January 11, 2009
If Obama Is Serious
Aaron David Miller in Newsweek:
If Obama is serious about peacemaking he'll have to adjust that balance in two ways. First, whatever the transgressions of the Palestinians (and there are many, including terror, violence and incitement), he'll also have to deal with Israel's behavior on the ground. The Gaza crisis is a case in point. Israel has every reason to defend itself against Hamas. But does it make sense for America to support its policy of punishing Hamas by making life unbearable for 1.5 million Gazans by denying aid and economic development? The answer is no.
Then there's the settlements issue. In 25 years of working on this issue for six secretaries of state, I can't recall one meeting where we had a serious discussion with an Israeli prime minister about the damage that settlement activity—including land confiscation, bypass roads and housing demolitions—does to the peacemaking process. There is a need to impose some accountability. And this can only come from the president. But Obama should make it clear that America will not lend its auspices to a peacemaking process in which the actions of either side willfully undermine the chances of an agreement America is trying to broker. No process at all would be better than a dishonest one that hurts America's credibility.
Second, Obama will have to maintain his independence and tactical flexibility to play the mediator's role. This means not road testing everything with Israel first before previewing it to the other side, a practice we followed scrupulously during the Clinton and Bush 43 years.
More here. [Photo shows Obama with Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak.]
Posted by Abbas Raza at 07:09 AM | Permalink
Comments
Nothing strikes me as new here. We know what must be done to make sure there is a balance. We know that a peace requires give and take on BOTH sides. We should note though that getting commitments in writing and in speech and in charter revisions that Hamas no longer has as a goal the destruction of Israel is key to holding talks, as Obama plans to do with Hamas.
So long as Hamas insists upon the destruction of Israel, we can not hope for Israel or the Palestinians to have useful talks toward establishing a Palestinian state.
Posted by: fred lapides | Jan 11, 2009 3:58:00 PM
As an American who grew up fascinated by the civil rights movement in this country, as well as the anti-apartheid struggle in South Africa, I find the argument that Hamas must accept Israel's right to exist ridiculous. Israel's entire existence -- as it stand now -- is premised on the superior right of one race (the Jewish people, be they from wherever) over the rights of another race (Arabs who live in Israel, the occupied territories or are descended from those who lived there but were ejected in 1948). Why should Hamas accept the state of Israel when Israel denies Palestians and their descendants the right to live in Israel because of their race? I wouldn't accept that, and the demand that Palestinians brand themselves less worthy of civil rights strikes me as nothing but pure, unadulterated racism.
Posted by: Celeste | Jan 12, 2009 11:36:15 AM
Post a comment