Netanyahu confronts the new Middle East

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Israel's intransigence on the flotilla killings will further isolate the country in the international community.

Can it be? Did the Turks really dare to say "No" to Bibi Netanyahu, threaten to break ties with Israel, and say it so directly and strongly?

Bibi Netanyahu defiantly refused to apologise to Turkey for Israeli commando forces' May 31, 2010 raid that killed nine civilians (eight Turks and one American of Turkish descent) and wounded several dozens, mostly Turkish citizens. The Turkish-flagged Mavi Marmara - a flotilla of peace activists, aid workers, writers, journalists, lawyers, members of parliaments and ordinary citizens - was bringing humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza in an attempt to break Israel's two-year blockade and siege of the Gaza Strip, which they believed was a necessary step to restart the peace process in the Middle East.

Bibi not only said no to the Turkish government's demand for a formal apology, but no to the US as well. It was not a secret that both US President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had strongly encouraged the Israeli government to apologise. Instead Netanyahu retreated to a mantra he has used throughout his years as prime minister: "We need not apologise."

But should anyone have been surprised? One can understand the Netanyahu government's intransigence and defiance: This is perfectly reasonable given the lack of resistance from the US and the international community, who consistently avoid dealing firmly, critically and decisively with Israel. Bibi is clearly not used to being diplomatically rebuffed and held accountable. Rather, he has a track record of defying international law, and of not being held accountable for the use of excessive force, violence, punishment and repression. Witness the Israeli invasions of Gaza and Lebanon, the creation of an apartheid state, and the blockade of the democratically elected Hamas government in Gaza - aided by his US and EU partners. As in Gaza and Lebanon, so too in response to the attack on the flotilla. Even though an American citizen was among those murdered, the US silence was deafening.

Was Israel's use of force justified?

Despite the United Nations report's recognition of Israel's naval blockade of Gaza as legal and appropriate, it noted that the flotilla posed no immediate threat and emphasised that the decision to board and use force was excessive and unreasonable, and that Israel had failed to provide an adequate explanation or details for the killing of the nine activists. Indeed, it concluded: "No evidence has been provided to establish that any of the deceased were armed with lethal weapons." That said, Israel was advised to issue a statement of regret and "make payment for the benefit of the deceased and injured victims and their families".

Need for a new narrative

As Turkey's expulsion of the Israeli ambassador and downgrading of its ties with Israel signals, Israel's defiance of both friend and foe alike will have implications in the new Middle East. The Netanyahu government totally misreads and ignores the Arab Spring with its demand for respect, dignity and freedom. Many of the authoritarian allies that the West and Israel could count on are gone, or going.

The new Middle East, like the resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, requires a new narrative, and with it a redefining of relationships as partnerships. Turkey has become a major player in the Middle East, and a respected ally of the US and many EU countries. The loss of Turkey as a friend will further isolate Israel in the region and the international community. Israel's continued occupation and blockade policies further demonstrate Netanyahu's lack of leadership, and his lack of vision or desire to make peace with Palestinians and establish productive relations with new emerging Arab governments.

Israel's fallout with Turkey, the repercussions of which are being felt across the Middle East and the Muslim world, comes just weeks before a scheduled UN Security Council vote to recognise a Palestine as a new member state. Despite Israel's intransigence in US-led Middle East negotiations and Bibi's arrogant personal style in dealing with Barack Obama, the US administration has made it clear that it will (yet again) veto any request presented to the United Nations and has lobbied its EU allies to also do so. However, the US, EU and Israel will not be able to block a UN General Assembly vote to elevate the status of the Palestinians' from nonvoting observer "entity" to that of a nonvoting observer "state". Such a vote will even more clearly symbolise Israel's marginalisation in the community of nations, and will further undermine the US' role as an honest broker in the Middle East peace process.

John Esposito is a Professor of Reglion (Islamic Studies) and Professor of International Affairs at Georgetown. He is the author of several books, including Islam in Transition: Muslim Perspectives (2006, Oxford University Press) and Unholy War: Terror in the Name of Islam (2002, Oxford University Press).

The views expressed in this article are the authors' own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/09/20119883612490901.html

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

The 29 standing ovations went to Nutty's head. But he has big problems indeed. This is another one of them:

September may bring the death of the two-state solution - and the Jewish state

What happens when the Palestinians realize come September that UN recognition doesn't change their lives, that the settlements continue to expand, and the occupation continues?

The diplomatic tsunami of September is building up. So far, neither the U.S. nor the EU has been able to dissuade the Palestinian Authority from its bid for UN recognition.

It seems that the Palestinians no longer have a way out. Given that they do not see the Netanyahu government as a bona fide partner on the route toward a viable state, they are bereft of an alternative strategy.

The Netanyahu government has known but one tactic vis-à-vis the Palestinian bid for UN recognition: working against it.

It is bracing for the head-on collision with the UN recognition of Palestine, and hopes to score a ‘moral victory’ if major EU countries like Germany, France and the U.K. either abstain or vote against this recognition.

Basically Netanyahu will argue that the Palestinians ‘only’ got their ‘automatic majority’, and that the major Western countries didn’t go along with it.

But the real question is what will happen after the UN showdown. Israel's political and military echelon is trying to prepare for the eventuality of massive protests in the West Bank after approximately one hundred and forty countries recognize Palestine. The prospect of a new spiral of violence is frightening indeed.

While this is the most immediately pressing issue, the Netanyahu coalition has consistently been avoiding a much larger question. Israel’s concern has been what might happen should the Palestinian bid for statehood succeed in making a real difference.

There is but one scenario that is more problematic: What will happen if this bid indeed changes nothing on the ground, as most Palestinians indeed believe? What will happen when the Palestinians realize that UN recognition doesn’t change their lives, that the settlements continue to expand, and the occupation continues?

Netanyahu probably hopes that he can hang on to the status quo. Judging from his writings in the 1980s and 1990s, he has always claimed that a Palestinian state with territorial contiguity west of the Jordan is an unacceptable security risk for Israel. His clash with Obama earlier this year about the 1967 borders as a basis for negotiations indicate that he has never changed his mind in this respect.

The problem is that soon there may no longer be a status quo to hang on to. As Akiva Eldar has pointed out, Mahmoud Abbas, now 76- years-old, may well be the last Palestinian leader to strive for the two-state solution.

If the UN bid does not yield any tangible results, the Palestinian leadership may seriously consider dissolving the Palestinian Authority, and the West Bank, once again, will be Israel’s responsibility. The implications are enormous both economically and politically.

In that event, the Palestinians are then likely to turn to the UN with a new request: They will claim that after 44 years of occupation, they are de facto residents under Israeli sovereignty, and should therefore receive Israeli citizenship.

This scenario is likely to be the de facto burial of the two-state solution: What would the current Israeli coalition do under such circumstances?

Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin has taken a very clear stance, and called for the one-state solution for some time. Because he is a staunch believer in the principles of liberal democracy, Rivlin has called on Israel to grant full citizenship to the Palestinians in the West Bank. In this he is joined by former Likud Defense Minister Moshe Arens.

It seems that most of Netanyahu’s coalition - and actually, most members of Knesset – do not share the vision expounded by Rivlin and Arens of integrating the Palestinians in the West Bank as full citizens, because it is difficult to see just how Israel could then avoid turning into bi-national state de facto.

This is the background for the wave of nationalist legislation in the Knesset. Israel’s lawmakers have been implicitly grappling with this possibility over the last two years, and have been trying to fend it off with law proposals that would guarantee Israel’s Jewish character.

Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman gave the opening salvo with his proposed loyalty oath to Israel as a Jewish and democratic state. In general, his view has been that Israel’s Arab citizens constitute a security risk, so he is unlikely to be thrilled to add more than two million Palestinians to Israel’s citizenry.

Kadima's Avi Dichter’s proposal for a basic law that defines Israel as the homeland of the Jews with Hebrew as the only official language is another attempt to fend off the possibility of Israel’s becoming bi-national.

But all these proposed laws do not provide an answer to the simple question how a state with close to 40 percent Palestinian citizenry could maintain a Jewish character by democratic means.

Thus Netanyahu may go into history not only as them man who killed the two-state solution, but also the dream of Israel as the democratic homeland of the Jewish people that he claims to defend.

http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/strenger-than-fiction/september-may-bring-the-death-of-the-two-state-solution-and-the-jewish-state-1.383248

Edited September 8, 2011 by wife_of_mahmoud

[Captain Oates 911]

Its now been 235 years since one third of the colonists (about 800k people) used force to overthrow the lawful government in America and forced out many to Canada or the UK or the Caribbean

Many people were financially ruined as their land was taken over by the avaricious mob

The Duke of Westminster had much of his land in Virginia stolen

It's ironic that he owns the land that the US Embassy stands on in Grosvenor Square in London. The US wanted to buy the land a couple of years ago as they own all other embassy sites, and the Duke said they could have it when he got his chunk of Virginia back.

The Normans conquered England in 1066 and many of the landowners names in my home town and county are Norman-French. Vavasouer, Percy, Devere, Lacy, DuCanne, Cavendish, Fairfax, etc -- they still run England and own much of it and the anglo peasants remain poor.

Who will help us throw out these foreign landlords who only own England through their murderous force ?

It ain't over til it's over.

Edited September 8, 2011 by Alan the Red

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

[Captain Oates 911]

What has a cockerel headed zebra eating a piece of toast got to do with it ?

They must have some real ganja down there in the territories

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

What has a cockerel headed zebra eating a piece of toast got to do with it ?

About as much as the Norman Conquest and the Duke of Westminster...

[Captain Oates 911]

About as much as the Norman Conquest and the Duke of Westminster...

The point was that many nations have been conquered and have had to accept it

The only difference with Palestine is that it is recent

Another thousand years will get it into perspective so that it is merely a simmering resentment

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

The point was that many nations have been conquered and have had to accept it

The only difference with Palestine is that it is recent

Another thousand years will get it into perspective so that it is merely a simmering resentment

Well, there are also many nations that have not been conquered, or that did not accept conquer (or even their own governments) and had revolutions or liberation movements.

And what does all that have to do with Netanyahu or his spat with the Turks or his having to deal with the expected Palestinians' bid for statehood this month ?

[mawilson 2,133]

Well, there are also many nations that have not been conquered, or that did not accept conquer (or even their own governments) and had revolutions or liberation movements.

Those nations were willing to man up and fight their conquerors.

Clearly, Palestinians lack the ability to fight Israel militarily as they got their аss kicked every time they tried.

All they can do is whine "unfair!" to the UN and keep shooting off unguided bottle rockets.

[Captain Oates 911]

Well, there are also many nations that have not been conquered, or that did not accept conquer (or even their own governments) and had revolutions or liberation movements.

And what does all that have to do with Netanyahu or his spat with the Turks or his having to deal with the expected Palestinians' bid for statehood this month ?

The USA can no more conquer Afghanistan than the russians or the british - but at least the USA acknowledges its failure and is getting out - its time the Palestinians realised that they are beaten and the Jewish State is here to stay. When they have the world's number 1 super power giving them a tank and a fighter plane each, there is no point resisting.

When Menachim Begin and the Stern Gang killed all those British Officers in the St David's Hotel - we took the hint and called it a day. Of course they weren't terrorists - they were freedom fighters.

The palestinians should all move to Minnesota and accept a million each from the US gov for doing it. The US would make on the deal with less arms to Israel, and Israel could get nearer the oil - so everyone would be happy

Bit cold in Minnesota but less flies

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Let me get this straight... you are both saying that Israel has conquered Palestine (including the West Bank and Gaza) and these areas are now part of sovereign Israel ?

[Captain Oates 911]

Let me get this straight... you are both saying that Israel has conquered Palestine (including the West Bank and Gaza) and these areas are now part of sovereign Israel ?

That is the case in fact, if not in International law. The Israelies can ride around in their tanks in the territories and dictate what arms the Palestinians can have and what passes in and out - either directly or using their puppets in Egypt or wherever.

Palestinians are free to sit on the sidewalk and count their beads - and not much more. They are conquered for all practical purposes. If this wasn't the case then why fire rockets at them ?

The Palestinians will know they are not conqered when Palestinian fighter bombers can patrol their borders with Israel.

We both know that's not going to happen - ever.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

That is the case in fact, if not in International law. The Israelies can ride around in their tanks in the territories and dictate what arms the Palestinians can have and what passes in and out - either directly or using their puppets in Egypt or wherever.

Palestinians are free to sit on the sidewalk and count their beads - and not much more. They are conquered for all practical purposes. If this wasn't the case then why fire rockets at them ?

The Palestinians will know they are not conqered when Palestinian fighter bombers can patrol their borders with Israel.

We both know that's not going to happen - ever.

Hmmm. So... you are a one-state solution guy ?

[Pooky 3,786]

All they can do is whine "unfair!" to the UN and keep shooting off unguided bottle rockets.

Don't forget the anti-tank guided missiles that someone slipped to them

[Captain Oates 911]

Hmmm. So... you are a one-state solution guy ?

It is a Jewish State where the immigration policy discriminates for Jews. By 'Jew', I am speaking of the religion only - as does Israeli law. How the US reconciles itself with those values I have no idea.

It has been said that as a democratic State, the Israelises would embarrasseded to disenfranchise their citizens on the basis of religion.

Any country that calls itself an Islamic State or a Jewish State has already abandoned the idea of democracy US style - so I don't think they will as embarrassed as people say.

I think it will remain a Jewish (religion) State with the Palestinians left exactly where they are.

The cost is few toy rockets landing every now and then - not much

... and the Americans will swallow it when the Israelies justify disenfranchising the majority of their population.

Nothing will change - the palestinians can't make it change and the Israelies are sitting pretty with the US backing them forever no matter what they do.

Game over

As Jeremy Paxman asked the British Ambassador - is there anything that Israel could do that you would condemn ?

He shuffled that one off..