanistan, I cheered. I remember driving down the freeway pumping my fist (illegal of course).
.
When we attacked Iraq, I told my boss that I expected that the US Forces would find Saddam’s WMD, but, I did ask him this question:
.
What if they couldn’t find any?
.
An interesting post, Exiled…

I’ve seen that Abbas is having problems with his own people, who dearly want from Abbas something to show for his current stance of cooperation with Israel.
.
Netanyahu has offered him nothing but cosmetics, and he’s not buying. His own political future is at risk if he can’t show some detectable benefit besides not being ground under the heels of an Israeli boot.
.
If Netanyahu persists in weakening Abbas, other political forces may step into the picture. And we all know who they are…
.
A note to all who think Israel is invincible:
.
When I first came to the swamp, I told Joe that one of the worst oversight he and all others have overlooked is that the age of cheap rocketry has arrived.
.
And Joe, I was right!
.
I may not be a political analyst, or an ME expert, or any of those card carrying critters that get listened to, but I saw how the cards would lie.
.
Indeed, now, Hizb Allah can reach Tel Aviv, and two wars have been fought, and as I predicted on swampland Israel was unable to win either war. The roackets, as I also predicted became more sophisticated, and now, also as I predicted Israelis no longer can claim safety behind that prison wall they built for themselves.
.
I strongly suggest that Israel learn how to make freinds, and try a just peace for a change!
.
Ehud Barak was not wrong when he said that Israel cannot rule the Palestinians forever…

I do not see Arabs ever agreeing to recognize Israel’s sovereignty. (Newfreedomblog, post #4)
.

The Arabs demand a return to the exact borders of 1967…The Arabs demand a “right of return”…The Arabs continue to deny Israel’s legitimate right to exist…Finally, the Arabs continue to foment hatred for all Israelis and all Jews, and claim it is their religious duty to kill Jews. (jbaustian, post #6.2)
.
Such simplistic world-views, such utter lack of cultural comprehension. Who are these Arabs of which you both speak? Are Arabs some rare contradiction to the basic elements of human-nature, a people so immersed in tribalism that these millions think and act as one? Setting aside the very real and tangible divisions among Arabs, most notably expressed in the Sunni-Shia rift among others, as well as the more general conceptualization of individuality, you are both aware that most Arab states have agreed to recognize Israel’s sovereignty within the pre-1967 borders? The Arab League Inititiative was unanimously agreed upon, however, recognition comes only with Israel’s withdrawal from occupied territories. To you, jbaustian, “the Arabs” do not foment hatred for all Israelis and Jews. Some do. Most do not. The overwhelming hatred is towards the ideology of Zionism, and Israel’s expansionist, colonial policies. Extremism and racism do exist among the Arabs, as they exist among the Jews. Though it doesn’t fit your world-view, a great many of Israel’s settlers in the West Bank preach openly about the Jewish duty to expell and kill the Arabs within Judea and Samaria (the West Bank). Books have been published, articles written, and sermons proclaimed, in the open of Israeli society, exalting the superiority of the Jewish people, and the dispensibility of the Palestinians. Hatred is rampant on both sides, and until Israel recognizes full, unbridled sovereignty of Palestinian lands, it should expect nothing more from “the Arabs.”