Palestine

[andrewducker]

The recent announcement on Israel/Palestine has me absolutely infuriated.

_Not_ because the plan has Israel holding onto bits of what they should really be handing back (which bits end up being populated by which people isn't really a huge concern to me and I'm fairly fluid about the concept of nation states at the best of times).

What really, _really_ annoys me is the way that it was announced. Bush stood up there with Sharon and told everyone what they'd agreed. The US is supposed to be brokering a deal between two sides and yet it presents a deal hammered out with one side without any actual reference to the other one.

Israel/Palestine may cover a tiny amount of area but it's become a major matter for the entire Arab world. Much of the anger aimed at the US stems entirely from the way it acts over Israel. By standing up there and saying "Fuck you, we're only actually interested in one side here." they've just pushed many, many more people towards anti-Israel and anti-US and anti-Western groups.

Can someone not give the current US administration a _tiny_ clue that if they treat people like shit those people will get upset?

Comments

[guyinahat.livejournal.com]

Nobody has told the Palestinians what they are going to get!
It was a unilateral withdrawal.
The Palestinians have given up nothing and nothing has been taken away from them.

The analogy with NI is in relation to the spin.

[andrewducker]

It has long seemed inevitable that a lasting peace would allow Israelis to keep some of the large West Bank settlements contiguous to Jerusalem and would offer, at most, a very limited right of return for the Palestinians whose families fled at the dawn of a Jewish state. But by accepting Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's terms absent any negotiation between the parties, M. Bush is essentially supporting Israel's right to impose a settlement of its choice on the Palestinians.

It wasn't presented as a "We're doing this, we hope you like it." but as a "These are our terms."

Clearly taken aback by the fury provoked by the change, the US secretary of state, Colin Powell, embarked on a series of media appearances and telephone calls to try to convince the administration's many critics that President George Bush's support for Jewish settlement building in the West Bank would not emascu late an eventual Palestinian state. He also defended the president's stand against the right of return of Palestinian refugees to their homes in what is now Israel.

Officials said Mr Powell spoke to Jordanian, Egyptian and Palestinian leaders as well as the UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, arguing that the White House should be lauded for backing Ariel Sharon's Gaza withdrawal plan.

and


That response was echoed by the Arab League yesterday, which accused the US of reneging on its role of mediator. "We expect the United States to play honest broker. The United States has adopted Israel's position," said Hesham Youssef, spokesman for the league's secretary general.

In France, President Jacques Chirac said Mr Bush had set an "unfortunate and dangerous precedent", and flatly rejected any unilateral changes to the borders of Israel and the Palestinian territories.

The Irish foreign minister, Brian Cowen, adopted a similar stance. "The EU will not recognise any change to the pre-1967 borders other than those arrived at by agreement between the parties."

German and Russian reaction was more muted, welcoming the withdrawal from Gaza while calling for a negotiated final settlement.

From Ramallah, the Palestinian prime minister, Ahmed Qureia, or Abu Ala, proposed an emergency meeting of the Arab League and the other sponsors of Mr Bush's erstwhile road map: the EU, Russia, and the UN.

From the ruins of his headquarters, the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, said defiantly: "Israel will not achieve security through occupation, arrogance and assassinating our leaders."

Nobody at all seems to be taking this as a peace gesture, everyone is taking it as a 'final agreement' made by only one side.

[guyinahat.livejournal.com]

Lots of quotes about people reading a 'final agreement' into this withdrawal. There is no signed paper re-stating any boundaries. Bush has gone on record saying that he is not supporting any final agreement at this point.

Everyone is up in arms about inference. Stuff the inference. No agreement is signed, so the Palestinians haven't actually lost anything. Sharon won't get even this through the Knesset unless he lays it on thick in the short term. So for now, let him. It's domestic political reality for Israel.

The final agreement will have to be something very different from this stage because the Palestinians will have to be party to it. I suspect a lot of the hollering is about people making sure that this is still understood by all sides. I think it is, but if the spin in Israel focuses on this as being just a first step, Sharon won't get anywhere with it domestically.

What Sharon is doing is in the right direction - pulling settlements out of occupied land. We may all be unhappy with the amount, but at least it is in the right direction.

I wouldn't be surprised if the peace process stalls again at the next stage, but once those settlements are gone, they're gone. With a fair wind Arafat and Sharon will both be gone in a few years too. Maybe then, further down the line, a final settlement might be agreed.

One step at a time.