GENEVA — On 26 June, Israeli troops began massing on the northern border of Gaza and threatened to invade in retaliation for continuing Palestinian rocket attacks against southern Israel and the kidnapping of an Israeli soldier. Why do I feel that we have been through this before without any real success?
Perhaps it is time for Israelis and the world to acknowledge something they have always preferred to avoid: Why did pullout from the Gaza Strip last year not result in the intended effect of rejuvenating a new Israeli-Palestinian peace process? Because the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank are not the main issue at conflict between Israelis and Palestinians.
I have been attending in Switzerland this week, an annual conference of highly qualified American, Middle Eastern and European research scholars discussing all the major political issues in the Middle East, including Israel-Palestine, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, terrorism, nuclear non-proliferation, and domestic political cultures. Always an excellent window into the minds of well-informed scholars, the gathering this week confirmed for me how large is the variance between Arab analysts and the political establishments in the United States, Europe and Israel.
The basic divergence in perceptions of the Arab-Israeli conflict focuses on the causes, meaning and consequences of Israel’s three main ongoing unilateral moves:
* building the separation wall during the past two years;
* pulling out of Gaza last year; and, according to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s promises,
* pulling out of much of the West Bank in the coming years.
Most people in Israel and the West see these as major, bold initiatives that reflect historic change in the mindset of the Israeli public and political elite, who have decided that they must separate from the Palestinians in West Bank-Gaza lands occupied in 1967.
The reason that Israeli unilateralism has not triggered a renewed peace-making effort is very simple: This is not a unilateral conflict. Easy moves that only reflect the concerns of one side, while leaving the underlying causes of the conflict untouched, will only keep the conflict alive. The only way out of this is the hard way: coming to terms with the core dispute over the land of historic Palestine and the rights of all its people.
For the Palestinians, the dispute is not about Gaza and the West Bank only; it is a wider national conflict that can be resolved by addressing the full dimensions of Palestinian national rights in an integrated manner. This means statehood in the West Bank-Gaza, a capital in Arab East Jerusalem, and resolving the 1948 Palestinian refugee issue fairly, on the basis of international legitimacy and law. In return, the Palestinians have to make the hard decision to live in peace and mutual assured security with a predominantly Jewish Israeli state in its 1967 borders.
The Hamas victory in the last election was badly misinterpreted by Israel, the United States and much of Europe. The victory reflected a series of widespread Palestinian perceptions that must be grasped and engaged politically, including:
* the failure of nearly 40 years of Fateh- and Arafat-led policies;
* the failure of foreign diplomatic intervention, including recent European moves closer to U.S.-Israeli positions;
* the absence of solid Arab support;
* the Israeli center-right majority’s preference for unilateral moves that deny Palestinian national rights; and,
* subordination of Arab-Israeli issues to the American-led “war on terror.” Thus, Palestinians feel they are more or less on their own, and must prepare for a long political and military struggle with Israel.
The Hamas victory represents a reaction to all these perceptions, and reflects the dominant Palestinian strategic approach that aims to achieve three main goals:
* resist Israel militarily and politically, while always exploring opportunities to negotiate with it on equal terms — not the unequal, humiliating and failed terms of the past;
* continue to develop the republican institutions of a pluralistic democracy; and,
* rebuild Palestinian society on the basis of good governance, local security, and a revived economy.
The Palestinian mindset and the Hamas victory both reflect these broad analyses and aims. Palestinians look at themselves and their national issues as an integrated whole, not as a narrow West Bank-Gaza matter or the “demographic threat” to Zionist purity that Israel sees. Palestinian priorities therefore include resolving the refugee issue from 1948, reclaiming all lands occupied in 1967, and stopping Israeli attacks, assassinations and colonial expansion, in return for coexistence with a non-colonial, law-abiding Israel.
The message is very simple: If Israel will not allow Palestinians to live in peace, dignity, and national integrity, Israelis themselves will not be permitted to enjoy those same rights. If Israel is prepared to negotiate seriously and fairly, and resolve the core 1948 issues of the conflict, rather than the secondary ones from 1967, a fair and permanent peace is possible.
Sending yet another Israeli assault brigade to kill and torment more Palestinians in Gaza this week will only heighten that reality, not override it. Israelis must wise up one day and accept the fact that unilateralism — whether invading or retreating with their army — does not solve the problems of a bilateral conflict.
Rami G. Khouri is editor-at-large of the Beirut-based Daily Star, published throughout the Middle East with the International Herald Tribune.
Copyright ©2006 Rami G. Khouri / Agence Global
—————-
Released: 28 June 2006
Word Count: 841
——————-
For rights and permissions, contact:
rights@agenceglobal.com, 1.336.686.9002 or 1.212.731.0757