And The Goal Is?
Yes, yes, I know; bear with me. The goal is, as I understand it, as much of the world agrees is a laudable and needed one, both for humanitarian and defusing reasons, sister-states. Humanitarian: the Palestinians require a recognized, autonomous, separate state of their own with defined borders. Defusing the current and long-standing incendiary conditions which may still lead to an all-out war within the Middle East; presumably with the Palestinian question settled militant Islamists will no longer have a 'reason' to claim that Israel is an oppressor of the Palestinian people.Needless to say, had other Arab community states commiserated humanely with the homeless Palestinians the refugee camps would not have had the long existence they've enjoyed; the refugees, having been made to feel welcome as fellow Arabs by their brethren, where appropriate to their refuge, could have settled comfortably, instead of carefully tending to their cinder-box of aggrievement. But that wasn't on the agenda as we well know; fellow Arabs and their heads of state considered the festering sore of righteous determination to recapture what was once 'theirs' more to the point; of greater utility.
Should the nascent Palestinian State finally come to fruition, what then will the hostile states surrounding Israel descend to in their unending efforts to uproot the state comprised of other-than-Muslims? Total capitulation? The possibility is always there, and there is always room to hope. Meanwhile, the Palestinian legislators are attempting to extract a heavy toll upon agreement to disengage from hostilities leading to a final acceptance of the State of Israel living peacefully alongside its neighbours.
Why not trade off land-for-land determined by the residents currently on the premises? The suggestion has been made before and should be repeated; where majority Palestinians reside, encourage the minority Jewish populations to consider a transfer to areas hosting majority Jewish residents and vice versa. Beats having discrete and oppositional neighbours eyeing one another and continuing to foment mischief as is currently the case. Since the Israeli government has already formed a committee to study the feasibility of removing some hundred-thousand Jewish residents from homes in areas which would be encompassed by the creation of a new Palestinian state, offer a trade.
Both sides, after all, should be prepared to make certain gestures of good will, certain sacrifices, compromises. There are no workable one-sided solutions which is what the Palestinian Authority seems to be arguing for: that a significant part of Jerusalem be given over to the Palestinians, that the West Bank in its entirety be submitted to Palestinian statehood, and the capstone - that "right of return" be agreed upon. All of these three issues are problematical to the utmost degree.
Israel wholeheartedly embraced over three-hundred-thousand Jewish refugees from their various Arab and Muslim countries of origin. A like number of Palestinians fled the confines of the new Jewish state upon its proclamation of legitimacy. That number has swelled over the space of 60 refugee-camp years to well over two million. Israel already has within its midst as legitimate citizens of Israel more than modest numbers of Israeli-Arabs and Kurds; to accept a further unwieldly number would be to spell the end of the Jewish state, as such.
That is the core of the problem. And that, I fear, is the underhanded, petulant and demanding end-game of the Palestinians. These unreasonable demands are meant to accomplish slowly but surely what years of agitation and guerilla war, and insurgent terrorism have been unable to. Out-populate the Jews and voila! no more Jewish state.
At the very best there would come into existence a state set aside specifically for the Palestinian population of the region, and another, adjacent half-Arab, half-Jewish state.
This is called progress in reasonable debate leading to a reasonable solution to an intractable problem? Yes, if you're an insincere, scheming and under-handed adversary posing as an earnest, honest and well-meaning partner seeking a long-overdue solution to a solvable-enough problem. But Israel is bargaining with PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, that trustworthy 'moderate' who sees nothing amiss in calling for arms "to be turned against Israel", the PA's "occupying forces".
His bargaining counterpart, MK Livni suggests that PA Arabs living now in the West Bank remain there, rather than aspire to find homes within Israel. Yet Mr. Abbas maintains, while stating his obligation to the negotiating process, that Arabs be resettled within Israel should they so desire, and not within a newly-created Palestinian state. Why then, bargain, why insist on the desperate need for a Palestinian state; only to hide the obvious that in so doing the entire goal is to subsume the Israeli one?
How hypocritical can the situation get, when Mahmoud Abbas continually stresses commitment, urging that the "Palestinian-Israeli conflict requires a workable solution" leading first to peace between the nations, followed by the establishment of the ardently-sought Palestinian state. The atmosphere he bargains in, however is not conducive to concluding a satisfactory conclusion agreeable to both sides.
He speaks the talk, but doesn't walk the talk. The Fatah faction of the PA has done its utmost to continue undermining the sovereignty of the Israeli state, encouraging nomadic tribesmen to illegally intrude on lands owned and occupied legally by Israelis, and to settle there to create instability and insecurity for the legitimate land-owners. Israeli farmers are facing constant disruptions in their daily working lives with cattle being stolen and infrastructures demolished or torched.
The "just solution" of which Mr. Abbas and his bargaining agents speak to settle the "refugee crisis" is an error of perception, for it will never be practical for Israel to permit these hordes of "refugees" to re-settle within Israel. Clever manipulation of process and perception, practised deceit posing as honest debate may express the traditional manner in which adversaries within the region bargain, but it does not represent an honest attempt to solve a critical problem.
The "Arab initiatives" of which Mr. Mahmoud speaks with respect to a viable and acceptable two-state solution reflects Arab demands, as though they are morally superior and in the ascendency as far as strength of determination is concerned. These demands are just that; demands. They are not suggestions, recommendations; they are not put forward as a wish-list; they are adamantly aggressive demands which the PA must know cannot be acceptable to a state which has on its own agenda its long-term survival.
Should, by some miracle, the PA become serious about negotiations, envisioning a true state of peace between two sovereign neighbours, then he can be reasonably assured of shared opportunities with his neighbour, regional cooperation in economic opportunities, scientific and educational advancement, assistance in the medical-health community and sharing of infrastructure advancements to propel the new state toward self-sufficiency.
Judging from the record of past negotiations, it begins to seem like deja vu all over again.
Labels: Middle East
posted by Pieface @ Friday, January 26, 2007
<< Home