The
Conflict Cannot Wait
By Roni Ben Efrat
08 November, 2006
Challenge
America's
entrapment in Iraq creates a vacuum through the Middle East. The way
out of that war has become the great question of US politics. Mid-term
Congressional elections are due on November 7, 2006, but whatever the
result, President George W. Bush will be a lame duck. If he boldly signals
a change of direction (for example, by firing Defense Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld), he will lose all credibility. On the other hand, if he doggedly
"stays the course," he will appear as a man out of touch with
reality, unfit to lead his nation or the world. Either way, Bush's lot
will be that of the leaders his policy helped bring down: Asnar in Spain,
Berlusconi in Italy, Blair in Britain.
As long as America is paralyzed,
very little can change here. In Lebanon, to be sure, the recent war
damaged Hezbollah's autonomy. But on the major question, the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict, we can only see years of deep freeze ahead.
The trouble is that the conflict
cannot wait. Politics abhors a vacuum. Force rushes in to fill it. Consider
Gaza, on the brink of armed chaos. Or the Lebanon War. No one planned
it, no one wanted it. There was a vacuum.
America's paralysis determines
the agenda of Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. His campaign platform
for the March elections included a program for "convergence"
or "realignment" (in other words, withdrawal from settlements)
in the West Bank. Now he has put that idea in cold storage and focuses
instead on broadening his power base. The weak political profile of
the US, combined with the narrowness of his party Kadima's election
victory and the chaotic state of his chief coalition partner, Labor,
prevent him from leading any kind of strategic process.
Olmert need not bother to
announce that he is freezing the situation. It is enough that he has
fattened his coalition with the right-wing party Yisrael Beitenu (Israel
Our Home). Its leader is Avigdor Lieberman, who was dismissed from Ariel
Sharon's government after voting against the Gaza disengagement. If
Lieberman is in, the Palestinians are out: outside negotiating range.
Apart from the 11 mandates he brings, giving Olmert 78 seats of 120,
Lieberman is a red cloth in Arab faces. His program is racist. He would
transfer Arab citizens to the Palestinian Authority. He would require
a loyalty oath; those who refuse would be demoted to the status of residents
and shorn of the right to vote. During the election campaign, Lieberman
marketed himself as the strong man you don't want to mess with. In this
spirit, Olmert invented a "Ministry for Strategic Threats"
and set him at its head. His function will be to growl at Arabs and
Iranians.
Lieberman brings Olmert an
additional dowry. Within the murky precincts of Israel's right wing,
the new minister seeks to diminish his former patron, Binyamin Netanyahu.
The latter's Likud sank to 12 mandates in the March elections, but after
Lebanon opinion polls boosted Bibi again. Not only that: the Laborites
are out of control. Some are likely to rebel when the budget comes up
for a vote, and failure to pass it would obligate new elections. By
bringing in Lieberman, Olmert, with a single blow, wards off that prospect
while splitting the Right.
Although Labor's social-minded
left wing made a lot of noise against sitting in a government with Lieberman,
Olmert's gamble paid off. On October 29, Labor's Central Committee decided
by a firm majority to stay in the government. The message was clear:
power over program.
America's paralysis also
determines events on the Palestinian side of the fence. In the absence
of a program that offers any hope, there is no public pressure to restrain
the more militant and radical forces in Hamas and Fatah. They are all
the more dangerous within the context of the economic blockade imposed
since the Hamas victory in January 2006. A quarter of the Palestinian
workers, mostly in the public sector, have not been paid for the last
eight months. The teachers have been on strike since the school year
started. The European Union withholds the donated money because Hamas
refuses to accept the three conditions set by the Quartet: recognition
of Israel, condemnation of terrorism and the honoring of former agreements,
such as the Oslo Accords. (For its part, Israel is illegally withholding
tax money and customs duties that it has collected, under the terms
of Oslo, for the PA.) The Fatah members are furious with Hamas for not
accepting the Quartet's conditions. Armed gangs are on the verge of
civil war. Both sides fear this, but neither is willing to stand down.
A mere $1.5 billion per year would keep them quiet, but the money isn't
there.
The Palestinian people is
hostage to the West, which feels no obligation to support a government
that refuses to oppose terrorism or recognize Israel. But the Palestinian
people is also hostage to the movement it chose. Hamas ran in elections
for the Palestinian Authority, although this is the creature of the
Oslo Accords. True, the Accords tie the Palestinians to a bed of hard
nails, allowing no hope for a viable state-Oslo keeps Palestine a charity
case. Yet Hamas accepted this framework when it decided to run for office.
It can hardly complain that the donor nations are withholding funds
while it refuses to accept the terms under which the funds were donated.
The pro-western Arab states,
such as Egypt and Qatar, have taken various initiatives, some in an
attempt to get Hamas to accept the Quartet's conditions, others aimed
at dissolving the Hamas government and establishing a more moderate
one. Opposing these efforts is Syria, which whispers to Hamas: "Don't
give in." In return for using its influence to bring Hamas into
an internal Palestinian agreement, Syria hopes to normalize relations
with America and end international isolation. As ever, both sides are
using the Palestinians for their own ends. Again, as ever, the tug-of-war
will only deepen Palestinian suffering.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict
suffers from absence of leadership. The Americans will be out of the
running for quite some time. The Israeli government has put its own
longevity ahead of everything else. It will wage the struggle in high
or low gear, as circumstances dictate, but without any program for substantial
change. Meanwhile, the PA has not found a formula that would enable
it at least to pay salaries and survive from month to month.
The mid-term US elections
offer the American people a chance for soul-searching after six years
of Republican rule, but we should not pin our hopes too high. No fundamental
change is in the offing. Both major parties serve the wealthy. The foundations
of this regime are not in dispute, rather only immediate policy in the
narrowest sense. Should goals be accomplished by military might or diplomacy?
Should taxes be increased or cut? Such are the points of contention
between Republicans and Democrats.
The problem of worldwide
poverty; genocidal wars in Africa; the diseases afflicting millions;
lack of education; environmental damage; ethnic and national conflicts,
ours included-these items don't enter the American debate. By capitalist
lights, they are an incurable part of the human condition.
Nevertheless, between America's
failure to lead the world and, on the other hand, the dangerous adventures
of political Islam, there is a third way. There are people who call
for a radical change in social and political priorities, for a just
and equal division of the world's resources, for the canceling of special
privileges. This agenda seeks to solve national and ethnic conflicts
by overcoming their root causes. The agenda exists, even if its adherents
are few. Our task is to forge a leadership that can implement it.
CHALLENGE
is a bi-monthly leftist magazine focusing on the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict within a global context. Published in Jaffa by Arabs and Jews,
it features political analysis, investigative reporting, interviews,
eye-witness reports, gender studies, arts, and more. This article first
appeared in Challenge #100
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights