I have received letters from various correspondents for my views on Israel and Palestine. Here is the Liberal Democrat view from our 2017 manifesto.
“[We] Remain committed to a negotiated peace settlement to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which includes a two-state solution. We condemn disproportionate force used by all sides. We condemn Hamas’ rocket attacks and other targeting of Israeli civilians. We condemn Israel’s continued illegal policy of settlement expansion, which undermines the possibility of a two-state solution. We support recognition of the independent State of Palestine as and when it will help the prospect of a two-state solution.” http://www.libdems.org.uk/world
My personal view coincides with the party view insofar I condemn force used in all cases apart from self-defence. Disproportionate force is never right, nor is the targeting of civilians. Any civilians.
As a liberal, I condemn the suppression of equal rights and any form of discrimination or threat, whether it occurs in Israel, occupied territories or anywhere across the world.
Where I potentially disagree with party policy is the pursuit of a two-state solution. Owing to Israel’s policy of settlement expansion (illegal under international law), there is now not enough land left to a potential Palestinian state to make it viable. Pragmatically, all I want to see is a country where all citizens have equality under the rule of law and protection against discrimination. The current situation is a long way from that. For evidence of Israel’s attitude to a twin-state solution, I suggest the reader researches the siting of the proposed Palestinian airport. Under a variety of proposals, not once has Israel offered Palestinian control of the airport. This is not sovereignty on offer.
As for whether I back broad economic and cultural sanctions against Israel, the answer is that I do not. While the Palestinian people are undoubted are under oppression, citizens of Israel are under compulsion. Failure to undertake compulsory service in the military either results in a prison sentence or removal of rights following a diagnosis of mental incapacity. Sanctions tend to hit the most vulnerable of the affected society and this in turn will, in my view, only increase the suffering of all people and reinforce nationalist opinion. Besides, the material effect of sanctions would be debatable unless the USA were to undertake them and this is not going to happen.
In my view, the root cause of the continuing conflict is that of weapons. Both from reading and my own experiences in Israel, the nation “benefits” from being lavishly supplied by weapons, not all of which are declared openly. For an historic example, please refer to Robert Fisk’s book The Great War For Civilisation - The Conquest of the Middle East (search Hellfire missile) and my own experiences in country (see links below). I do not support ongoing UK co-operation with the Israeli arms industry.
I feel desperately sorry for all people involved in this ongoing conflict.
Below I offer a selection of blog posts outlining my own experiences while in Israel.
Blog links:
http://martinveart.blogspot.com/2009/01/little-story-of-shame.html
http://martinveart.blogspot.co.uk/2009/04/day-trip-to-jerusalem.html
http://martinveart.blogspot.co.uk/2009/01/traveling-back.html
http://martinveart.blogspot.co.uk/2010/05/distraction.html
http://martinveart.blogspot.com/2015/11/us-middle-east-and-bar-in-haifa.html
http://martinveart.blogspot.com/2015/09/drones.html
Campaign Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/martinveartedin/
Showing posts with label Palestine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Palestine. Show all posts
Wednesday, 17 May 2017
Wednesday, 6 May 2015
Campaign Letters #5: Israel and Palestine
Thank you for writing to me about the human rights situation in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Between 2008 and 2012 I was a frequent visitor to Israel, employed as part of an offshore energy project, so some of my opinions will be at variance with Liberal Democrat party policy. I shall point out the differences as they occur.
The Liberal Democrats are committed to seeing a negotiated peace settlement, with two-state solution to the conflict. However, both sides will need to make some significant compromises to ensure the rights of people from both communities are respected. Liberal Democrats in Government have been working hard to ensure that the UK continues to play its part in the pursuit of peace. We have supported direct negotiations between the two sides, provided £122m over four years to help the Palestinian Authority develop and £107m worth of essential services to vulnerable refugee communities.
After seeing the country, I personally feel that on the Israeli side, there is no intention to either commit to or deliver a two-state solution. As an example is the proposed location of the Palestinian Authority's International Airport. It is to be sited near the town of Netanya, which is on the Mediterranean coast. When I expressed surprise at this, I was further informed that Israel intended to keep control over both people and goods passing into any separate Palestinian state. It is therefore clear that a two-state solution is an impossibility.
Where does that leave us? The state of Israel is a reality and is to be accepted upon that basis. Since the Oslo Accord, land has continued to have been annexed by illegal (but state-supported) Israeli settlements, leaving the areas remaining in Palestinian hands isolated and unviable. The only way forward I can see is to call for equal rights and equality before the laws for all people that live in Israel and the West Bank. I would have no problem if Israel were to recognise and apply the law, with impartiality, to all people within its original borders, the West Bank and Gaza. The recent elections, where Benjamin Netanyahu shamelessly rallied the Israeli right by claiming bus-loads of Arabs were being shipped to polling stations to vote, shows that such an aspiration is almost as difficult to achieve as the much promoted two-state solution.
In response to the specific questions that you pose: I urge the UK Government to uphold the principles of equality, human rights and international law in all its relations and dealings with Israel.
Yes - as I have made clear above. Israel should have both the rights and responsibilities of any state and should not be accorded any unique status. Liberal Democrats in Government have put human rights and international law at the centre of our foreign policy. These are some of our core values and we would only join a government if they were at the heart of our relationship with Israel, the Occupied Palestinian Territories and every other country around the world.
I consider the construction of Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land in the West Bank and East Jerusalem to be illegal and unjustifiable.
Yes - as stated above. These settlements are illegal and they make finding a two-state peace settlement even harder - personally I would say impossible. At the Liberal Democrat conference last October we passed a motion which called for the UK to “apply continued pressure on the Israeli Government to cease its illegal acquisition of land in the West Bank.”
Do you agree that one of the first acts of the next UK Government should be the recognition of Palestine? Liberal Democrats believe the UK Government should encourage the EU to recognise the State of Palestine. When MPs voted on recognising Palestine I was delighted to see Liberal Democrat MPs overwhelmingly supported it. The UK Government has said it will continue to support a negotiated two-state solution and will work with other countries to secure one. The government said they look forward to recognising a democratic, sovereign and viable Palestinian state when it will help the peace process most. I now believe the time for such a two-state solution to have passed. To answer your question directly, I don't know. I have looked with interest at Swedish recognition of Palestine and acknowledge it is a welcome boast for the cause of an oppressed people. What practical aid such a move is able to bring, that I am not so certain of.
Do you agree that the blockade on Gaza should be lifted immediately?
Yes The UK Ambassador in Israel has been raising this with senior Israeli Government officials since the ceasefire in Gaza last summer. We have been calling for the blockade on Gaza to be lifted and for trade routes to be reopened. The UK has also been working with the EU and UN to put pressure on Israel for this to happen, while recognising their legitimate security concerns.
Do you agree that we should stop trade with Israel’s settlements on Palestinian land, and stop settlement goods being sold in Britain?
No Putting trade sanctions on Israeli goods will only make achieving a peaceful solution much harder. I think the Government is right to support the voluntary guidelines so that customers can identify whether goods come from the Occupied Palestinian Territories and make a decision for themselves if they want to buy them.
Do you agree that the EU Israel Association Agreement should be suspended until Israel meets its human rights obligations? No The EU-Israel Association Agreement allows the EU to regularly raise human rights concerns with Israel and work to address these. However, I think the EU should review its Association Agreement to consider whether Israel continues to uphold peace and human rights.
Do you agree that the government should stop supplying arms to Israel until it complies with international law? Yes Israel has also been listed as a country of concern in the UK Government’s Human Rights and Democracy Report and Liberal Democrats believe that there should be a presumption of denial when considering whether to grant arms export licenses for equipment bound for countries that are listed in that report.
I would go further. It is my firm belief that the whole economy, not just of Israel but the entire region, is based upon war. Every arms export to the area continues to fuel the conflict. If I may be blunt, during my time in Israel, I have never encountered so many arms dealers in my life! From the financiers organising the capital, the technical experts and the sales teams, the business of war is fully represented.
Before finishing, I think it is only fair that I mention also the stresses upon the average Israeli citizen too. I found Israel to be a very suppressed state on many levels, with very high degree of surveillance by the authorities upon its citizens. Although discussion and debate are wide ranging, actual attempts to deviate from expectation, such as conscientious objection, are punishable either by prison or by being declared of unfit mental state, meaning, for example, the withdrawal of one's driving licence and financial independence.
The cost of housing and inability of many Israeli young to afford a roof over their head, led to widespread protest while I was there, and may also be a driving force in Israeli settlement of the West Bank. When considering the outrages routinely visited upon Palestinians, it is sometimes easy to forget that not all Israelis back their government's policies on human rights and relations with their neighbouring states.
My fundamental position is to be against all violence, whoever the perpetrator; for equality of human rights and enforcement of the rule of law: regardless of birth, ethnicity or religion.
Yours sincerely,
Martin Veart
Scottish Liberal Democrats,
Edinburgh North and Leith
The Liberal Democrats are committed to seeing a negotiated peace settlement, with two-state solution to the conflict. However, both sides will need to make some significant compromises to ensure the rights of people from both communities are respected. Liberal Democrats in Government have been working hard to ensure that the UK continues to play its part in the pursuit of peace. We have supported direct negotiations between the two sides, provided £122m over four years to help the Palestinian Authority develop and £107m worth of essential services to vulnerable refugee communities.
After seeing the country, I personally feel that on the Israeli side, there is no intention to either commit to or deliver a two-state solution. As an example is the proposed location of the Palestinian Authority's International Airport. It is to be sited near the town of Netanya, which is on the Mediterranean coast. When I expressed surprise at this, I was further informed that Israel intended to keep control over both people and goods passing into any separate Palestinian state. It is therefore clear that a two-state solution is an impossibility.
Where does that leave us? The state of Israel is a reality and is to be accepted upon that basis. Since the Oslo Accord, land has continued to have been annexed by illegal (but state-supported) Israeli settlements, leaving the areas remaining in Palestinian hands isolated and unviable. The only way forward I can see is to call for equal rights and equality before the laws for all people that live in Israel and the West Bank. I would have no problem if Israel were to recognise and apply the law, with impartiality, to all people within its original borders, the West Bank and Gaza. The recent elections, where Benjamin Netanyahu shamelessly rallied the Israeli right by claiming bus-loads of Arabs were being shipped to polling stations to vote, shows that such an aspiration is almost as difficult to achieve as the much promoted two-state solution.
In response to the specific questions that you pose: I urge the UK Government to uphold the principles of equality, human rights and international law in all its relations and dealings with Israel.
Yes - as I have made clear above. Israel should have both the rights and responsibilities of any state and should not be accorded any unique status. Liberal Democrats in Government have put human rights and international law at the centre of our foreign policy. These are some of our core values and we would only join a government if they were at the heart of our relationship with Israel, the Occupied Palestinian Territories and every other country around the world.
I consider the construction of Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land in the West Bank and East Jerusalem to be illegal and unjustifiable.
Yes - as stated above. These settlements are illegal and they make finding a two-state peace settlement even harder - personally I would say impossible. At the Liberal Democrat conference last October we passed a motion which called for the UK to “apply continued pressure on the Israeli Government to cease its illegal acquisition of land in the West Bank.”
Do you agree that one of the first acts of the next UK Government should be the recognition of Palestine? Liberal Democrats believe the UK Government should encourage the EU to recognise the State of Palestine. When MPs voted on recognising Palestine I was delighted to see Liberal Democrat MPs overwhelmingly supported it. The UK Government has said it will continue to support a negotiated two-state solution and will work with other countries to secure one. The government said they look forward to recognising a democratic, sovereign and viable Palestinian state when it will help the peace process most. I now believe the time for such a two-state solution to have passed. To answer your question directly, I don't know. I have looked with interest at Swedish recognition of Palestine and acknowledge it is a welcome boast for the cause of an oppressed people. What practical aid such a move is able to bring, that I am not so certain of.
Do you agree that the blockade on Gaza should be lifted immediately?
Yes The UK Ambassador in Israel has been raising this with senior Israeli Government officials since the ceasefire in Gaza last summer. We have been calling for the blockade on Gaza to be lifted and for trade routes to be reopened. The UK has also been working with the EU and UN to put pressure on Israel for this to happen, while recognising their legitimate security concerns.
Do you agree that we should stop trade with Israel’s settlements on Palestinian land, and stop settlement goods being sold in Britain?
No Putting trade sanctions on Israeli goods will only make achieving a peaceful solution much harder. I think the Government is right to support the voluntary guidelines so that customers can identify whether goods come from the Occupied Palestinian Territories and make a decision for themselves if they want to buy them.
Do you agree that the EU Israel Association Agreement should be suspended until Israel meets its human rights obligations? No The EU-Israel Association Agreement allows the EU to regularly raise human rights concerns with Israel and work to address these. However, I think the EU should review its Association Agreement to consider whether Israel continues to uphold peace and human rights.
Do you agree that the government should stop supplying arms to Israel until it complies with international law? Yes Israel has also been listed as a country of concern in the UK Government’s Human Rights and Democracy Report and Liberal Democrats believe that there should be a presumption of denial when considering whether to grant arms export licenses for equipment bound for countries that are listed in that report.
I would go further. It is my firm belief that the whole economy, not just of Israel but the entire region, is based upon war. Every arms export to the area continues to fuel the conflict. If I may be blunt, during my time in Israel, I have never encountered so many arms dealers in my life! From the financiers organising the capital, the technical experts and the sales teams, the business of war is fully represented.
Before finishing, I think it is only fair that I mention also the stresses upon the average Israeli citizen too. I found Israel to be a very suppressed state on many levels, with very high degree of surveillance by the authorities upon its citizens. Although discussion and debate are wide ranging, actual attempts to deviate from expectation, such as conscientious objection, are punishable either by prison or by being declared of unfit mental state, meaning, for example, the withdrawal of one's driving licence and financial independence.
The cost of housing and inability of many Israeli young to afford a roof over their head, led to widespread protest while I was there, and may also be a driving force in Israeli settlement of the West Bank. When considering the outrages routinely visited upon Palestinians, it is sometimes easy to forget that not all Israelis back their government's policies on human rights and relations with their neighbouring states.
My fundamental position is to be against all violence, whoever the perpetrator; for equality of human rights and enforcement of the rule of law: regardless of birth, ethnicity or religion.
Yours sincerely,
Martin Veart
Scottish Liberal Democrats,
Edinburgh North and Leith
Monday, 31 May 2010
Distraction
It is easy to be blinded by suffering. In the latest misadventure off the coast of Israel / Gaza, the latest reports available list sixteen dead at the hands of the Israeli commandos. Why did they people have to die?
Of course, the easy answer is that they didn’t have too. This morning on the Today Programme the beautifully-voiced Mark Regev defend the Israeli actions that led to the deaths of these unfortunates, along with injuries to many more; both flotilla crew and Israeli personnel. Naturally he claimed the Israelis were attacked first. I must have missed the event that led to members of the flotilla trying to board the Israeli warships. He also reminded the world that the Israelis had offered to take all allowed goods through the Israel-Gaza border. Since the central purpose of the flotilla was protest against the joint blockade by Israel and Egypt and to remind the world of the very real suffering of the Palestinian people, that is hardly the point.
It is easy to become hardened by suffering. Fear does that and fear is the state that the Israeli people are encouraged to live in. The world is against them, misunderstands their plight and that is why their forces, of which they all must play their part, must be aggressive because that is the only language that their barbarous and less sophisticated neighbours understand.
The rest of us, onlookers of various degrees, are asked to take sides by the competing and extremely sophisticated propaganda machines of all sides. For instance, this morning the BBC website initially reported the source of this morning’s tragedy as a Hamas report, despite the live streams coming from various Arabic news organisations onboard. Hamas = terrorists therefore their word is not to be trusted. As a quoted source, the link to Hamas has now been dropped and for the moment it is still reporting only ten deaths, as reported by the IDF.
Why does this matter and why should we onlookers care? I’ve been to Israel several times over the years and it is my opinion that all populations are being misled. Despite being a democracy, Israel in my opinion is also a police state. The population are under the heaviest possible surveillance from the internal security forces. One waitress I met in Haifa was an Arab Christian and formally worked as a receptionist at the hotel where I was staying. Her story was that she made a bad joke concerning the conflict to a guest. Next day, she gets a phone call.
"Hey Girlfriend, how are you?"
"Who is this?"
"You can call me David and I work for the Misrad Habitahon [internal security]. I hear that you have been saying things that you shouldn't have."
"What is it to you?"
"Next time that I hear such things, it won't be a friendly chat over the phone. We will want to know more about you. A visit to our offices. Am I clear?"
The girl laughed at David. "You are afraid of little me? Some silly girl? This country is weaker than I thought."
She kept her dignity but not the job.
The hotel where she used to work was often full. On the last occasion the visitors were athletes and sports people from all over the world for the the Jewish games held last year. Before that, I overheard many snatches of conversations. The arms dealers were the ones that frequently drew my attention though. On one flight across I was lucky enough to be upgraded. My companion was a banker and the file he was perusing was for pilotless light aircraft, used for reconnaissance and attack roles. It was his business to provide the money. I remember reading Robert Fisk's accounts in his book The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East ; of how he traced the history of one missile used by the Israelis in Lebanon back to the US Marine Corps and thus how the US tax pater is secretly being used to subsidise Israel's conflict with their neighbours.
So to my mind, this is why there is never peace in the Middle East: too many people are making too much money out of war. It is not just the arms dealers, it is their financiers also.
The deaths this morning were totally unnecessary unless their purpose is to keep the fires of hatred burning brightly. The secret fuel for this hatred is money and until the profit is cut, the war will continue. I say this to both sides and of none. Look up and see who among you are getting richer from this conflict. To protestors for peace: research the companies who are making the profit. Now most people don't tend to pop down to our local friendly arms manufacturer for a couple of SAM missiles, so look into the companies that they are dowing business with and the banks that are providing them with the finance and expertise. Target these companies and people for protest, boycott and blockade, not normal people who are just as much victims as anybody else. Governments who want peace, cut the flow of weapons to all sides and refuse entry to the warmongers. If you won't then it up to your populations to hold you to account.
Protests like the flotilla are just a distraction from what is really happening. In fact, by providing opportunities for needless death, they help to prolong the war.
Of course, the easy answer is that they didn’t have too. This morning on the Today Programme the beautifully-voiced Mark Regev defend the Israeli actions that led to the deaths of these unfortunates, along with injuries to many more; both flotilla crew and Israeli personnel. Naturally he claimed the Israelis were attacked first. I must have missed the event that led to members of the flotilla trying to board the Israeli warships. He also reminded the world that the Israelis had offered to take all allowed goods through the Israel-Gaza border. Since the central purpose of the flotilla was protest against the joint blockade by Israel and Egypt and to remind the world of the very real suffering of the Palestinian people, that is hardly the point.
It is easy to become hardened by suffering. Fear does that and fear is the state that the Israeli people are encouraged to live in. The world is against them, misunderstands their plight and that is why their forces, of which they all must play their part, must be aggressive because that is the only language that their barbarous and less sophisticated neighbours understand.
The rest of us, onlookers of various degrees, are asked to take sides by the competing and extremely sophisticated propaganda machines of all sides. For instance, this morning the BBC website initially reported the source of this morning’s tragedy as a Hamas report, despite the live streams coming from various Arabic news organisations onboard. Hamas = terrorists therefore their word is not to be trusted. As a quoted source, the link to Hamas has now been dropped and for the moment it is still reporting only ten deaths, as reported by the IDF.
Why does this matter and why should we onlookers care? I’ve been to Israel several times over the years and it is my opinion that all populations are being misled. Despite being a democracy, Israel in my opinion is also a police state. The population are under the heaviest possible surveillance from the internal security forces. One waitress I met in Haifa was an Arab Christian and formally worked as a receptionist at the hotel where I was staying. Her story was that she made a bad joke concerning the conflict to a guest. Next day, she gets a phone call.
"Hey Girlfriend, how are you?"
"Who is this?"
"You can call me David and I work for the Misrad Habitahon [internal security]. I hear that you have been saying things that you shouldn't have."
"What is it to you?"
"Next time that I hear such things, it won't be a friendly chat over the phone. We will want to know more about you. A visit to our offices. Am I clear?"
The girl laughed at David. "You are afraid of little me? Some silly girl? This country is weaker than I thought."
She kept her dignity but not the job.
The hotel where she used to work was often full. On the last occasion the visitors were athletes and sports people from all over the world for the the Jewish games held last year. Before that, I overheard many snatches of conversations. The arms dealers were the ones that frequently drew my attention though. On one flight across I was lucky enough to be upgraded. My companion was a banker and the file he was perusing was for pilotless light aircraft, used for reconnaissance and attack roles. It was his business to provide the money. I remember reading Robert Fisk's accounts in his book The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East ; of how he traced the history of one missile used by the Israelis in Lebanon back to the US Marine Corps and thus how the US tax pater is secretly being used to subsidise Israel's conflict with their neighbours.
So to my mind, this is why there is never peace in the Middle East: too many people are making too much money out of war. It is not just the arms dealers, it is their financiers also.
The deaths this morning were totally unnecessary unless their purpose is to keep the fires of hatred burning brightly. The secret fuel for this hatred is money and until the profit is cut, the war will continue. I say this to both sides and of none. Look up and see who among you are getting richer from this conflict. To protestors for peace: research the companies who are making the profit. Now most people don't tend to pop down to our local friendly arms manufacturer for a couple of SAM missiles, so look into the companies that they are dowing business with and the banks that are providing them with the finance and expertise. Target these companies and people for protest, boycott and blockade, not normal people who are just as much victims as anybody else. Governments who want peace, cut the flow of weapons to all sides and refuse entry to the warmongers. If you won't then it up to your populations to hold you to account.
Protests like the flotilla are just a distraction from what is really happening. In fact, by providing opportunities for needless death, they help to prolong the war.
Tuesday, 9 March 2010
Israel, Arms and the End of NATO?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi
As usual with the prospect of peace talks, the stress is ramped up just prior to the start. Israel’s decision to proceed with the building of 120 new homes “for safety reasons” on the West Bank settlement of Beitar Illit is a bricks-and-mortar reminder to the Palestinians that regardless of negotiations, peace or war, Israel has the power and cannot be stopped. So don’t expect too much from the coming negotiations.
When I was blogging about my time in Israel last year, I came out against the call of boycott against Israel, much to the disapproval of many of my facebook friends. Sanctions usually hit the average person and leave the elites richer. I am certainly against cultural sanctions as it is very easy to impose a siege mentality upon the Jewish residents of the region. Of course, it should also be pointed out that most Palestinians are under real siege conditions; a situation exacerbated by the cooperation of the Egyptian authorities when it comes to Gaza.
What really struck me what I was there were the numbers of arms traders and their financiers that were in Israel. I was sitting next to them on aircraft, over-hearing the chit-chat of gun-dealers in bars and restaurants. These experiences have led me to the conclusion that peace is not a viable outcome in Israel / Palestine for the simple reason that too many people are making large fortunes out of the current state of low-level warfare that is encouraged to exist. In my opinion this is the core reason why peace is impossible. It does not matter how many marches are made, petitions signed or Jaffa oranges left unsold. The arms business dwarfs every other consideration.
There are no easy or quick solutions to address this state of affairs, especially in this time of recession. But to remain silent is to acquiesce to the continued injustice, humiliation and brutality that Israel inflicts upon their nearest neighbours.
These is one path that I would advocate however: an arms embargo. I know it wouldn’t make much difference. The USA would be more than happy to take up any slack and it is that one nation that has the power to make any difference. Robert Fisk has already established how the US military directly transfers weapons to Israel (the bill being picked up by the American taxpayer) so any effect of a military embargo by the European Union would be very small. At least at first.
Where it may really bite would be, after giving due notice, would be if the European Union would boycott those arms-dealers who continued to trade with Israel. This might not be as radical as it first appears. NATO, in recent years especially, has just become a giant arms fair owing to the necessity for new member nations to “standardise” equipment. In other words, buy new kit for Western Europe and North America. It is this continued trade that is keeping NATO in existence when in terms of the 21st. century, the organisation is an anachronism.
What would make more sense is for the EU to become more self-sufficient in terms of military defence with the establishment of a European-wide Defence Force. Naturally this would also require expansion of domestic production and supply.
With the failed adventures in the Middle East and Afganistan, the future of NATO is in doubt already. The continued state of the Near East might just be excuse that Europe needs to go it alone.
As usual with the prospect of peace talks, the stress is ramped up just prior to the start. Israel’s decision to proceed with the building of 120 new homes “for safety reasons” on the West Bank settlement of Beitar Illit is a bricks-and-mortar reminder to the Palestinians that regardless of negotiations, peace or war, Israel has the power and cannot be stopped. So don’t expect too much from the coming negotiations.
When I was blogging about my time in Israel last year, I came out against the call of boycott against Israel, much to the disapproval of many of my facebook friends. Sanctions usually hit the average person and leave the elites richer. I am certainly against cultural sanctions as it is very easy to impose a siege mentality upon the Jewish residents of the region. Of course, it should also be pointed out that most Palestinians are under real siege conditions; a situation exacerbated by the cooperation of the Egyptian authorities when it comes to Gaza.
What really struck me what I was there were the numbers of arms traders and their financiers that were in Israel. I was sitting next to them on aircraft, over-hearing the chit-chat of gun-dealers in bars and restaurants. These experiences have led me to the conclusion that peace is not a viable outcome in Israel / Palestine for the simple reason that too many people are making large fortunes out of the current state of low-level warfare that is encouraged to exist. In my opinion this is the core reason why peace is impossible. It does not matter how many marches are made, petitions signed or Jaffa oranges left unsold. The arms business dwarfs every other consideration.
There are no easy or quick solutions to address this state of affairs, especially in this time of recession. But to remain silent is to acquiesce to the continued injustice, humiliation and brutality that Israel inflicts upon their nearest neighbours.
These is one path that I would advocate however: an arms embargo. I know it wouldn’t make much difference. The USA would be more than happy to take up any slack and it is that one nation that has the power to make any difference. Robert Fisk has already established how the US military directly transfers weapons to Israel (the bill being picked up by the American taxpayer) so any effect of a military embargo by the European Union would be very small. At least at first.
Where it may really bite would be, after giving due notice, would be if the European Union would boycott those arms-dealers who continued to trade with Israel. This might not be as radical as it first appears. NATO, in recent years especially, has just become a giant arms fair owing to the necessity for new member nations to “standardise” equipment. In other words, buy new kit for Western Europe and North America. It is this continued trade that is keeping NATO in existence when in terms of the 21st. century, the organisation is an anachronism.
What would make more sense is for the EU to become more self-sufficient in terms of military defence with the establishment of a European-wide Defence Force. Naturally this would also require expansion of domestic production and supply.
With the failed adventures in the Middle East and Afganistan, the future of NATO is in doubt already. The continued state of the Near East might just be excuse that Europe needs to go it alone.
Thursday, 22 January 2009
What Does Israel Want?
I like trivia. Especially quizzes. And the one in the Jerusalem Post that morning in early December was particularly tough. I only got four out of ten correct. One of the questions stuck with me though as particularly curious. “Outside which town is the proposed site of the new Palestinian airport.” I didn’t have a clue. Ramallah perhaps? Isn’t that the capital of the West Bank? No, the answer was Netanya. Now I know that Israel is really a small place, but I’ve been there and that is definitely still in Israel and not the West Bank. A curious fact which I have been pondering since.
* * *
By a telephone call, I had just been snatched from working on my house, again, flown overnight from Edinburgh via London to Tel Aviv and frankly I was pessimistic. My driver Momi was pumping me with questions “Martin, will they find anything? Is there gas there?” Having just left the rig six days previously, I had seen no indication of the major find that was about to take place. But that is the nature of exploration: one day there is nothing, the next the whole world wants to be your friend.
Gas was not the only thing on Momi’s mind that morning. “Our attack in Gaza will be a failure if the Hamas leadership survives. But what do they do? They hide under the hospital! We don’t want to kill civilians. Why can’t they hid somewhere else?”
Perhaps they weren’t very enthusiastic about being killed, I thought to myself. What did people expect? Hamas to move into a field so that they could be decently bombed?
“But Momi,” I said. “All the Arab states have said that if Israel retreats to the pre-1967 borders, there will be peace.”
“Why can’t these people accept that they lost! We won, they lost. Get over it and move on!”
The attack on Gaza is now over. Momi didn’t get his wish: the Hamas leadership did survive. But the effect on the people and the city are terrible and it will take years to rebuild. Personally I don’t think that matters much to Israel, even less now that the Tamar gas find is looming larger and larger in the public consciousness. The Saudi’s have already pledge $2 billion worth of aid to rebuild the territory. As I outlined in my previous article “Israel and Gaza – it’s a gas!”, the Palestinians could be a lot richer than they are if Israel had not been consistently blocking the development of the gas fields offshore Gaza. But on the grounds that profits would go to finance weapons for Hamas, negotiations were ended with BG Group and the company closed it’s offices in Tel Aviv in 2007. That was not the end of the story however: talks were restarted in 2008 in an attempt to convince BG Group to sell their stake in the Gazan gas fields to a new consortium, the Israel Electric Corporation (IEC).
Israel needs gas in order to secure water. The chosen method is the building of new desalination plants which are very energy-intensive. So Israel wants energy in order to deal with the effects of global warming. There is even an alternative to this however. Since I last commented upon this issue, I have been contacted by Terry Spragg who has been kind enough to outline to me a new technology for moving large volumes of fresh water across oceans without the need for container vessels, potable water tankers or laying pipelines. Known as the Spragg Bag, each individual section can hold up to 17,000 tonnes of fresh water, with what is claimed to be the world’s strongest zip fastener linking together up to five of these bags. The real smart trick however is that these bags can then be towed by a vessel as modest as a standard-powered tug boat. I can certainly see the value of this remarkable technology, especially in emergencies such as the one that Gaza is facing at this moment. Whether the Israelis will go for it to solve their own water issues, that is a matter which shall be considered in a moment.
By a telephone call, I had just been snatched from working on my house, again, flown overnight from Edinburgh via London to Tel Aviv and frankly I was pessimistic. My driver Momi was pumping me with questions “Martin, will they find anything? Is there gas there?” Having just left the rig six days previously, I had seen no indication of the major find that was about to take place. But that is the nature of exploration: one day there is nothing, the next the whole world wants to be your friend.
Gas was not the only thing on Momi’s mind that morning. “Our attack in Gaza will be a failure if the Hamas leadership survives. But what do they do? They hide under the hospital! We don’t want to kill civilians. Why can’t they hid somewhere else?”
Perhaps they weren’t very enthusiastic about being killed, I thought to myself. What did people expect? Hamas to move into a field so that they could be decently bombed?
“But Momi,” I said. “All the Arab states have said that if Israel retreats to the pre-1967 borders, there will be peace.”
“Why can’t these people accept that they lost! We won, they lost. Get over it and move on!”
The attack on Gaza is now over. Momi didn’t get his wish: the Hamas leadership did survive. But the effect on the people and the city are terrible and it will take years to rebuild. Personally I don’t think that matters much to Israel, even less now that the Tamar gas find is looming larger and larger in the public consciousness. The Saudi’s have already pledge $2 billion worth of aid to rebuild the territory. As I outlined in my previous article “Israel and Gaza – it’s a gas!”, the Palestinians could be a lot richer than they are if Israel had not been consistently blocking the development of the gas fields offshore Gaza. But on the grounds that profits would go to finance weapons for Hamas, negotiations were ended with BG Group and the company closed it’s offices in Tel Aviv in 2007. That was not the end of the story however: talks were restarted in 2008 in an attempt to convince BG Group to sell their stake in the Gazan gas fields to a new consortium, the Israel Electric Corporation (IEC).
Israel needs gas in order to secure water. The chosen method is the building of new desalination plants which are very energy-intensive. So Israel wants energy in order to deal with the effects of global warming. There is even an alternative to this however. Since I last commented upon this issue, I have been contacted by Terry Spragg who has been kind enough to outline to me a new technology for moving large volumes of fresh water across oceans without the need for container vessels, potable water tankers or laying pipelines. Known as the Spragg Bag, each individual section can hold up to 17,000 tonnes of fresh water, with what is claimed to be the world’s strongest zip fastener linking together up to five of these bags. The real smart trick however is that these bags can then be towed by a vessel as modest as a standard-powered tug boat. I can certainly see the value of this remarkable technology, especially in emergencies such as the one that Gaza is facing at this moment. Whether the Israelis will go for it to solve their own water issues, that is a matter which shall be considered in a moment.
There are a few more apparently random thoughts that I would like to add to the mix before struggling to some kind of conclusion. The first is Israel’s recently built security fence, or apartheid wall as it has been called by it’s critics. I think there is truth in both labels. As far as security is concerned, it seems to have worked. Well I was here in 2000, people were a lot more nervous. I was in a bar in Natanya which was then bombed the following week. Security was very tight within Israel. Now it is a lot more relaxed. But there are negatives to it as well. The routing of the wall was little more than a blatant land grab in many places. It’s main function however is to control, absolutely, the movement of people and goods into the Palestinian West Bank.
Likewise the withdrawal from Gaza. It was true that Israelis did withdraw people, but that is nothing like the same as granting the Palestinians within autonomy. The reason being is that the supply of goods and services remain in control of the Israelis. The bombing of the supply tunnels were justified on the grounds that these were the routes by which weapons were smuggled into the territories. Probably true, but they were also the way that most other supplies moved into Gaza too. Laying siege is not the same as granting freedom.
We finally return to the proposed Palestinian airport and why I love trivia. If the airport is built outside Netanya, it is obvious that Israel intends to remain in full control of the movements of people and goods into the West Bank. Just as in Gaza. Just as it was unhappy with the attitude of BG Group and is now pressing that company to sell out it’s stake to the Israeli-controlled IEC. What Israel wants more than anything else is total control over it’s land and resources. The political implications are even more obvious: there will never be a viable two-state solution because an independent Palestine will be outside the control of the Israeli government and this can never be tolerated.
Let us return to water. The gas is so valuable to Israel because it will allow the planned desalination plants to be powered independently of Egyptian supplies. The is an alternative however in the form of mass-importation of water from Turkey (a close ally of Israel) via giant water bags. But we have already seen the case for Israel’s love of control. I therefore think that importation of such a vital resource will not be looked upon favourably by the Israeli government. The only ray of hope I can offer Terry Spragg is this: it is Israel’s stated aim that the planned desalination plants are intended not only to supply the country with it’s water but are also to be used to replenish the depleted aquifers beneath the land. What if the fast-track to refilling the aquifers was not the desalination plants but by limited term importation from Turkey? This would mean that the desalination plants would not have to produce so much water and that the new finds off Haifa will last the country even longer. Hell, it would even be good for the environment!
Selected sources
IEC control
http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/Stock%20News/2133287/?relatestories=1
Spragg Bags (and photo credit)
http://www.waterbag.com/
Please refer to my previous article “Israel and Gaza – it’s a gas!” for other references.
Likewise the withdrawal from Gaza. It was true that Israelis did withdraw people, but that is nothing like the same as granting the Palestinians within autonomy. The reason being is that the supply of goods and services remain in control of the Israelis. The bombing of the supply tunnels were justified on the grounds that these were the routes by which weapons were smuggled into the territories. Probably true, but they were also the way that most other supplies moved into Gaza too. Laying siege is not the same as granting freedom.
We finally return to the proposed Palestinian airport and why I love trivia. If the airport is built outside Netanya, it is obvious that Israel intends to remain in full control of the movements of people and goods into the West Bank. Just as in Gaza. Just as it was unhappy with the attitude of BG Group and is now pressing that company to sell out it’s stake to the Israeli-controlled IEC. What Israel wants more than anything else is total control over it’s land and resources. The political implications are even more obvious: there will never be a viable two-state solution because an independent Palestine will be outside the control of the Israeli government and this can never be tolerated.
Let us return to water. The gas is so valuable to Israel because it will allow the planned desalination plants to be powered independently of Egyptian supplies. The is an alternative however in the form of mass-importation of water from Turkey (a close ally of Israel) via giant water bags. But we have already seen the case for Israel’s love of control. I therefore think that importation of such a vital resource will not be looked upon favourably by the Israeli government. The only ray of hope I can offer Terry Spragg is this: it is Israel’s stated aim that the planned desalination plants are intended not only to supply the country with it’s water but are also to be used to replenish the depleted aquifers beneath the land. What if the fast-track to refilling the aquifers was not the desalination plants but by limited term importation from Turkey? This would mean that the desalination plants would not have to produce so much water and that the new finds off Haifa will last the country even longer. Hell, it would even be good for the environment!
Selected sources
IEC control
http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/Stock%20News/2133287/?relatestories=1
Spragg Bags (and photo credit)
http://www.waterbag.com/
Please refer to my previous article “Israel and Gaza – it’s a gas!” for other references.
Wednesday, 7 January 2009
Traveling Back
From the East, flights to
My alarm had been set for 02:30 but as it happened I was awake way before that. Working offshore without a back-to-back means one has to be ready to work when they need you. A couple of nights previously I had started my surveying at
The taxi was ready at 03:00hrs outside my hotel. The night receptionist had kindly made me a cup of hot instant coffee, which I carried into the leather-upholstered Mercedes cab. A good job it was, as I managed to spill some of it onto the front seat. Not a good start but many apologies and the use of a ‘wetwipe’ later, we were off.
I didn’t get the name of my driver but like all those on contract to the oil company, he is from
The radio was tuned into a late night phone-in show to which the driver was listening intently. Being in Hebrew, I had no idea as to content, so I asked him what the topic was.
“It’s about
“What are they saying?”
“It is messages of support. Prayers for the safety of our kids who are fighting and hope that the rocket attacks are stopped.”
“What do you think of the attack on
There was a silence for a while. I thought that he would not reply but then an answer came.
“I live in
I agreed with him that life has to continue but didn’t he think that it was heavy-handed for the IDF to be killing so many when Israeli casualties had been so low? At that point in time, four Israeli deaths had been reported. Of course, that was four deaths too many.
“Yes, but you have to understand we have been getting rockets every day, every day for the past six or seven years. Our argument is not with the Palestinian people but it is with Hamas. They hate us and it has been worse when they came to power. What else can we do?”
This fatalism by the Israeli people seems to be the attitude of pretty much every Jewish person I spoke to on the subject. The new bout of blood-letting seems to be accepted as part of the cycle of things. “What else can we do?” is the usual reply from pretty much every Israeli I have heard voice an opinion on the topic.
I have been wondering about this attitude of acceptance. On the Friday night before travelling I had met a couple of guys in the Bear Bar in
It seems to me that it is their time in military service of the state that unites the people of
The killing in
Meanwhile, in this morning’s Independent,
“And I write the following without the slightest doubt: we'll hear all these scandalous fabrications again. We'll have the Hamas-to-blame lie – heaven knows, there is enough to blame them for without adding this crime – and we may well have the bodies-from-the-cemetery lie and we'll almost certainly have the Hamas-was-in-the-UN-school lie and we will very definitely have the anti-Semitism lie. And our leaders will huff and puff and remind the world that Hamas originally broke the ceasefire. It didn't. Israel broke it, first on 4 November when its bombardment killed six Palestinians in Gaza and again on 17 November when another bombardment killed four more Palestinians.”
At least the BBC presenter on Today had the gumption to question the ambassador on who had really broken the cease-fire. But really even that is missing the point. The real question should have been “why was there a siege around
There is an election due soon in
There is nothing more cynical than politicians laying down the lives of people simply to win an election.
Cited report:
Sunday, 28 December 2008
2008 - Bloody Awful
What a bloody awful year it's been for the world. It hasn't been the best for me either. At least I found out the reason why I have been feeling generally under the weather all year. Nursing a gut-full of African parasites since April 2007 would tend to take the edge off most people. But I'm clear now so am feeling better on that count.My troubles are small when compared to the rest of the world however. These past few days have been atrocious. The continued Israeli attacks into Gaza is just creating more suffering. Isaac Hertzog was on the BBC today, asking what else could they do to stop Hamas’ missile attacks into Israel? Not provoking them earlier in the month would have been a good start, with the killing of Hamas personnel within the Gaza border. But that has always been the way. Attack and reprisal. Now Hamas has promised revenge. As if turning a café full of Israelis into an abattoir would solve anything. If it’s war both sides want, then things just have to continue in the same vein. The only country who has any sway over Israel is the USA. According the APF news agency, President Elect Obama is “is closely monitoring global events, including the situation in Gaza.” President Bush is speaking not to Israel nor to the Palestinians. Instead he has called the Saudis. Please excuse my cynicism, but I don’t doubt the purpose of the call was to make sure that things are business as usual. And I know about Mr. Obama’s policy of “one president at a time” but his silence on the matter amounts to consent for Israel’s actions.
Perhaps it is time for the USA to review it’s policy of arms trading with Israel? I doubt if you are reading this blog Mr Obama, but if you wanted to do something to gain the trust of the world when it comes to Israeli-Palestinian conflict, this would be a major step. I’m not advocating leaving Israel defenceless, just not in a position to be so damn aggressive. It looks like that Gaza is now in for the same treatment that Lebanon received in 2006. But with the population so tightly packed in such a small area, the slaughter will be intense.
Oh, and while you are at it, Mr. Obama, perhaps it is also time to review US policy on retaining the capacity on being able to fight two major wars simultaneously? I know there is an old saying about if one wants peace, one should prepare for war, but if one wants war, then it seems to me that the preparations are the same. And given the current economic strength of America, can the USA continue to afford such a policy. It was the arms race that broke the Soviet Union. Is America risking the same fate?
Speaking of wars, Afghanistan and Iraqi have also been weeping sores. I link these two countries because of the military effort that has been required to launch concurrent invasions. As you doubtless remember, the invasion of Afghanistan occurred in 2001, following the 9/11 attacks upon the USA. Many things were promised as justification: the eradication of the Taliban and their regime based upon the culture of the refugee camps, the end to terrorist training camps and, most importantly, the rebuilding of the country after over twenty years of bloodshed. Well, thanks to the second Iraq War and the resources that were diverted into this illegal campaign, none of that happened. In fact the Taliban has regained support again and has spread, now posing a real threat to Pakistan. The radicalisation of Pakistani youth has now spread over to the sixty-year rivalry between Pakistan and it’s larger neighbour India. The terror attack on Mumbai this year is in all probability a direct result of the failure of the Afghanistan campaign.
So what has all this stuff got to do with us? The opinions I have been hearing and reading from friends and colleagues range from support for the Israeli action (“what else are we supposed to do?”), through to apathy (“both sides are just as bad as each other.”). One of my Indian friends has directly linked the Mumbai attacks to Kashmir, saying “Kick the Bastards Out.”
Fortunately there are others who share my horror at what is happening and are vocal in their protests. With the building threat to civil liberties in the West however, it remains to be seen for how long such voices are tolerated by governments. If we are lucky, it may be for another generation. But all the signs are there. It remains to be seen in American whether Barack Obama will continue with the expansion of the so-called Patriot Act. If he does, the only possible hope I see is that the left-wing of US politics will listen to the right-wing as they protest and say “Hey, that is what we were saying a couple of years back.” In Britain, the New Labour Government has already introduced the Identity Card (a misnomer – really it a super-database in which all available information about an individual is accessible in one place). In Australia, moves are afoot to censor the Internet – The Great Australian Firewall. A term chillingly reminiscent of the Great Chinese Firewall – their governments attempt to control access to the Web.
For shear nerve and audacity however, the prize for Scumbag Country of the Year 2008 must go to Russia and it’s attempt to rehabilitate Josef Stalin. The authorities are running a plebiscite for the Greatest Russian Ever, the mass murderer and psychopath old Uncle Joe is tipped to get the vote. I couldn’t finish Simon Sebag Montefiore’s book Stalin, the Court of the Red Tsar. Each page seems to have been written in the blood of thousands.
There are obvious political advantages for the rise of Stalin to official favour. It will signal the way for the return of the cult of personality, and with that the crimes that Stalin and his lieutenants committed will no longer be seen as such, but rather as strict and necessary measures with which Stalin guided the country to survival and through to prosperity. Measures, should the unfortunate need arise, the government, probably with Mr Putin again at it’s head, will not hesitate to enforce.
What I find personally disgusting is that even elements of the Orthodox Church has jumped aboard the bandwagon, with icons of Stalin now hanging in several churches, and even calls for canonisation. I never thought I would ever use this phrase, but the canonisation of Josef Stalin would be a blasphemy against God.
Nikita Khrushchev, one time henchman of Stalin and his successor was probably the only First Secretary to leave the Soviet Union in a better state than how it was when he came to power. The politicians of today would be wise to remember Khrushchev’s words that follow. When in his old age he was asked if there was anything he regretted, Khrushchev answered “Yes, the blood. So much blood.”
Selected Links
Gaza: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7801657.stm
US military policy: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2005/07/mil-050714-rferl01.htm
AFP reports: US reaction to Gaza
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hlg6gJoFxIIFzFiTaidIBHFQFafA
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5i3eDBHAxraJgDP729NqRoCg00Imw
Australian Internet debate: http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/world/2008/12/26/7855261.html
Stalin: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7801773.stm
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=KvwwAAAACAAJ&dq=stalin+the+court+of+the+red+tsar
Khrushchev:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Khrushchev-Man-His-William-Taubman/dp/product-description/0743231651
Picture credits
Gaza: Mohammed Abed, AFP
Stalin: BBC website
Thursday, 20 September 2007
The Dark Divide
Viewed from the sea, the border between Israel and Gaza is a subtle affair; quite unlike the Israel Lebanon border where the no-man’s-land snakes over the hillsides in a broad stripe before dwindling into the distant east. Gaza from the sea looks just like another city which can be seen dotting the coast of the Mediterranean at regular intervals. True, maybe more high-rise towers, more densely packed than it near neighbours but nothing to especially draw the eye.
That is during the day. At night the scene is completely changed. While the coastal towns of Israel are shining with light, there is no sign of the city of Gaza. A passing ship may see the occasional headlamps of a car and imagine that one or two small villages and scattered homesteads occupy the land south of Ashdod. The tower blocks, the buildings, the streets; all become invisible. It is as if Gaza never was. The only clue that there is a border at all is a negative one: a strip of utter darkness that lies between the citizens of Israel and their near Palestinian neighbours.
That is the closest I have been to Gaza and although the view I describe is now several years old, I am certain that it has not changed. Indeed, from what I hear in the media it is worse now for the population of Gaza than it was then. The two-state “solution” that arose from the peace initiatives of the 1990s are now dead. Former US ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, stated as much this week. Now, I am not in the habit of agreeing with Mr. Bolton on many topics but in this I’m sure he is right. I do not, however, agree with his proposed solution: to carve up the remaining Palestinian populations between existing states, with Gaza going to Egypt and the West Bank to Jordan. I’m sure that the Israeli government would be more than happy with this; after all it has long being the policy of Israel to drive the Palestinians off the land claimed by Israelis and let the neighbouring states cope with the refugees should they choose to.
There are several objections to the Bolton suggestion. The first is the right to self-determination. These people are neither Egyptian nor Jordanian. They are Palestinian and I doubt that Palestinians of Gaza would be queuing up to join the repressive police-state that is Egypt. Secondly it assumes that Israel’s neighbours can swallow large numbers of new population, especially people that have been brutalised for many years. Egypt might be able to cope but I doubt that Jordan could. There are already hundreds of thousands of Iraqi refugees living in poverty in the country. Jordan has already closed its border to more. Maybe the assumption is that these people will be able to return home one day. Looking at the long-lived refugee camps of Palestinians in Lebanon, I have my doubts. Iraq has been trashed for a generation and those who have already left will not be returning soon. To bequeath another population on a fragile Jordan may well tip the balance for the country with the resulting in failed states running across the Middle East all the way from Israel’s eastern border to the western border of Iran, a truly horrific prospect.
It is perhaps time for Israelis to consider that which their policies have long attempted to avoid: what will happen if the Jewish people become minorities in their own state? For the citizens of Israeli, Gaza and the West Bank to live in one country and with equal rights under the law. Unrealistic and infeasible? At the moment, yes it is. Against the Zionist dream of a Jewish state? Yes. Would the majority of Palestinians have to renounce their claims on the land they have been driven from? Yes. Will the Jewish religion have to be granted special rights in the constitution of the new state of Israel-Palestine? Yes, that too. There would have to be much work to be done to bring this notion about and it would take time: a lot of time. Probably another forty years. It is not impossible though. Things have happened in my lifetime I never thought would happen: the fall of the Iron Curtain; Sinn Fein and the DUP in Northern Ireland working together in government. I know that these conflicts are not the same as Israel and Palestine. The point is that all conflicts have an end and despite the rhetoric on both sides, peace is seldom enforced by military means.
We all must work to break down the darkness that separates people.
That is during the day. At night the scene is completely changed. While the coastal towns of Israel are shining with light, there is no sign of the city of Gaza. A passing ship may see the occasional headlamps of a car and imagine that one or two small villages and scattered homesteads occupy the land south of Ashdod. The tower blocks, the buildings, the streets; all become invisible. It is as if Gaza never was. The only clue that there is a border at all is a negative one: a strip of utter darkness that lies between the citizens of Israel and their near Palestinian neighbours.
That is the closest I have been to Gaza and although the view I describe is now several years old, I am certain that it has not changed. Indeed, from what I hear in the media it is worse now for the population of Gaza than it was then. The two-state “solution” that arose from the peace initiatives of the 1990s are now dead. Former US ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, stated as much this week. Now, I am not in the habit of agreeing with Mr. Bolton on many topics but in this I’m sure he is right. I do not, however, agree with his proposed solution: to carve up the remaining Palestinian populations between existing states, with Gaza going to Egypt and the West Bank to Jordan. I’m sure that the Israeli government would be more than happy with this; after all it has long being the policy of Israel to drive the Palestinians off the land claimed by Israelis and let the neighbouring states cope with the refugees should they choose to.
There are several objections to the Bolton suggestion. The first is the right to self-determination. These people are neither Egyptian nor Jordanian. They are Palestinian and I doubt that Palestinians of Gaza would be queuing up to join the repressive police-state that is Egypt. Secondly it assumes that Israel’s neighbours can swallow large numbers of new population, especially people that have been brutalised for many years. Egypt might be able to cope but I doubt that Jordan could. There are already hundreds of thousands of Iraqi refugees living in poverty in the country. Jordan has already closed its border to more. Maybe the assumption is that these people will be able to return home one day. Looking at the long-lived refugee camps of Palestinians in Lebanon, I have my doubts. Iraq has been trashed for a generation and those who have already left will not be returning soon. To bequeath another population on a fragile Jordan may well tip the balance for the country with the resulting in failed states running across the Middle East all the way from Israel’s eastern border to the western border of Iran, a truly horrific prospect.
It is perhaps time for Israelis to consider that which their policies have long attempted to avoid: what will happen if the Jewish people become minorities in their own state? For the citizens of Israeli, Gaza and the West Bank to live in one country and with equal rights under the law. Unrealistic and infeasible? At the moment, yes it is. Against the Zionist dream of a Jewish state? Yes. Would the majority of Palestinians have to renounce their claims on the land they have been driven from? Yes. Will the Jewish religion have to be granted special rights in the constitution of the new state of Israel-Palestine? Yes, that too. There would have to be much work to be done to bring this notion about and it would take time: a lot of time. Probably another forty years. It is not impossible though. Things have happened in my lifetime I never thought would happen: the fall of the Iron Curtain; Sinn Fein and the DUP in Northern Ireland working together in government. I know that these conflicts are not the same as Israel and Palestine. The point is that all conflicts have an end and despite the rhetoric on both sides, peace is seldom enforced by military means.
We all must work to break down the darkness that separates people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)