It's good to know that Europe is seeing things more clearly....Europe's traditional position on the Arab dispute has been quietly changing: It is gravitating closer to a US-Israeli framing of a war on terror, a "clash of civilizations," with a subtext of concern about the rise of Islam - and away from an emphasis on core grievances of Palestinians, like the ongoing Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and "occupation."Causes for the shift are complex and manifold, and in no small way associated with the rise of Muslim populations in Europe.
The Peace Process goal of 2 states for 2 nations is not something that can actually be implemented. Instead, the West Bank realizes that there is not going to be a separate state but rather only real option is for Israel to continue to be a shield. The Palestinian Arabs in Judea and Samaria are comfortable with this. If new ideas/leadership comes--then maybe can we can talk. Till then in Judea and Samaria - Israel is the defense shield, but not occupying. [from notes; hear audio]
Of course, it is not exactly news for a right-wing Israeli MK and Brigadier General to say something like this. But he is not alone. There are some in Europe who are saying the same thing. For instance, there is Karim Bitar, of the International Institute of Strategic Relations in Paris.
A Euro-American convergence leaves European Union diplomats supporting Palestinians on "shallower emotional and humanitarian grounds," says Mr. Bitar [the International Institute of Strategic Relations in Paris], "helping people survive, hoping economic improvement is enough, and forgetting the old issues of substance, and Israeli occupation. The two-state solution is nearly dead." [emphasis added]Aude Signoles, an expert on Palestinian movements at the University of La Réunion in Madagascar, points out that the US and Europe still do not see eye-to-eye on Israel and the Middle East, but as Europe comes closer to a US-Israeli framing of a war on terror
the main effect of a Europe that adopts an American position is that the core Palestinian issues regarding the cessation of settlements, a shared capital of Jerusalem, and the right of return "may not be emphasized as before.... [T]he Israel-Palestine issue is an asymmetric problem, and if the international community does not raise it and balance it, there is little chance that the rights of the smaller player will be raised."That may be hard to believe, and Israel is aware that the Palestinian Arabs cannot be ignored. If the immediate imposition of an artificial two-state solution can be avoided for now, maybe there is hope after all.
The Guardian has spoken to three people with knowledge of the discussions in the Obama camp.
There is no talk of Obama approving direct diplomatic negotiations with Hamas early on in his administration, but he is being urged by advisers to initiate low-level or clandestine approaches, and there is growing recognition in Washington that the policy of ostracising Hamas is counter-productive.
Now if Israel can destroy Hamas in the next 11 days...
by Daled AmosAbout that news report on Obama talking to Hamas:
(1) It is the Guardian. British papers have a tendency to exagerate and the paper may be projecting its hipes onto Obama (the guy is a blank slate, you can project anything onto him you wish).
(2) We talk to our enemies all the time. If by talking you get something, isn't that better? If Hamas gets hurt bad by this, maybe they will be more willing to negotiate. Or maybe someone in Hamas will be willing to break off to negotiate
Posted by: Anthony at January 9, 2009 5:06 PMTrue, Obama has made a point of creating an image that opposing groups could feel comfortable with. However, now that he will have to take some kind of stand, the viewpoints of his advisors takes on a greater urgency--and does not instill confidence.
We have no choice but to wait and see what Obama will do. The Guardian is not the last word on this, but it is something to keep in mind in the meantime.
Posted by: Daled Amos at January 10, 2009 8:13 PMUnfortunately, when the left/Europeans/Arabs/etc. say the two-state solution is dead, they generally mean the alternative is a binational state, with full citizenship for Palestinians. This would mean the end of the Jewish state.
While I agree that a Palestinian state is a non-starter (http://biurchametz.blogspot.com/2004/11/prediction-there-will-be-no.html), a binational state is no better.
Posted by: Zman Biur at January 11, 2009 1:45 AM