Feeble And Pliant

As I've said several times in the past, there are several reasons I go over to Watching America each week. First of all, it's a good bet that I'll find information about the US there that I won't get in any American papers. Equally as important, however, is that those international articles give some indication of just how the US is viewed by friends and not-such-friends around the world on any given issue. It is the latter point that I was drawn to today.

This editorial in the Arab News (Saudi Arabia) assesses the latest state of the US-led peace talks between the Palestinians and Israel as an epic fail.

Washington’s decision that it will no longer attempt to persuade the Israelis to impose a new moratorium on settlement construction in order to restart peace negotiations is an abject and shocking admission of failure. Everyone knew that that the Americans had serious difficulties trying to persuade the Israelis to concede on this vital issue. But there was wide belief that an ingenious diplomatic formula could be devised to enable talks to go ahead. No one imagined that President Barack Obama would simply capitulate to the Israelis. That is what has happened. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has refused to concede on the matter and, rather than try to use the financial and political force the US has to make him change his mind, Obama has thrown in the towel. Never in the history of US-Israeli relations has a US president been so feeble or so pliant. ...

The US response was also critical. It can no longer justify that position. The time has come for the Arab states, through the Arab League that meets in the next couple of days to respond to the American announcement, to formally tell the US that its Middle East policy is a failure. It should also tell it that since it is not prepared to help find a just and workable solution, it has forfeited any right to hinder attempts by others to do so. Washington will not like it, but it has abandoned all semblances of integrity and responsibility in the matter. [Emphasis added]

The descriptor "feeble and pliant" would apply to this president's domestic efforts as well as his diplomatic ones. Healthcare reform and the recent tax cut extension deals are prime evidence of that. But in the crucial Middle East arena, that approach could be cataclysmic in ways the president apparently has not considered. When Prime Minister Netanyahu refused to impose a moratorium on new settlements, the White House did have options to bring pressure to bear on the recalcitrant leader, chief of which was the ending of matching grants of military weapons. Instead, President Obama blinked. And then he shrugged and turned away, like a crippled old man just spat upon by a local thug.

The editorial calls upon the rest of the world to step in by formally recognizing the Palestine State with all that entails. It also calls upon the Arab League to step up and take the place of the US in the morass the peace talks have become. Since the US has shown such an unwillingness to challenge the current Israeli leadership, it should indeed step down. If it will not lead, then the least it can do is get out of the way.

Balance

One of the real joys in following Watching America is that there is usually at least one article posted from the world press that captures an issue so well that I've had to shift my perspective to one more in touch with reality. This week there was such an article, this one from Spain.

“Israel will be the victim of geography and demography,” prophesied De Gaulle, indicating that Israel would not be able to resist the pressure of the surrounding Arab world, which has a much superior birth rate to its own. However, Israel has not only resisted both pressures but has accumulated victory after victory until it has converted itself into the premier power of the Middle East. No country in its surroundings, or all of them put together, can stand up to it.

That could carry Israel, paradoxically, to destruction. In order to continue using its power in all its forms and in occasions where it appears challenged, that same strength will turn against it. It is already happening. It is true that it would only take Israel’s enemies one battle to annihilate it, whereas Israel would have to eliminate all of them in order not to disappear. But in the global world in which we live, he who minds only his particular interests without keeping in mind those of the community will inevitably end up condemned to ostracism. Remember South Africa under apartheid. It is what Israel’s most sensitive spirits are warning against. [Emphasis added.]

While the logic is a bit murky, the essence of the portion cited is that if Israel is not reined in, either by cooler heads in Israel or by pressure bought to bear by the rest of the world (in particular, by the US), it will indeed have to stand alone if the Arab world should finally decide that enough is enough. South Africa managed to avert violence in the overthrow of the apartheid government, in part because the burden of economic and social sanctions simply became too much to bear. The question now, however, is whether that kind of universal sanctioning can be accomplished with Israel, given the history of US subversion of any attempt to punish Israel for its egregious behavior.

José María Carrascal, the author of this opinion piece, offers a tentative answer to that question, one that both sides of the conflict should take hope from:

In a global world, there are no individual solutions, and the Palestinian problem has been poisoning international relations since the division of that territory. It is this that is impeding the rapprochement of the West and the spread of moderate Islam, this that makes it impossible for the Palestinian Authority to control its people and this that has converted Gaza into a small fort controlled by Hamas, a terrorist organization. “The flotilla was aiming to break the Gaza blockade,” claimed the Israeli government in order to justify its commandos’ assault of it. But the problem comes precisely from having Gaza blockaded. In the 21st century, a million and a half people cannot be locked inside a ghetto. Today, Gaza is a powder keg ready to explode, to the satisfaction of extremists.

Israel believed that, with the backing of the United States, it could resist the harassment coming not only from the Arab world but also from the entire world. Until now it has achieved that, thanks to the carte blanche offered by all American presidents to defend itself. But the United States has other priorities than the defense of Israel, and Obama has already shown interest in a more well-balanced Middle East foreign policy. ...

Without that carte blanche, Israel would have to come to terms with its neighbors and would have to cease the collective punishment of the Palestinians for the murderous behavior of the extremists. That collective punishment, whether in the form of the blockade (see this LA Times article on the impact of the blockade on all of the Palestinians in Gaza) or in the simple day-to-day harassment of Palestinians at the border (see this post at Dohiyi Mir for evidence of just how petty, yet violent, the IDF can be), is only pushing the Palestinians into the camp of the violent and the neighboring nations into the camp of the hotheaded war makers.

Mr. Carrascal's concluding remarks summarize just what kind of balance has to be struck:

I would say that the first party interested in finding a just and balanced solution to the Palestinian problem is Israel. Then, we are. The Jews can never return to being a wandering people without rights or a homeland in the world. Neither can the Palestinians.

From you lips, Mr. Carrascal, to the world's ears.

Our Ms. Brooks: Teh Stupid!

Rosa Brooks has a superb column on the situation in Gaza in which she skewers all of the major actors. Using the frame of "How to be stupid", she then lists the deadly and boneheaded moves in what I consider to be an evenhanded analysis, and I urge you to click on over to read the entire column.

The part that interested me most was the section on the Bush administration response:

. . . Bush style

Avoid opportunities to push for a rapid end to the conflict. Wring your hands every now and then, but don't engage seriously with European, Turkish or Arab actors anxious to propose compromises that could end the conflict. Block a U.N. Security Council resolution calling for a temporary cease-fire on the grounds that it doesn't offer a durable solution.

In general, sit back and relax. It's just the Middle East exploding again. It's just a harbinger of ongoing suffering, regional instability and global terrorism. No big deal. Let the new guy handle it.

Pretty accurate description of our current leader, eh?

Oh, Sec. of State Rice has been wearing her fingertips to the bone dialing world leaders and Israel, but she has made it clear she has no intention of traveling anywhere this late in the game. Let Hillary do it. Besides, Hamas had it coming. It's their fault for lobbing rockets into Israel.

Mr. Bush also feels it's Hamas' due. After all, they are a terrorist organization. Maybe Israel can finally stamp those pesky Arabs out and the land can be restored to its pristine milk and honey state. Besides, John Howard is in town.

And Mr. Obama, the President Elect?

Well, there can be only president at a time. It would be unseemly to make any comments that could be construed as presumptuous. Besides, the inauguration is only twelve days away. There will be time enough to deal with the issue after that when he is the real president.

Only twelve days: twelve days of rocket and bomb showers, some of the weapons tipped with phosphorus. There are still some mosques and schools standing and some parts of Israel that haven't been littered with Katushyas. There are still some civilians on both sides of the wall that haven't been spattered with blood, their own and that of their families and friends.

Teh stupid, it burns!

Literally.