- Home
- About
- General Issues
- Maps
-
Position Statements
- 2011 >
-
2012
>
- Time to Negotiate the Northern and Southern Sectors of the Israeli-West Bank Border
- President Peres and Dr. Ashrawi: Thank You for Staying on Track
- Playing the Victim Card Will Not Bring Peace
- Negotiations By the Parties
- The World Should Help the Palestinian Hunger Striker
- ...and only afterwards move to discuss the topic of Jerusalem
- A Question of Accountability
- Israel Twisting in the Wind
- Netanyahu: Too Big for His Britches
- Netanyahu's "Israeli Comfort"
- How Shaul Mofaz Can Jump-Start the Peace Process
- Netanyahu on the Brink
- Time for Taking Stock
- Israel in Wonderland
- Whatever Happened to the Quartet?
- The Palestinians Want to Negotiate
- A Time for Hope and a Call for Restraint
- Israel Can Win in Gaza, But Not Now
- Congratulations to the New State of Palestine!
- Security and Borders: Both Required for Peace
-
2013
>
- It Is Up to Israel to Restart Peace Negotiations
- Israel and Palestine: Changing the Terms of Agreement
- The Knesset Bill to Increase the Number of Women that Elect the Chief Rabbis Is Important for Jewish Women
- Proposal on Governance of the Holy Basin
- Time for Netanyahu to Reach Across the Aisle
- Tzipi Livni's Challenge
- Women Should Be Free to Pray at the Wailing Wall
- Proposed Highway through the Jordan Valley Will Backfire on Israel
- 2014 >
-
2015
>
- We Should Applaud Herzog and Livni for Reclaiming Zionism
- The Next Israeli Government
- West Bank Citizenry and Receipt of Individuals of Palestinian Origin
- What Next for Israel?
- Palestinian statehood
- Mischief in the Trade Legislation would Hinder Progress
- What Next for America?
- Could American Firms Choose to Gradually Disinvest from Israel?
- Boycotting Israel is not anti-Semitism
- 2016 >
- 2017 >
- 2019 >
- 2020 >
- 2023 >
- 2024
- Resources
- About the Authors
Israel Twisting in the Wind
March 14, 2012
Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu received a cool reception from President Obama during his trip to Washington last week, with the President flatly refusing to commit to U.S. military action against Iran. Meanwhile, a cease-fire is in effect after rockets rained down on Israel causing death and destruction, a gift of Islamic Jihad, Iran’s proxies in Gaza. Israel’s new Iron Dome anti-missile defense system is working tolerably well, yet still some rockets are getting through; one that hit the center of Ashdod caused widespread panic. There is no doubt that Israel lives in a rough neighborhood, yet why does it have to face its enemies alone?
The Israelis bravely make a virtue of their Jewish exceptionalism, colored by their memories of the painful history of Jewish victimhood. They take pride in the fact that where once in Europe they were as sheep led to the slaughter, today with their strong military they are able to prevail over their enemies. Yet it is becoming ever harder to do so, as its enemies have become more sophisticated and better armed.
In the 2006 war with Hezbollah in Lebanon, the best Israel could attain was a standoff. Today even though the IDF has no doubt inflicted heavier casualties on the terrorists than it suffered from the rocket attacks, when the dust clears the Islamic Jihad will no doubt declare victory. According to a senior IDF intelligence officer, “Islamic Jihad was currently focused on saving face and creating a ‘victory image’ with which it will be able to claim that it defeated the IDF.” And Israel knows that it has not damaged its foe’s logistical capabilities, as the terrorists are obtaining longer range missiles that can potentially threaten even Tel Aviv.
We are saddened by the loss of life from this latest round of violence, and we deplore the actions of these extremist Palestinian groups in Gaza who by attacking Israel are only damaging their own cause. Yet why must this ugly violence and miserable loss of life continue, and for how long? It will continue as long as the root cause of the problem is not addressed: the Palestinians’ natural right to a state of their own.
Netanyahu, who apparently remains a political captive to his right-wing settler coalition partners, did everything he could during his meetings with Obama to distract the world’s attention from the Palestinian problem and to bring Iran front and center. Apparently he succeeded, at least for a few days.
Yet shortly after he left Washington, Gen. James Mattis, head of U.S. Central Command, once again reminded the Americans that the absence of a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is a “preeminent flame that keeps the pot boiling in the Middle East, particularly as the Arab Awakening causes Arab governments to be more responsive to the sentiments of their populations.” He remarked on the importance of a peace agreement for American national interests: “A peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians will foster stable public support among our partners in the region for American initiatives.” He added that an agreement would also hamper the efforts of extremist groups, referring to Iran and its proxies.
There is only so far that Netanyahu can go in placing partisan politics over the peace and security of Israel. The Israeli public is not stupid. The rockets from Gaza are a vivid demonstration that his obstructionist policy of delaying any serious engagement with the Palestinian Authority is not improving Israel’s security. How long will the Israeli public continue to indulge the settlers, whose starry-eyed aspiration to colonize the whole of the West Bank is putting the entire nation at risk?
Granted, some Israelis still nurse wounds from the Second Intifada, in which Palestinian violence claimed over 1,100 Israeli lives between 2000 and 2004. Yet does the memory of events a decade old justify causing pain to Palestinians in the present day, in the form of a cruel occupation? Israelis had better recognize that indulging these memories has become an excuse for inflicting pain. It blinds them to the fact that the Palestinians have demonstrably put aside the tactics of armed resistance in favor of peaceful and constructive state-building. They are asking to be treated as good neighbors. In this situation, when one’s opponent has already yielded, continuing to exact punishment for past sins becomes cruelty. It is only storing up resentment and creating the potential for violence that could come down on Israel’s heads with far greater ferocity than a few rockets.
Netanyahu in Washington invoked memories of the Holocaust in speaking of the need for military action against Iran. But the French could remind Israel of another lesson from that era that speaks to Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians: The rise of the Nazis was a direct result of a similar self-righteous decision to punish a defeated enemy. In 1919 the French thought it justified to exact heavy reparations on a defeated Germany by the Treaty of Versailles. Yet those punitive measures finally broke Germany’s humanity and led to the rise of Hitler. Had the French treated the defeated Germans with greater respect, there might have been no Holocaust.
Meanwhile, Netanyahu’s path is increasing Israel’s isolation in the world community. He has only himself to blame for his frosty relationship with Obama, after his 2011 visit to Washington where he aligned himself with the Republicans in Congress and publicly upbraided the President. He began meddling in America’s domestic politics through his proxies in AIPAC, who by portraying the President as anti-Israel sought to split the solidly Democratic Jewish vote. This time Obama stood his ground, giving nothing of substance to Netanyahu even as his supporters stepped up to declare that no president has been a greater friend of Israel.
The representatives of the Quartet were having nothing to do with the Iranian issue. Naturally they had to deplore the rocket attacks from Gaza. After an informal meeting on March 12 at the United Nations, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called on “all sides” to restore calm. Yet their focus clearly remains on restarting bilateral Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. In a statement, they affirmed their commitment to “a comprehensive resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict” and “welcomed the important effort led by Jordan, which began in early January, as part of the shared commitment to reach a negotiated agreement by the end of this year.”
The Europeans are growing ever more appalled with Netanyahu. The French and Italians have had enough of him. The Germans are currently waiting to see what Israel will do to satisfy the Quartet’s demands. The British are committed to peace, but they want to be even-handed, calling for both sides to produce movement. The UN Secretary General has come out in full force calling for a peace agreement, while the United States, caught in election-year paralysis, mouths the usual about justice and universal peace. The Obama administration may feel constrained by loud Jewish voices during this election season, but French Jews are more taciturn, and they are lovers of liberty. If Europe moves to secure freedom for the Palestinians, they are more likely to side with that cause.
The British are more serious about wanting to attain a result that brings true universal justice, but in front of America the UK is weak-kneed. Nevertheless, they can draw strength from Obama’s new assertiveness last week in facing down Netanyahu. They can also read Peter Beinart’s forthcoming book, The Crisis of Zionism, which chastises Obama for his succumbing to Netanyahu’s bullying that caused him to abandon his 2010 Middle East initiative and betray his own ideals for peace (see excerpt in The Daily Beast). Now it is America that is in a position of weakness politically and morally, and Great Britain can support a European initiative. Obama, despite his brave words to AIPAC that he would oppose sanctions, will not object to European action; in fact he will root for Europe from the sidelines.
The Quartet will meet again in April. Let’s see what Sarkozy and Merkel might do to bring about two states.
Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu received a cool reception from President Obama during his trip to Washington last week, with the President flatly refusing to commit to U.S. military action against Iran. Meanwhile, a cease-fire is in effect after rockets rained down on Israel causing death and destruction, a gift of Islamic Jihad, Iran’s proxies in Gaza. Israel’s new Iron Dome anti-missile defense system is working tolerably well, yet still some rockets are getting through; one that hit the center of Ashdod caused widespread panic. There is no doubt that Israel lives in a rough neighborhood, yet why does it have to face its enemies alone?
The Israelis bravely make a virtue of their Jewish exceptionalism, colored by their memories of the painful history of Jewish victimhood. They take pride in the fact that where once in Europe they were as sheep led to the slaughter, today with their strong military they are able to prevail over their enemies. Yet it is becoming ever harder to do so, as its enemies have become more sophisticated and better armed.
In the 2006 war with Hezbollah in Lebanon, the best Israel could attain was a standoff. Today even though the IDF has no doubt inflicted heavier casualties on the terrorists than it suffered from the rocket attacks, when the dust clears the Islamic Jihad will no doubt declare victory. According to a senior IDF intelligence officer, “Islamic Jihad was currently focused on saving face and creating a ‘victory image’ with which it will be able to claim that it defeated the IDF.” And Israel knows that it has not damaged its foe’s logistical capabilities, as the terrorists are obtaining longer range missiles that can potentially threaten even Tel Aviv.
We are saddened by the loss of life from this latest round of violence, and we deplore the actions of these extremist Palestinian groups in Gaza who by attacking Israel are only damaging their own cause. Yet why must this ugly violence and miserable loss of life continue, and for how long? It will continue as long as the root cause of the problem is not addressed: the Palestinians’ natural right to a state of their own.
Netanyahu, who apparently remains a political captive to his right-wing settler coalition partners, did everything he could during his meetings with Obama to distract the world’s attention from the Palestinian problem and to bring Iran front and center. Apparently he succeeded, at least for a few days.
Yet shortly after he left Washington, Gen. James Mattis, head of U.S. Central Command, once again reminded the Americans that the absence of a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is a “preeminent flame that keeps the pot boiling in the Middle East, particularly as the Arab Awakening causes Arab governments to be more responsive to the sentiments of their populations.” He remarked on the importance of a peace agreement for American national interests: “A peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians will foster stable public support among our partners in the region for American initiatives.” He added that an agreement would also hamper the efforts of extremist groups, referring to Iran and its proxies.
There is only so far that Netanyahu can go in placing partisan politics over the peace and security of Israel. The Israeli public is not stupid. The rockets from Gaza are a vivid demonstration that his obstructionist policy of delaying any serious engagement with the Palestinian Authority is not improving Israel’s security. How long will the Israeli public continue to indulge the settlers, whose starry-eyed aspiration to colonize the whole of the West Bank is putting the entire nation at risk?
Granted, some Israelis still nurse wounds from the Second Intifada, in which Palestinian violence claimed over 1,100 Israeli lives between 2000 and 2004. Yet does the memory of events a decade old justify causing pain to Palestinians in the present day, in the form of a cruel occupation? Israelis had better recognize that indulging these memories has become an excuse for inflicting pain. It blinds them to the fact that the Palestinians have demonstrably put aside the tactics of armed resistance in favor of peaceful and constructive state-building. They are asking to be treated as good neighbors. In this situation, when one’s opponent has already yielded, continuing to exact punishment for past sins becomes cruelty. It is only storing up resentment and creating the potential for violence that could come down on Israel’s heads with far greater ferocity than a few rockets.
Netanyahu in Washington invoked memories of the Holocaust in speaking of the need for military action against Iran. But the French could remind Israel of another lesson from that era that speaks to Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians: The rise of the Nazis was a direct result of a similar self-righteous decision to punish a defeated enemy. In 1919 the French thought it justified to exact heavy reparations on a defeated Germany by the Treaty of Versailles. Yet those punitive measures finally broke Germany’s humanity and led to the rise of Hitler. Had the French treated the defeated Germans with greater respect, there might have been no Holocaust.
Meanwhile, Netanyahu’s path is increasing Israel’s isolation in the world community. He has only himself to blame for his frosty relationship with Obama, after his 2011 visit to Washington where he aligned himself with the Republicans in Congress and publicly upbraided the President. He began meddling in America’s domestic politics through his proxies in AIPAC, who by portraying the President as anti-Israel sought to split the solidly Democratic Jewish vote. This time Obama stood his ground, giving nothing of substance to Netanyahu even as his supporters stepped up to declare that no president has been a greater friend of Israel.
The representatives of the Quartet were having nothing to do with the Iranian issue. Naturally they had to deplore the rocket attacks from Gaza. After an informal meeting on March 12 at the United Nations, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called on “all sides” to restore calm. Yet their focus clearly remains on restarting bilateral Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. In a statement, they affirmed their commitment to “a comprehensive resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict” and “welcomed the important effort led by Jordan, which began in early January, as part of the shared commitment to reach a negotiated agreement by the end of this year.”
The Europeans are growing ever more appalled with Netanyahu. The French and Italians have had enough of him. The Germans are currently waiting to see what Israel will do to satisfy the Quartet’s demands. The British are committed to peace, but they want to be even-handed, calling for both sides to produce movement. The UN Secretary General has come out in full force calling for a peace agreement, while the United States, caught in election-year paralysis, mouths the usual about justice and universal peace. The Obama administration may feel constrained by loud Jewish voices during this election season, but French Jews are more taciturn, and they are lovers of liberty. If Europe moves to secure freedom for the Palestinians, they are more likely to side with that cause.
The British are more serious about wanting to attain a result that brings true universal justice, but in front of America the UK is weak-kneed. Nevertheless, they can draw strength from Obama’s new assertiveness last week in facing down Netanyahu. They can also read Peter Beinart’s forthcoming book, The Crisis of Zionism, which chastises Obama for his succumbing to Netanyahu’s bullying that caused him to abandon his 2010 Middle East initiative and betray his own ideals for peace (see excerpt in The Daily Beast). Now it is America that is in a position of weakness politically and morally, and Great Britain can support a European initiative. Obama, despite his brave words to AIPAC that he would oppose sanctions, will not object to European action; in fact he will root for Europe from the sidelines.
The Quartet will meet again in April. Let’s see what Sarkozy and Merkel might do to bring about two states.
