It's been two weeks since Ariel Sharon took power and tensions are on the
rise in Israel-Palestine. The Bush administration has said it wants the
violence to end. Why then is the US vowing to block the best chance available
to halt the bloodshed?
This week the UN Security Council again considered the deployment of a
'protection force' to calm the situation. The proposal draws strong
international support. But upon Ariel Sharon's request, the US said it would
veto any such effort. Both the US and Israel have even rejected proposals to
send unarmed UN 'observers'. This intransigence is in no one's best interest.
As Sharon visits the White House, repression in the Occupied Territories
increases. Encircling Palestinian towns with trenches and tanks, Sharon has
intensified the collective punishment that sparked the uprising in the first
place. Harsh military lock-downs promise to sow more anger on the Palestinian
street as students are blocked from their universities, workers from their
jobs and patients from much needed medical care. Since September, 428 people
have been killed, seven out of eight of them Palestinian. It's not clear how
high or how lopsided the death toll will need to be before intervention is
sanctioned. The time has come for the US to step aside and let the UN do its
job.
A lasting peace in Israel-Palestine must be based on international law and
enforced with international oversight. Instead, for seven years the US
spurned outside involvement, singularly promoting the Oslo process over the
past seven years. Oslo promised an Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and
Gaza, but led to 50,000 new settlers and the bulldozing of 1,000 more
Palestinian homes. It pledged a sovereign Palestinian state but left all
infrastructure (electricity, telecommunications, gas, water) in Israeli
hands. The formula was "land for peace"; the reality was land in pieces. The
proposed Palestinian state consisted of an archipelago with no free internal
passage, surrounded by a sea of Israeli settlements, bypass roads and
military checkpoints. The Palestinians demanded their home back, and Israel
offered rooms for rent with police stationed in every hallway.
The Israelis want and deserve security. But to get it they must end the
occupation immediately. Expanding settlements, as Sharon has promised, moves
in the opposite direction. Each new settler planted in Palestinian territory
requires Israel to garrison a platoon of soldiers around him, pulling the
Israeli army further away from its own land. To increase security for all,
the UN must help implement Israel's withdrawal of both soldiers and settlers
to the 1967 borders, as mandated by international law.
The Israeli government must end the economic inducements for settlers to move
into the Palestinian territories. These inducements violate UN resolutions as
well as the Oslo agreements in which Israel agreed to freeze settlements.
Last year, the Israeli organization Peace Now released a poll indicating that
53 percent of West Bank settlers had moved to the Occupied Territories for
"non-ideological" reasons: cheap housing, hilltop views and income tax
rebates. Nearly 34 percent of the settlers were prepared to evacuate in
return for reasonable compensation. The UN is well equipped to monitor such a
withdrawal.
But mere observers will not suffice. The UN must deploy a force with a clear
plan for protecting civilians and ending the occupation. Had the UN sent only
unarmed observers to East Timor, those massacres would still be occurring.
Israel is in flagrant violation of international law. With the crime still in
progress, the UN must dispatch protectors not photographers to the scene. If
the Bush administration is serious about ending the violence in
Israel-Palestine, it should stop obstructing the UN from carrying out its
mission.
Ian Urbina writes for the Middle East Report, a publication of the Middle
East Research and Information Project (www.merip.org). He can be contacted at:
(202) 679-9104 or
MERIP1@aol.com
###