Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Skewed Middle East Peace Talks
Whether there's a deal or not, the Palestinians can't really win, while the Israelis have little to lose
Israelis and Palestinians who have started peace negotiations in Washington are separated by much more than the gulf between their substantive positions. Staggering asymmetries between the two sides could seriously imperil the talks.
Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu is the head of a stable state with the ability to deliver on his commitments. Celebrations of supposed institution-building notwithstanding, Palestinians have no robust central authority. Their territory is divided between the West Bank and Gaza. On their own, Palestinians would find it difficult to implement an agreement, however much they might wish to. Israel controls all material assets; Palestinians at best can offer intangible declarations and promises.
Netanyahu operates within a domestic consensus. On issue after issue – acceptance of a two-state solution, insistence on Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, rejection of a full settlement freeze including Jerusalem, refusal of preconditions for negotiations – his stances resonate with the Israeli people. Neither the right, from which he comes, nor the left, whose peace aspirations he is pursuing, denies him the mandate to negotiate. Netanyahu is heading on his own terms to negotiations he has demanded for 20 months; Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas is being dragged there without any of his preconditions having been met.
The Palestinian leadership has never been more vulnerable. Participation in talks was opposed by virtually every Palestinian political organisation apart from Fatah, whose support was lethargic. Abbas's decision to come to Washington is viewed sceptically even by those who back him. Netanyahu's is supported even by those who oppose him.
Palestinian views are well known. There is little to no distinction between their public, opening and final positions. Yet no one truly knows the Israeli stance. Netanyahu can start with maximalist positions and then climb down, exuding flexibility next to what inevitably will be couched as Palestinian obstinacy. Palestinians are likely to be frustrated, the atmosphere poisoned, and American bridging proposals – likely falling somewhere between Palestinian bottom lines and Israel's negotiating posture – risk being skewed.
Palestinian negotiators have logged countless hours on final status questions since the 1990s. The reverse is true on the Israeli side. From Netanyahu down, only one leading figure has seriously tackled permanent status issues, and it is unclear what role defence minister Ehud Barak may play. This disparity should favour the Palestinians – the experienced trumps the novice. But they will also be prisoners of their well-worn outlook, whereas the Israelis will be free to introduce new ideas. Yet again, Palestinians will confront the maddening task of beginning from scratch a process they have undergone on multiple occasions.
Neither Israel's mounting isolation nor its reliance on US assistance has jeopardised its ability to make autonomous choices, whereas the Palestinian leadership's decision-making capacity has shrivelled. Most recent Palestinian decisions have been made in accordance with international demands, against the leadership's instinctive desires and in clear opposition to popular aspirations. Despite such deference, Palestinian leaders cannot count on international support. They feel betrayed by Arab allies and let down by Washington. In contrast, Israel has defied the Obama administration without endangering close ties to Washington. Palestinians will have to take into account the views of Arab and Muslim states; Israel can negotiate by and for itself, without reference to an outside party.
What happens should negotiations fail? The status quo, though sub-optimal, presents no imminent danger to Israel. What Israelis want from an agreement is something they have learned either to live without (Palestinian recognition) or to provide for themselves (security). The demographic threat many invoke as a reason to act – the possibility that Arabs soon might outnumber Jews, forcing Israel to choose between remaining Jewish or democratic – is exaggerated. Israel already has separated itself from Gaza. In the future, it could unilaterally relinquish areas of the West Bank, further diminishing prospects of an eventual Arab majority. Because Israelis have a suitable alternative, they lack a sense of urgency. The Palestinians, by contrast, have limited options and desperately need an agreement.
In any event, Abbas will return to a fractured, fractious society. If he reaches a deal, many will ask in whose name he was bartering away Palestinian rights. If negotiations fail, most will accuse him of once more having been duped. If Netanyahu comes back with an accord, he will be hailed as a historic leader. His constituency will largely fall in line; the left will have no choice but to salute. If the talks collapse, his followers will thank him for standing firm while his critics are likely in due course to blame the Palestinians. Abbas will be damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Netanyahu will thrive if he does and survive if he doesn't. One loses even if he wins, the other wins even if he loses. There is no greater asymmetry than that.
- Posted in
29 Comments so far
Show All"What happens should negotiations fail? The status quo, though sub-optimal, presents no imminent danger to Israel. What Israelis want from an agreement is something they have learned either to live without (Palestinian recognition) or to provide for themselves (security). "
This is an insightful argument. How does Israel prosper from a solution to the problem? Answer is that really, it doesn't. Things aren't great, but they can survive and have for 40 years. Things have to change significantly to make Israel NEED a peace with the Arabs. 40 years ago there was a threat to Israel, there is no longer....
bull. There was no threat to Israel 40 years ago. They just finished the job they had begun in 1948 - conquest and ethnic cleansing, as they have admitted as much. You can go to youTube and watch the generals brag about it on Israeli TV.
And as for the authors contention that the Palestinians lack international support, he couldn't be more wrong. 3 words - overwhelming international consensus. That is the only salient reality with regard to the future of this conflict, even more so than Israel's arsenal of weapons of terror. The international refusal to allow the Palestinian nation to be exterminated by barbarians will never change, and the American Jewish community has shamed itself for all times by its repulsive acquiescence to these crimes committed in their name.
"Bull" as you so nicely put it. The "International Community" couldn't stop a statue. They don't even have the support of their neighbors.
The Israeli could "exterminate" the Palestinians any time they choose. That is reality. That they have not should answer your argument.
And let me add that the Israeli-Palestinian fight over the future of the West Bank is no longer the nexus of Middle East tensions. The Muslim Arab world is now more terrified by the re-emergence of a bloc of old familiar non-Arabic, Islamic fundamentalist rivals.
"And let me add that the Israeli-Palestinian fight over the future of the West Bank is no longer the nexus of Middle East tensions. The Muslim Arab world is now more terrified by the re-emergence of a bloc of old familiar non-Arabic, Islamic fundamentalist rivals."
Please help me out; I don't understand what you mean. I guess "non-Arabic, Islamic fundamentalist rivals" means Iran, and "the Muslim-Arab world" that is now "terrified" might mean Saudi Arabia and Egypt, two repressive regimes whose leaderships are justly "terrified" of losing power, and certainly fear "rivals," though they don't have a problem with Islamic fundamentalism.
Are you just trying to get more "attack Iran" memes going?
It is not the "Muslim Arab world" that is "terrified" by Iran's potential rise to power in the region. It is Israel and the U.S. and the repressive regimes they embrace.
You'll remember that while Iran has not attacked any of its neighbors in hundreds of years, Israel's aggression never stops, and U.S.-funded support for and imposition of corrupt and repressive Arab governments never stops, either. And who can ever forget the misery suffered in Iran after the U.S. engineered a coup to remove the democratically-elected Prime Minister Mossadegh in 1953, replacing him with the torture regime of the U.S.-backed Shah of Iran?
from wikipedia:
"Mosaddegh was an author, administrator, lawyer, prominent parliamentarian, and politician, famous for his passionate opposition to foreign intervention in Iran. During his time as prime minister, a wide range of progressive social reforms were carried out. Unemployment compensation was introduced, factory owners were ordered to pay benefits to sick and injured workers, and peasants were freed from forced labour in their landlords' estates. Twenty percent of the money landlords received in rent was placed in a fund to pay for development projects such as public baths, rural housing, and pest control.
"He is most famous as the architect of the nationalization of the Iranian oil industry, which had been under British control since 1913 through the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC) (later British Petroleum or BP). The Anglo-Iranian Oil Co. was controlled by the British government. Mosaddegh was removed from power in a coup on 19 August 1953, organised and carried out by the United States CIA."
Who is "terrified," mightymite, and of whom, and why?
petrkrop
Please take a look at my post to Peggyfor peace below.
"I guess "non-Arabic, Islamic fundamentalist rivals" means Iran"
Correct, and her clients Syria, Hamas, Hezbollah, etc.
"the Muslim-Arab world" that is now "terrified" might mean Saudi Arabia and Egypt"
Correct, among others.
"certainly fear "rivals," though they don't have a problem with Islamic fundamentalism."
They have a tremendous fear and problem with "Islamic fundamentalism." Especially the Saudi's. Thats why they behave as they do.
"Are you just trying to get more "attack Iran" memes going?"
Frankly, I don't see what attacking Iran would have to do with this. Who did you have in mind in any case? Not us for sure. Israel I would assume.
"You'll remember that while Iran has not attacked any of its neighbors in hundreds of years"
While true, its irrelevent. She is obviously determined to be the power in the Middle East and has been funding surrogate attacks and wars for years.
"Israel's aggression never stops"
Pasrtially true, lets not forget the agression agaist her by the Arab and Muslim states. She is to blame recently. but lets not give a pass to everyone else involved.
"and U.S.-funded support for and imposition of corrupt and repressive Arab governments never stops, either"
Here you have me, who are you speaking of?
"And who can ever forget the misery suffered in Iran after the U.S. engineered a coup to remove the democratically-elected Prime Minister Mossadegh in 1953, replacing him with the torture regime of the U.S.-backed Shah of Iran?"
Quite true.
I understand what you were trying to imply with..."Who is "terrified," mightymite, and of whom, and why?" but I'll stand by my opinion that it is the Saudi and other Arab states that are terrified. And don't forget Turkey.
I also stand by my opinion that the Palestian question may very well sink into the background for the reasons I stated.
And view it also in the context I mentioned to Peggy of the changes happening, rise of nationalism, etc.
Aaargh Mightymite - a Zionist troll by an other name.
Which Israeli disinformation bureau is feeding you this utter propaganda?
Ahhh, the Troll that doesn't know real history.
What would you consider "propaganda" sir? Which point (or points) EXACTLY do you say is not true? Should be very interesting.
Typical Zionist propaganda. Israel is not as strong as people think. It is propped up by a decaying empire. Israel is one more financial crisis away from being in a world of hurt. I don't think the Chinese give a flying .... Whether Israel survives as a country or not. The only arabs worried about Iran are our puppets. They do not have the support of their people. There will be no more arab wars with Iran.
The thing that is tiresome is the continuation of..."whoevers" propaganda is blah, blah,blah...but never one single sentence as to what they are specifically referring to. Just blather.
If you get your head out of your ideology long enough, you might just want to learn something about the real world and what the grown ups are doing.
Mightymite gives a nice demonstration of current Zionist best practice - distract attention from the topic of discussion. Whenever there is a critical analysis of Israeli crimes, they start talking about Iran and Saudi Arabia. Funny, universities aren't in turmoil about divesting from these countries. Palestinian liberation is the cause celebre the world over and all the dissembling by Termites, Mighty or otherwise, will not change that.
Same comment.
The thing that is tiresome is the continuation of..."whoevers" propaganda is blah, blah,blah...but never one single sentence as to what they are specifically referring to. Just blather.
If you get your head out of your ideology long enough, you might just want to learn something about the real world and what the grown ups are doing.
There is a distinction to be made here, that unfortunately you did not.
The problem is not the American Jewish community, but the American Zionist Community.
www.nkusa.org
www.jewsagainstzionism.com
Much like there is a great distinction between Christian groups, like the Quakers, and Dominionist groups, like the New Life Church, there is a great distinction between Jews and Zionists. This goes back to the founding of the Zionist ideology. A telling quote:
"Zionism is a suicide attempt on the part of Judaism."
-- Dr. Moritz Güdemann, chief rabbi of Vienna, 1897. (Cited by Jacob A. Rubin, Partners in State Building: American Jewry and Israel; New York, 1969; p.35).
The more we play into the hands of AIPAC by equating Zionism with Judaism, the more strength they have.
Israel is a golden calf, and specifically forbidden by the traditional teachings of Judaism.
Not really. Israel's enemies have LONG provided an economic drain on Israel. Threatened their markets, decimated tourism and forced it to spend a cripplingly high percentage of their GDP on defense.
Of course Israel would be happy to have more stability for investment, more tourism and less defense spending. They just know that they have to trade something tangible for something intangible. And something very hard to revoke in exchange for something every easy to revoke.
I might sound like a repeating drum but I emphasize again that the Zionist are Masters! Masters with a capitol "M". They are THE big bosses. They are the shot callers, the final say rests with those who have a choke hold not only on Palastine and America, but soon the World will see that they've got the Master Grip over the Globe! (for now anyways). They ARE the "Man". The elite circle of Zionist Jews are the white mans "White Man"!
Understand what you're effin with!
I might sound like a repeating drum but I emphasize again that the Zionist are Masters! Masters with a capitol "M". They are THE big bosses. They are the shot callers, the final say rests with those who have a choke hold not only on Palastine and America, but soon the World will see that they've got the Master Grip over the Globe! (for now anyways). They ARE the "Man". The elite circle of Zionist Jews are the white mans "White Man"!
Understand what you're effin with!
"Most recent Palestinian decisions have been made in accordance with international demands, against the leadership's instinctive desires and in clear opposition to popular aspirations."
Translation: Palestinian Authority "President" Abbas's term of office ended 18 months ago, but he and his henchmen have been able to illegally stay in office because the U.S. finances and arms them. Abbas and his Fatah party refuse to hold elections because they know that they would lose. Abbas is a corrupt puppet of the U.S.
I wouldn't say Abbas is a puppet of the U.S., but her is certainly supported by our government instead of the legally elected government. Something we may perhaps change whith the elections in November.
In any case, this conflict is dimming in importance in the region and may well sink into status quo.
"In any case, this conflict is dimming in importance in the region and may well sink into status quo." Please provide us the basis for this overly broad statement.
Essentially look at the worries of the Arab states. The Muslim Arab world is now more terrified by the re-emergence of Iran and non-Arabic, Islamic fundamentalist states and organizations than anything else.
And these folks all share contempt for the squabbling Sunni Arab world of rich, defenseless oil rich-sheikdoms like the Saudi's and old state authoritarians like Egypt.
Turkey wants to revive the old Ottoman sultanate. She wants to be the (or another) unifier and protector of Islam. Armenia, Cyprus, Greece and Kurdistan are about as comfortable as the Saudi about this.
It is overly broad, but thats because it is an overview of what is happening. If it continues, the Palestinian question will certainly take a back seat.
Also view it in the context of rising nationalism in every country and the breaking down of the post Cold War alliances and placements.
Agree on all point, and I'll add the following link to a story that discusses how the US funds the training of Abbas' security force, which is trained in Jordan (I'm sure the US is involved). In addition, Abbas has worked to destroy the Hamas party through arrests in the West Bank so Abbas has no real political threats. Yes, he is a US puppet.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL4918183
Interesting link. OK, I'll go with puppet in that case.
Abbas can try what he likes, we can be as unhappy as we like, but Hamas cannot be destroyed. Aside from the fact that Hamas is the duly elected government, not Abbas, most Palestinians (my opinion)think their best chance lies with Hamas to achieve statehood. As long as that is the case, it matters not what Obama, Bush or whomever would like.
bligh4
So, Arafat and his Fatah party were U.S. puppets?
There is no realistic hope for Palestine as long as Israel maintains it current manifest destiny. Israel has too much power in Washington, and the status quo will remain, peace talks, notwithstanding.
The current round is happening because Israel needs some political cover for its impending attack on Iran. Such an attack will be widely applauded on the Hill, and there will be no lack of support by Hillary and Rob.
It will be a lot of bombing, and destruction in Iran, but, not enough damage done to the deter nuclear capacity. Iran will benefit from having its stature raised in that they will survive the aggression, while at the same time scoring a historically better kill ratio.
If Iran will use oil as a weapon, they will make life very uncomfortable for Western economies. At the very least, finally, there will be some price to pay for American and Israeli aggression. Gas prices will soar, as the oil companies gouge, when a shortfall of oil occurs, no matter how puny Iran's effort is to cause some disruption of supply.
If Iran is clever they will anticipate the attack, and prepare a counter attack. They only have to kill several thousand Israelis to become the champions to a billion muslims. If they are also clever enough to infiltrate the significant opposition in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt that currently exists, the situation could further destabilize those regimes, that allow Israel to get away with their treatment of Palestine.
How ironic would be if the regime changes caused by this aggression turns out to favor Iran? Giving Iran a leg up was not Bush's objective, but that is what has happened.
Eventually, Israel will overplay its hand. The result of centuries of economic oppression of the peasants of Europe created the kind of hate that Hitler used to forge his rise in Germany. The hatred created by Israel for its behavior in Palestine could have consequences as well.
Politically, Israel cannot make peace with Palestine. That can only continue to make every effort to eradicate the indigenous people who interfere with their racist plans.
“The Palestinians, by contrast, have limited options and desperately need an agreement.”
The last thing Palestinians need is an agreement with Israel. The Zionist regime will continue gobbling up land and expelling Palestinians, treaties notwithstanding, as it has always done. Ugh! Zionist speak with forked tongue.
The only thing that can save the Palestinians from Zionist expansionism now is a strong international BDS movement. For its part, the U.S. government will probably back Israeli apartheid to the bitter end, as it did with South Africa.
“Abbas will be damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.”
Yes, but Zionism may also be damned either way. After sixty years of duplicity and intransigence, Israel has finally made all meaningful negotiations with the Palestinians both impossible and irrelevant. The world is beginning to see the Israeli government for what it is, a rogue regime that will never live in peace with anyone.
The idea that there is only one side of a question, there is only one answer, that there is only one group that has "right" on their side, bespeaks of narrow mindedness that surpasses belief.
No wonder we are losing.
This is the standard fall-back argument for those trying to justify Zionist crimes against humanity. First, they blame the victims of ethnic cleansing and accuse them of terrorism when they resist. When that tactic fails, they blame both victims and aggressors, on the ground that there is never “only one group that has ‘right’ on their side.”
CD readers are too well-informed for this false moral equivalency argument to gain any traction with them.
The Palestinians are relatively innocent in this conflict; the nakbar was perpetrated on them by external forces which they did nothing to provoke.
In contrast, those who use these forums to brazenly defend crimes against humanity deserve their fair share of the blame.
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn09032010.html
Peace talks? I've never heard peace do any talking. Peace is silent and makes no demands.
colonial settler's always have "reasons" for their actions, sometimes the victims of this colonial movement, after a long time, can get free of such a regime, but there are always consequences, South Africa no longer has apartheid, but it's a tremendously unequal society. Algeria no longer has the French but the place is a mess. And these are the successes, lets not even talk about Hawaii or the US mainland. Thus, the fact that there is even a question of Palestinian rights is a kind of success, no matter how minimal. What will probably happen in the future is a default secular democratic state in the form of the South African solution, this is a best case scenario. The damage done to Judaism by zionism is pretty sucky but that will pass in time as zionism exits the world stage and with it unquestioning US financial and diplomatic support. At present, because of this support, any negotiated peace will be a disaster.