Thursday, June 4, 2009

Mr. Obama Goes to Cairo

Our President is a very earnest guy and I believe that he truly does want to do good things in the World. But I found his speech today to be quite troubling.

Obama spoke eloquently today about the 60 year plight of the Palestinians. And, he left the clear impression that it was the State of Israel that was the sole cause of the plight of the Palestinians. Little history lesson: there never was a country called Palestine. Ever. And, when two Arab states, Jordan and Egypt, controlled the West Bank and Gaza for 19 years between 1948 and 1967, they did not create a state called Palestine then either (they occupied the land). Israel is but one party among many that are responsible for the plight of the Palestinians.

Going back even further, when the British Mandate proposed to split the land between the Jews and the Arabs in 1917, they divided the land into two states, separated by the Jordan River. What is now Jordan was supposed to be the Arab state and everything West of the Jordan (including what is now called the West Bank and Gaza) was to be the Jewish state. That plan languished, the Kingdom of Jordan was created, as a gift to a tribal leader who assisted the British in another conflict. And, Palestine remained a British protectorate until 1948 when the UN split what was left of the land.

The Jews said "thank you very much" and the Arabs said "no" and invaded. The rest is history (and needs more space than I have here). Flash forward to Oslo and 1993 when a peace process was started and the dynamics set in motion to result in a Palestinian state. Unfortunately, violence stopped that process and more bloodshed resulted.

Then along comes Bill Clinton and Camp David when the bluff was finally called publicly once and for all. The Palestinians were offered a solution that included having their own state, 98% of the pre-1967 land and partial control of Jerusalem. That offer was rejected by Yasir Afafat, who then plunged into the Second Intifada, which cost thousands more lives and has resulted in a decade of on-again, off-again war. The lost decade also included a unilateral pullout of Israel from Gaza, which was another test for Palestinian leadership. Now they had a chance to prove to the World that they could handle the responsibilities of governance. Instead, thousands of rockets have been fired at Israel from Gaza and the land has been turned into a wasteland. And, this, too, is all Israel's fault. No matter how irresponsible and crooked the Palestinian leadership is . . . it is Israel that is at fault.

Meanwhile, the Palestinians continued to suffer, as do the Israelis. The Palestinians want their own state. The Israelis want to live life. Israel does not want to govern the Palestinians. But, they don't want to have rockets fired at them more than they don't want to rule over the Palestinians. Until the Palestinians solve that little problem, they will not have a state of their own. No matter what our well-meaning (and naive) President would like to think.

There is one other problem with his approach to this conflict, which is that he is setting himself, and by extension us, up to fail. He likes to lecture about how diplomacy works (he's been President for what, five months?) Well, if he consults some of those diplomats he employs in Foggy Bottom, he will find out that in most successful diplomatic deals there is usually a lot of talk behind the scenes and frameworks agreed upon privately well in advance of any public proclamations about what this party or that party needs to do. This is not the approach President Obama is taking on this. He is laying out markers and drawing lines in the sand before talking is seriously undertaken.

And, the shame of it all is that the Israelis have shown a willingness to give up almost anything to get peace (the terms offered at Camp David are unthinkable today, a mere 9 years later). They really don't need to be pushed that hard. The only problem is there has never been, and still isn't, a party on the other side of the table who is equally willing, and able, to give it all away . . . in order to prevent yet another generation of Palestinians from growing up in refugee camps. Yet, sadly, at the end of the day, no matter what befalls the Palestinians . . . we all know who's fault it will be.

Woldy

2 comments:

  1. Jim, this issue will not be solved in our lifetime and goes back hundreds of years.It became a problem in 1948 and will not go away. My friends in Highland Park will not like what I have to say on the issue and some may call me anti-semetic.
    The only way to solve this is to move the state of Israel which is intolerable to the Jewish people and simply will not happen.
    Can anything good come out of Minnesota?
    If Canada invaded Minnesota overnight would anyone care?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dear Rota-filler boy:

    Let's start with . . . I don't think you are anti-semitic for saying aloud what some people are privately thinking. As you rightly point out, however, moving a country is not a viable option for many reasons, not the least of which is the history. And, the history of the land is not something that can be properly addressed in a blog.

    Next, I agree . . . it won't be solved in our lifetime . . . unless some gamechanging personalities emerge on both sides (i.e. Nelson Mandela-like leaders) who can lead their people through the wilderness. Oslo was a head-fake, unfortunately. And, now people on both sides are quite skeptical of new initiatives. We read about it. They live it.

    The urge to resolve this centuries old dispute in the 4 years of a U.S. Presidential term is something to be wary of, in my opinion. No doubt that a new voice is sometimes a good thing to get people to think, and possibly act, differently. But a real, long-term solution can not be imposed by the outside. The warring parties (let's call a spade a spade) must both come to the conclusion that a new dynamic is needed now (the "now" part is critical, by the way). As of yet, this has not happened.

    What is needed is leadership with a vision. That has been sorely lacking on both sides for a long time.

    Now, can you please explain what the heck you are talking about with Canada and Minnesota?

    Woldy

    ReplyDelete