I got the “peace process” blues…
The “peace process” industry is in full grind, and fuck is it depressing. It’s the same story everytime – Israel isn’t interested in a just peace, but for political reasons must appear as though it is. As the occupying power, Israel has time on its side. It can afford to wait, to maintain the status quo until the time is ripe, and ‘endless negotiations’ are the perfect mechanism with which to do this.
The latest round is even more farcical than usual, because it is openly and explicitly aimed not at peace, but at isolating Hamas, an organisation whose cooperation is a prerequisite for any serious attempt to end the conflict. The same cycle has been repeating itself for weeks now: Olmert promises “gestures”, like a release of prisoners, and then backtracks. Abbas declares that any meetings must be “serious” and discuss final status issues, or else he’ll walk out. Olmert responds that Israel is looking to take things “slow”, and will not be committing to any peace deal, or even a binding declaration of principles. Abbas grumbles.
So, time now for the most recent installment of ‘The Middle-East “Peace Process”‘… (see here, here and here for previous episodes, all equally disheartening):
On Monday, President Abbas expresses doubts about the sincerity of the latest U.S./Israeli “peace push”:
“We have been told that the summit will be held in November, yet we have not been informed about the exact time or about who will partake in the summit. Most importantly, we do not know the content of the meeting and the expected results if there will be.”
As if to reassure him, Reuters reports on Wednesday that ‘Israel is resisting pressure from the Palestinians to set a strict timetable for implementing any statehood principles’. One Israeli official explains,
“They (the Palestinians) want a tight and strict schedule for implementation. Naturally we can’t commit to a tight and strict schedule”.
Naturally. Another official cites a “performance-based” timline, akin to the ‘roadmap’, as what Israel is looking for. Why? Because the roadmap never went anywhere – it suited Israel’s strategy of “endless negotiations” perfectly. Indeed, the day after the Israeli government approved the roadmap, it entered 14 “reservations” that effectively made it meaningless.
This prompts a warning from Saudi Arabia that unless the planned November “peace summit” sponsored by the U.S. will address key issues and produce a timetable for a final settlement, it will be completely “pointless”. The Saudis reiterate their earlier position that they will only attend the November conference if it results in something substantial.
On Sunday, Olmert declares that, despite the insistance of the Palestinians, there will be no ‘Agreement of Principles’ decided upon at the summit. “There is a difference between an Agreement of Principles and a declaration that presents intentions,” he notes, an indication that there will be ‘no major breakthrough’ in the peace process ahead of the meeting.
Dr. Mustafa Barghouti comments,
“When Olmert says the summit is not going to be more than a declaration of intentions, he reassures anew that the Israelis are not partners in the peace process, and that Olmert’s government is incapable of establishing peace through serious negotiations, and they cover for their failure by accusing the Palestinian side”.
Abbas’ office immediately responds by threatening to boycott the summit unless it promises a “significant breakthrough”. The Israeli government does not reply, and Abbas, grumbling, makes a partial climbdown.
Senior Ha’aretz columnist Danny Rubenstein sums up the obvious:
“The conclusion is that it’s best to be pessimistic. The upcoming weeks will see much talk about negotiations, but not about political changes. Least of all, there will be discussion over significant changes in the reality in the West Bank and Gaza.”
That’s all from the “peace process” industry for today, folks! Don’t forget to tune in next week (or tomorrow, or next year) for more of the bloody same.
Filed under: Israeli / Palestinian, News and politics, US | 22 Comments
Tags: "peace process", Annapolis, International & Foreign Policy
-
Subscribe to The Heathlander feed
-
Site Meter
A few interesting pieces:
- ‘De facto government in Gaza says it will consider a ceasefire with Israel‘
- ‘Diplomatic source: Israel intended to hit Iran, not Syria‘
- ‘Palestinian groups agree to halt rocket fire‘
- ‘Gideon Levy: It’s any man’s guess whether Syria hit was justified‘
I would probably go as far to say that Israel doesn’t have time on their side.
The Palestinian/Arab population is growing far faster than that of the Jewish one, and in 40-50 years they will outnumber them.
At that point, I don’t think even the United States would be able to justify supporting a minority Jewish government at the expense of the Majority. But then again, I’ve been wrong before.
Or are we due in for another great massacre to ‘thin down their numbers’?
Well, in the very long term, I’d agree with you – the occupation will probably end eventually, one way (a just peace settlement) or another (something much worse). But for now, Israel is quite secure with respect to the Palestinians, and it can afford to take its time over these things. Recall how Sharon’s advisor Dov Weisglass explained the motives behind the disengagement from Gaza:
Aggg…. no change there then. Still, I’m not sure I can seen any situation whereby the corrupt and disgusting Saudi regime could be seen as a useful peacemaker.
No disagreement about the nature of the Saudi regime, obviously, but with regards to I/P I think they’re definitely serious about wanting a settlement. They’ve been serious about it for decades, in the face of nearly unstinting U.S./Israeli rejectionism. Imagine the political boost it would provide them to be seen as the Arab leaders who achieved a Palestinian state. Also, it would take Israeli atrocities against the Palestinians off Arab TV screens, which would help the regime no end in pacifying the increasingly radicalised Saudi population, and would make the Saudi public far less pissed off about its regime’s relationship with the U.S.
The industry continues:
‘U.S. officials seek to lower expectations as they prepare for November summit‘ (JTA).
Aside on that Ynet piece, ‘Palestinian groups agree to halt rocket fire‘: The photo caption is wrong — this is a fighter from al-Quds bridages, the armed wing of Islamic Jihad, not Qassam brigades (Hamas). Evidence: yellow-on-black headbands (Islamic Jihad colours — Hamas fighters use green headbands with white text) and the Hebrew on rocket “al-Quds 3 rocket”.
I remember a story in Ynet last year (I’m sure it could be found with a search, but I can’t be bothered right now) that the al-Quds brigades were getting pissed off that their rockets were always called “Qassams” by the Israeli and international media. So they started to write “al-Quds rocket” on Hebrew — as seen in the pic (this was part of the rationale for us to alter out style guide at Palestine Times to refer to “makeshift” or “home made” rockets instead of “Qassams”).
I’ve seen footage on TV of “Qassam” rocket fire with the Jihad Islamiyeh logo CLEARLY visible in the top corner:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:PIJ_emblem.png
Videos by Hamas fighters use this logo: http://www.alqassam.ps/english/?action=aboutus
Thanks for the info, Asa – much appreciated. About that Ynet story – I checked briefly, and couldn’t find this “ceasefire” being reported anywhere else, not even Ha’aretz or the Palestinian news sources (Ma’an, etc.). Given that it would surely be big news if true, it seems a bit dodgy that only Ynet has covered it…
Well, I still don’t really see what the Wahaddis of Saudi get out of it. Given that they’ve consistently given less than a shit about the Palestinians (in fact the practical support given by gulf states to Palestinians is woeful – outside of Saddam’s Iraq, of course), it seems ironic that everyone seems to be accepting that they are the people with the power to make an agreement stick. Presumably Israel has a financial reason to be seen to be humouring the Saudis and the Americans on the perpectual peacetalk merry-go-round. Meanwhile the Palestinian situation deteriorates with each passing day.
Well, I think the Saudi regime would like to see some sort of solution to the I/P conflict, if only to make the region more ’stable’ and try to halt the increasing radicalisation that threatens it. That’s why, for example, they’ve been at the forefront of efforts by the Arab League to make peace gestures/offers to Israel – all rejected, thus far…
I thought this was interesting, including the comments:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/09/19/congressman-faces-heat-for-comments-on-jewish-lobby/
A lot of governments in the Middle East are worried about the situation going on over there. I am originally from Oman, relatively a quiet country which hans’t made the news much (surprisingly). People are mostly happy and taken care of, but its interesting to see that people are getting more religious and more vocal at the same time.
Oman is a majority Ibadhi country, unlike Sunni regimes in the area. But whats creeping me out is that we’re starting to see Wahhabist ideoligies beginning to spread slowly, mostly because of the governments unwillingness to act more pro-actively regarding Israel and Palestine.
Thanks for the link – here’s an interesting take on it. The comments over at CNN are quite depressing – most either call Moran an anti-Semite or go too far the other way, and try to blame AIPAC for everything.
I’m ashamed to say that I know nothing whatsoever about Oman! However, what you describe is going on in many places – certainly, the festering sore that is the Israel/Palestine conflict is a very useful recruitment tool for jihadists. You mention Wahhabist ideology – ironically, the Wahhabist fanatics in charge of Saudi Arabia are one of the U.S.’s best friends in the region.
“Israel isn’t interested in a just peace”
It is. It just isn’t interested in what you consider to be a just peace. And nor should it.
Well, by “just peace” I was referring to the international consensus two-state settlement, which in fact enjoys the support of the vast majority of the planet, including the Arab states. It’s put to a vote every year at the UN, and every time it gets the same results: the entire world on one side, and Israel, the United States and a couple of Pacific Islands on the other.
As reported by the BBC yesterday, Israel and the USA have decided that Gaza is a ‘hostile entity’. In their infinite charity, they have decided that they will continue allowing food and water into the prison which is Gaza, but everything else could be stopped. If I didn’t know any better, I’d be cynical and suggest that Israel was attempting to provoke an armed response.
Actually, given the above, I think I am going to send the Israeli embassy a very polite letter and a small bandage or plaster (or something else small) every week to remind them of their responsibilities towards occupied populations under international law.
good idea!
Yup, as I wrote not too long ago, Israel has a long and illustrious history of using collective punishment to force Palestinians into submission. The fact that the government of Israel can openly call for collective punishment against a defenceless population without the slightest fear of generating outrage amongst the general public is a sign that something is seriously wrong with the Israeli political discourse.
Take a look, for example, at Tzahi Hanegbi, the defence committee chairman, who declared on Army Radio that there was no need to “pamper” the Palestinians in Gaza with fuel and electricity. I mean, what level of racism and hatred is required to be so dismissive about the quality of life of hundreds of thousands of people, more than half of whom are under 15?
When you’re promised a piece of land I guess.
Peace for all. Let hope for world peace, no bombing, no terrorist. Back to good O world.
And what do you think of Obadiah Shoher’s arguments against the peace process ( samsonblinded.org/blog/we-need-a-respite-from-peace.htm )?
I think they’re racist, moronic and basically, if a few of the terms were switched around, could have come straight out the al-Qaeda handbook.