Obama Should Engage Now for Middle East Peace

An Israeli air assault on Palestinian targets in Gaza has taken an
estimated 300 lives over the course of the past several days, and the
death toll is mounting rapidly. Dozens of children have been killed,
confirming that there is nothing "surgical" about these strikes.

Most U.S. media coverage portrays a simple struggle between Israelis
on the one side and Gaza's Hamas militants on the other. This is the
line that is being advanced aggressively by the Bush administration and
that has effectively been accepted by President-elect Barack Obama's
transition team, which is maintaining its "Bush speaks for the U.S.
until January 20" line even as the crisis mounts. Following Bush's
lead, Obama has refused to call for a more nuanced and effective U.S.
response to an escalation of the Middle East conflict that Palestinian
parliamentarian Mustafa Barghouti on Sunday described as the worst
since the 1967 war in the region.

Obama and his aides should be openly counseling the Bush
administration to use every diplomatic avenue to promote a ceasefire
and, above all, to urge against an Israeli invasion and occupation of
Gaza.

Unfortunately, the president-elect is doing nothing of the sort.
Some may imagine that this disengaged approach confirms Obama as a true "friend of Israel."

But Jeremy Ben-Ami, the executive director of the U.S.-based pro-Israel, pro-peace advocacy group J Street,
argues that: "While (the recent) air strikes by Israeli Defense Forces
in Gaza can be understood and even justified in the wake of recent
rocket attacks, we believe that real friends of Israel recognize that
escalating the conflict will prove counterproductive, igniting further
anger in the region and damaging long-term prospects for peace and
stability. Respecting Israel's right to defend itself, we urge leaders
there to recognize that there is no military solution to what is
fundamentally a political conflict between the Israeli and Palestinian
peoples."

That sentiment is echoed in Israeli, where many war-weary citizens
are objecting to their government's escalation of a simmering conflict.

While moves to prevent rocket attacks on Israeli targets that have
been launched from Gaza enjoy broad popular support in Israel, there is
good deal of genuine concern about the prospect that Israeli forces
might invade and occupy all or part of Gaza.

A substantial crowd of Israelis - estimated at 2,000 by organizers
-- rallied in Tel Aviv Saturday to protest their country's attacks on
Gaza and to call for an immediate ceasefire. Chanting "No to War - Yes
to Peace," the protesters carried signs urging "Negotiation Instead of
Slaughter" and calling on Israeli leaders to "Lift the Siege from
Gaza".

"(We) are not destined to be the victim of history," says Israeli
parliamentarian Dov Khenin, who has spoken at several anti-war rallies
in recent days.

Khenin argues that, "A comprehensive war in Gaza is dangerous and
unnecessary and will put the lives of thousands of Gazans and western
Negev residents (of Israel) at risk. War is not the solution to
(concerns about rocket attacks on Israeli targets by Hamas militants).
There is another way: a real truce agreement. Not just a cease-fire,
but also ending the Gaza blockade and easing the extreme suffering of a
million-and-a-half people."

Unfortunately, the "comprehensive war" that Khenin fears seems
increasingly likely. Writer Gideon Levy argues that Israel has already
"embarked... on yet another unnecessary, ill-fated war."

"Once again, Israel's violent responses, even if there is
justification for them, exceed all proportion and cross every red line
of humaneness, morality, international law and wisdom," Levy wrote in
Monday's editions of Israel's oldest daily newspaper, Haaretz.

The same paper carried an editorial calling for "a diplomatic move whose goal is a genuine cessation of fire."

The headline on the Haaretz editorial read: "Defend, Don't Invade."

In the U.S., the group Jewish Voice for Peace called for "an immediate end to attacks on all civilians, whether Palestinian or Israeli."

JVP goes on to argue that:

Israel's slow strangulation of Gaza through blockade
has caused widespread suffering to the 1.5 million people of Gaza due
to lack of food, electricity, water treatment supplies and medical
equipment. It is a violation of humanitarian law and has been widely
condemned around the world.

In resisting this strangulation, Hamas resumed launching rockets
and mortars from Gaza into southern Israel, directly targeting
civilians, which is also a war crime. Over the years, these poorly made
rockets have been responsible for the deaths of 15 Israelis since 2004.

Every country, Israel included, has the right and obligation to
protect its citizens. The recent ceasefire between Israel and Hamas in
Gaza shows that diplomatic agreements are the best protection for
civilian life.

Moreover, massive Israeli air strikes have proven an indiscriminate
and brutal weapon. In just two days, the known death toll is close to
300, and the attacks are continuing. By targeting the infrastructure of
a poor and densely populated area, Israel has ensured widespread
civilian casualties among this already suffering and vulnerable
population.

This massive destruction of Palestinian life will not protect the
citizens of Israel. It is illegal and immoral and should be condemned
in the strongest possible terms. And it threatens to ignite the West
Bank and add flames to the other fires burning in the Middle East and
beyond for years to come.

The timing of this attack, during the waning days of a US
administration that has undertaken a catastrophic policy toward the
Middle East and during the run-up to an Israeli election, suggests an
opportunistic agenda for short-term political gain at an immense cost
in Palestinian lives. In the long run this policy will benefit no-one
except those who always profit from war and exploitation. Only a just
and lasting peace, achieved through a negotiated agreement, can provide
both Palestinians and Israelis the security they want and deserve.

Americans for Peace Now, which
works in solidarity with Israeli supporters of diplomatic responses to
the Middle East conflict, on Sunday called upon U.S. officials to
"urgently engage with Israel, regional parties, and the international
community to bring about an immediate halt to the rapidly escalating
hostilities in the Gaza Strip and southern Israel."
Said Americans for Peace Now president Debra DeLee, "Any real
resolution to this crisis will require Israel and Hamas to engage,
directly or indirectly, to achieve a ceasefire and to further engage in
a post-ceasefire political process."

"While we hold - as we always have - that Israel has the right and
the obligation to protect its citizens from attack and threats," added
DeLee, "we know that military power alone will not provide real, long
term remedy for the threat that the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip poses to
Israel. Israel needs stability on its border with Gaza. Such stability
can only be achieved through a political process."

This is just another truth about the Middle East that the Bush administration continues to deny.

The Obama transition team - and the Obama administration that will
soon end Bush's reign of error -- should end the state of denial and
act as candidate Obama said he would when he declared that, "As
President, I will work to help Israel achieve the goal of two states, a
Jewish state of Israel and a Palestinian state, living side by side in
peace and security. And I won't wait until the waning days of my
presidency. I will take an active role, and make a personal commitment
to do all I can to advance the cause of peace from the start of my
Administration...The United States must be a strong and consistent
partner in this process - not to force concessions, but to help
committed partners avoid stalemate and the kind of vacuums that are
filled by violence. That's what I commit to do as President of the
United States."

As with the economy, events have forced Obama's hand. The
president-elect cannot wait until he swears his oath of office to "take
an active role" is advancing the peace process.

Of course, Obama only has the bully pulpit at this point. And he must
use it judiciously. But neglecting to engage at this critical stage
sends the wrong message about the seriousness with which Obama will
pursue that "active role" once he has the power that goes with the
pulpit.

At the very least, Obama and his aides should publicly embrace the spot-on message of J Street's Ben-Ami:

The need for diplomatic engagement goes beyond a
short-term ceasefire. Eight years of American neglect and ineffective
diplomacy have led us directly to a moment when the prospects of a
two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict hang in the
balance and with them the prospects for Israel's long-term survival as
a Jewish, democratic state.

We urge the incoming Obama administration to lead an early and serious
effort to achieve a comprehensive diplomatic resolution to the
Israeli-Palestinian and Arab-Israeli conflicts.

This is a fundamental American interest as we too stand to suffer as
the situation spirals, rage in the region is directed at the United
States, and our regional allies are further undermined. Our goals must
be a Middle East that moves beyond bloody conflicts, an Israel that is
secure and accepted in the region, and an America secured by reducing
extremism and enhancing stability. None of these goals are achieved by
further escalation.

Even in the heat of battle, as friends and supporters of Israel, we
need to remember that only diplomacy and negotiations can end the
rockets and terror and bring Israel long-term security and peace.