Preemption – Moon of Alabama

October 4, 2004

Preemption

The candidates seem not to differ in their position on Israel and Palestine. In the foreign policy debate Bush used seven words to mention Israel, Kerry used five. Security is the top issue for the US electorate, the Palestine conflict is no. 17 on a list of 19 priorities (Link). If Osama bin Laden talks of: “ignoring the real problem of occupying the entirety of Palestine” the West ignores him too – until he hits again.

While the electorate sleeps, evangelist Pat Robertson stirs the fire. Haaretz reports:

In two Jerusalem appearances, Robertson Sunday praised Israel as part of God’s plan and criticized Arab countries and some Muslims, saying their hopes to include Israeli-controlled land in a Palestinian state are part of “Satan’s plan.”

Without the $100 billion Israel has received by the United States since 1949, currently at an official $3 billion per year rate, the state of Israel could not exist. Some calculate the costs induced to the US by Israel at exceeding $1.6 trillion. With their olive trees uprooted by Israels tanks, the Palestinians barely survive through aid from Islamic states and the EU.

A two state solution, as proposed by the now dead roadmap, is not viable. The planed Palestinian state – effectively under Israel’s economic and military control – would never be able to survive. The Zionists long term plan to transfer all Palestinians to Jordan and annex their land does (not yet?) receive support by the US. The only solution left is a one state/two people entity as it factual exists today.

Michael Tarazi, a legal adviser to the Palestine Liberation Organization, argues the case in todays New York Times.

But in this de facto state, 3.5 million Palestinian Christians and Muslims are denied the same political and civil rights as Jews.
…
In South Africa, such an allocation of rights and privileges based on ethnic or religious affiliation was called apartheid. In Israel, it is called the Middle East’s only democracy.

A one state solution does look difficult today, but it is the only one that has a long term chance for peace. An international initiative, with soft words of help and a big stick threat of economic sanctions, could bring this about.

Bin Laden thinks new blows with his big stick are needed to start this initiative. The west should preempt him by starting it now.

Context Links:
Gaza residents run out space to bury dead
Strike looms again over unpaid wages
A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties
Two Peoples, One State

Posted by b on October 4, 2004 at 10:29 UTC | Permalink

Comments

Minor correction: “Pat” Robertson, not “Ted”.
Furthermore, the assertion
“Without the $100 billion Israel has received by the United States since 1949, currently at an official $3 billion per year rate, the state of Israel could not exist. Some calculate the costs induced to the US by Israel at exceeding $1.6 trillion.”
while quite congruent with American perceptions of its own indispensable role might not be the case. Presumably Israel would seek and find other allies should the relation with America ever cool. Although “the elites” may be beginning to have serious and well-founded doubts about that relation, we are more likely to see hell freeze over before AIPAC’s hold on the U.S. congress is broken. Money talks.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Oct 4 2004 11:15 utc | 1

Bin Laden thinks new blows with his big stick are needed to start this initiative. The west should preempt him by starting it now.
Appeaser!

Posted by: slothrop | Oct 4 2004 15:19 utc | 2

Thank you so much for raising this issue. I was really struck by the fact that it did not come up at all during the recent debate, a sad testament to the ultimate outcome of the Bush policy over there, which has been to remove all semblance of objectivity or neutrality and to give Ariel Sharon and the Likud party everything they ever dreamed of, including removing even any fig leaf of an appearance of a need to negotiate with the Palestinians over their future. The profound impact of that policy on the lives of millions of human beings who happen to be Palestinian makes a complete mockery of any Bush claim to support “freedom” in any form. The Palestinians today are in a situation that is far worse than apartheid ever was. And the chance for any kind of shared solution in that troubled land has passed. The outcome that I see is 100 more years of bloodshed (accompanied by 100 more years of regional vitriolic hatred of the US for its incredibly unfair policy that underwrites Israel’s oppression of Palestinians) until both sides realize they have to live with one another in a shared state. I am profoundly saddened by the fact that the issue has fallen off the radar screen completely, as if Palestinians only matter when they are causing harm to Israelis. Once the area is “quiet” (which means, once Israelis are not getting harmed, not once violence has ceased on all sides), apparently no one cares any more. But the fact of the matter is, Palestinian lives in the past few years of Bush rule have taken a profound, incalculable turn for the worse.
I have to say, this is an issue that is near and dear to my heart, as I have lived in the region and seen the effects of our policies first hand, and most Americans have no clue what absolute darkness we have wrought. Where is the U.S. that used to stand proudly for the human dignity of every person, not make a pretense of supporting liberty in order to justify a policy of incredible oppression? And worst of all, how on earth did we allow ourselves to move from taking Israel’s side in the world to becoming an occupier just like Israel–thereby fulfilling all the worst possible expectations that the Arab and Muslim world might have had of us?
The mind boggles. Truly, the damage wrought to our standing in that part of the world in the past four years is unfathomable.

Posted by: Bea | Oct 4 2004 15:28 utc | 3

And I meant to add, in response to your post, that the fact that Kerry has chosen to echo the Bush position on the Israel-Palestine situation is an indication of real political cowardice. I refuse to believe that he really in his heart BELIEVES that the Bush position is the right one for the US. I can only conclude that he’s willing to dispense with moral integrity for the sake of political expediency, and that is not in line with the person whom I thought he was. I can only hope that once elected, Kerry moves swiftly to redress some of the terrible errors the Bush Administration has made in that arena. More of the same would be a disaster.

Posted by: Bea | Oct 4 2004 15:37 utc | 4

A few weeks ago, I came across the book ‘Leap of Faith, Memoirs of an Unexpected Life’. It is the story of Queen Noor, the last wife of King Hussein of Jordania. It was very unexpected in its content, despite it being the memoirs of a Queen it is not much about the glitter and gloria. I have learned more about Muslims and the newer ME history than from any other source. It is also interesting as she came to the ME with some of the typical Western bias. She also offers many aspects of ME and of course Jordanian history from a different point of view, that of Arabs. Very interesting.
The interesting thing about Queen Noor is that she was born Lisa Halaby, an American with a Western mother and an American-Arab father and educated in Princeton. Now I agree she might be painting Hussein in a better light than he really was, on the other hand she was a direct witness to the Palestinian and also US politics and met many of the people involved. She shows an interesting side to the Camp David talks between Egypt and Isreal and how Carter treated the Jordanians which I wasn’t aware before. She tries to be neutral, but her heart is definitely with the Palestinians and Israel doesn’t get away well. There are some stories and happenings I have not heard before, or only from the point of view of Westerners. Still, it is not a history book – it is the memoirs of a Queen.
I wish I could give you some excerps, but unfortunately I bought the German translation and at present do not have the time to translate.

Posted by: Fran | Oct 4 2004 17:07 utc | 5

Bea,
I agree w/ you on the importance of the issue of Palestine, but two assumptions you might want to reassess are
Where is the U.S. that used to stand proudly for the human dignity of every person, not make a pretense of supporting liberty in order to justify a policy of incredible oppression? and how on earth did we allow ourselves to move from taking Israel’s side in the world to becoming an occupier just like Israel…? Think back to who the original inhabitants of the land now called the USA were, and what “dignity” they or the imported slave laborers were afforded in the propaganda of “liberty” and “enlightenment.” Quoting Popper: The darkness had always been there. The light was new.

Posted by: b real | Oct 4 2004 19:07 utc | 6

Fran,
German translation is fine with me.
Looking forward,

Posted by: MarcinGomulka | Oct 5 2004 19:34 utc | 7

MarcinGomulka, I will try to write a short resumée over the weekend, if I can find the time.

Posted by: Fran | Oct 5 2004 21:22 utc | 8

talking points would be enough.

Posted by: MarcinGomulka | Oct 6 2004 0:14 utc | 9

Back to Main