|
by Peter A. Belmont / 2009-01-26
© 2009 Peter Belmont
| |
It has long been clear that Israel would never leave the occupied territories unless (and until) external circumstances forced such a withdrawal. If for no other reason, the settlers would prevent withdrawal.
The horror of Israel’s January 2009 smashing of Gaza has changed the external circumstances. Now the Arab states fear the outraged Arab “street” sufficiently for Saudi Arabia to threaten the USA, and the USA, if it credits that threat (or if, under President Obama, it recovers its belief in the Rule of Law, or simply in the human rights of the Palestinian people) will force Israel to remove the settlers, a first step in making peace (and a two-state resolution of the 60-year Palestinian/Israeli conflict).
Thank you, Israel! Couldn’t have done it without your dramatic over-reaching/call for help!
|
|
Until the Gaza blitz, there never was a “circle” to close.
It had long been clear that Israel would never leave the occupied territories voluntarily. As its program of settling the West Bank with (now 450,000) Jewish-Israeli citizens progressed, confiscating more and more Palestinian territory for settlements, for highways to connect them to pre-1967 Israeli territory, and for a wall [1] to protect the settlers, the prospect of a two-state resolution of the 60-year conflict became ever more remote. These so-called “facts on the ground” were widely described as, and clearly intended to be, permanent—an irremediable deal-breaker to prevent peace.
The US, for 41 years, had been (or has at least acted as if it were) a puppet of the extreme pro-Israel lobby (”The Lobby”) and its lead player, AIPAC. Until late January 2009, the US was not about to force Israel to do anything. The US was not about to alter the “external circumstances” of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict.
But Israel felt obliged to do something which, in the event, changed the “external circumstances” and closed a circle. Perhaps it was, subconsciously, a ”cry for help”.
How did Israel close a circle? Israel breached its truce with Hamas 6 months ago first by failing to lift the siege (or blockade) of food, medicine, fuel, and much else, which it had imposed to starve the people of Gaza and second by assassinating several Hamas members. Hamas responded, after a very long period of forbearance, by finally shooting several rockets into Israel. This response (evidently hoped for and, indeed, planned for by Israel) was the signal for Israel to mount its December/January blitz attack on Gaza, planned and practiced for long in advance.
All the world saw the blitz except for most Americans, who “enjoy” a heavily self-censored, pro-extremist-Israeli, media. The world which saw the blitz was properly horrified by it. Conditions for some sort of international change of heart were established. A circle was forming.
The first to move appears to have been Saudi Arabia, perhaps because the “Arab Street” there or elsewhere had been so outraged by the horror of the blitz as to create a danger of instability in the Arab countries. Saudia Arabia issued a warning[2].
The circle was now complete.
Saudi Arabia has enough financial power to threaten the US. Saudi Arabia speaks rarely, but when Saudi Arabia speaks, the US listens. Saudi Arabia has changed the “external circumstances” in which the US makes its decisions. The US is clearly in a position to change the “external circumstances” in which Israel makes its decisions.
The circle has closed. Israel’s blitz (freely chosen when Israel decided to strangle Gaza and assassinate Hamas members) changed the “external circumstances” in Saudi Arabia, which, as noted above, pushed the US which will now push Israel.
I cannot say that this “closing of the circle” was done deliberately by Israel. For one thing, it has too many “moving parts”, there are too many uncertainties. Israel’s blitz may have been pushed by electoral considerations, a government wishing to appear “tough” before the early-February elections. Alternatively, the blitz may have been pushed by a powerful and semi-independent military. In any case, the Gaza blitz was freely chosen and typical of an Israel which cannot break the mindset of permanent occupation, control, and oppression.
I can say that the effect of the blitz has been to change “external circumstances” for Saudi Arabia, for the US, for the world, and ultimately for Israel.
We should expect change, and quickly.
-----------
[1] The wall is variously described as a “security wall”, a “separation wall”, an “apartheid wall”, and a “final border”.
-----------
[2] Prince Saud Al-Faisal, the Saudi foreign minister, told the UN Security Council that if there was no just settlement, “we will turn our backs on you”. King Abdullah spoke for the entire Arab and Muslim world when he said at the Arab summit in Kuwait that although the Arab peace initiative was on the table, it would not remain there for long. Much of the world shares these sentiments and any Arab government that negotiated with the Israelis today would be rightly condemned by its citizens
|
