by Zalman Shoval
Considering the current climate of regional chaos, does it make sense to establish yet another dysfunctional Arab state on Israel's doorstep?
"The black flag of ISIS
will fly over the Palestinian territories, if the Palestinian Authority
under Mahmoud Abbas collapses," warned Democratic presidential
candidate Hillary Clinton at the Saban Forum last week. Clinton could be
proven right, heaven forbid, but not, as she hinted, because there is
no progress on the diplomatic track with the PA. Rather the opposite, or
in other words -- if a Palestinian state were to be haphazardly and
irresponsibly established while turning a blind eye to the chaos raging
across the Middle East, in short order such a state would indeed by
overrun by ISIS or another arm of the global jihadist octopus.
None other than Henry
Kissinger, the former U.S. secretary of state, recently wondered whether
it makes sense or is justified -- considering the region's current
fragile state, in which Arab states could experience structural failure
amid the rise of ISIS on the regional stage with empowered Iran leading
the Shiite terrorist camp -- to create another dysfunctional Arab state.
Even Aaron Miller, who
for over two decades served under various American administrations and
was involved in multiple efforts to advance the diplomatic process
between Israel and the Palestinians, recently asked in the Wall Street
Journal if the world really needs a weak or failing Palestinian state
right now. He writes: "A decade or so ago, when I was a Middle East
negotiator, even posing such a question would have been considered a
hostile act among peace advocates or, worse, would have been seen as
shilling for Israeli right-wingers and neoconservatives. ... But amid so
much disorder in the Middle East, it’s worth pondering -- even if there
are several reasons to be cautious or openly skeptical about the
prospects [of a Palestinian state]."
Miller and Kissinger
both note that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has only marginal impact
regardless, if any at all, on the prevailing ills afflicting the Middle
East, which is a position that runs counter to the accepted view in
certain Washingtonian circles and European capitals. And theirs are not
the only voices in America beginning to doubt the chances of success or
the wisdom of the administration's efforts to secure a "two-state
solution," and as soon as possible no less.
But while there are
those who insist on blaming the Israeli government for the diplomatic
standstill between the Palestinians and Israel, while pointing to the
settlements and other issues, an increasing number of people in
Washington are beginning to understand that the real obstacle is
Palestinian refusal to commit to or even discuss necessary compromises
on matters such as the "right of return," borders, Jerusalem, and
recognition of Israel as the Jewish national home. They are also
beginning to internalize that Palestinian intransigence is not tactical,
but strategic, and that their preferred course of runs through the U.N.
and other international bodies -- bolstered by organized or sporadic
violence on the ground.
The majority of Israeli
citizens and leaders are open to the establishment of a separate
Palestinian entity, dependent on an amenable regional and local climate
-- and in the same breath most Israelis also don't want a binational
state -- but for such an entity to emerge, as Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu qualified in his recorded speech to the Saban Forum, it would
need to be demilitarized and forbidden from forging military alliances
with hostile enemy states, such that it would be unable to pose a future
threat to Israel and its citizens.
It appears that U.S.
President Barack Obama, more than his secretary of state, has started
getting used to the idea that resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
won't be part of his diplomatic legacy. However, considering what he
said during his meeting President Reuven Rivlin last week, it is
difficult to know what practical conclusion he will reach, if at all, as
a result. Israeli journalist interpreted his comments as a veiled or
not so veiled threat toward the Israeli government that the stalemate in
the peace process will make it hard for the American administration to
continue blocking international Palestinian initiatives.
The question we must ask, then,
is whether the special bond shared by America and Israel, and the mutual
obligations of both sides toward the other, should be dependent on
contentious matters and developments, such as the urgency or lack
thereof of establishing a Palestinian state, particularly due to the
likelihood that the ISIS flag will indeed be hoisted over it.
Zalman Shoval
Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=14649
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment