In the Mideast, Obama Faces an Israeli-Palestinian Standoff That Threatens to Explode
A Bush legacy, Palestinian radicalism, and an Israeli right turn will burden any peacemaking effort
JERUSALEM—It would be hard to blame incoming President Barack Obama if he took one look at the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and decided it wasn't for him. After all, the main thing President George W. Bush has to show for eight years of on-and-off Mideast peacemaking is Hamas rule in the Gaza Strip—the result of the administration's insistence on Gazan elections and subsequent instigation of a failed coup attempt against the elected Islamist rulers.
The Israeli-Palestinian peace process has been essentially moribund for eight years, ever since the intifada broke out after the two sides failed to agree on a division of the land they've been fighting over for generations. Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and military clampdown on the West Bank have brought the violence down to a low flame, but the current state of no war/no peace can't go on forever, and trends indicate that if and when change comes, it's likely to be for the worse.
Obama's immediate challenge will be to help keep a lid on the situation so it doesn't slide back into the open warfare of the decade's early years. Formal peace between Israelis and Palestinians, like Israel has with Egypt and Jordan, may have to wait some more.
The most urgent front is Gaza, where a five-month cease-fire between Israel and the Strip's Islamic militant groups broke down on U.S. Election Day as the two sides resumed fire—with Gaza, as usual, getting much the worse of the exchange. The Egyptian-brokered cease-fire runs out December 19, and it's not clear whether there will be anything left by then to renew.
The danger of this conflict was highlighted this week when Jordan's King Abdullah received Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak in Amman. Abdullah implored them not to launch a threatened ground invasion of the Strip because it could destabilize his own regime, whose peace treaty with Israel is bitterly resented by Muslim fundamentalists.
By contrast, the West Bank is in a holding pattern. But Israel's military occupation and settlement enterprise there are so entrenched, and the moderate Palestinian leadership so weak, that the long-standing international goal of Palestinian statehood seems unimaginable.
Turning the West Bank into a Palestinian state—or half of one, the other half being Gaza—would require the removal of tens of thousands of radical Israeli settlers. This week's attempt by Israeli troops to remove just a handful of them from an illegally occupied house in Hebron set off violent resistance by settler mobs. All those years while the diplomats were talking, the settlers were creating "facts on the ground"—and it may well require unprecedented U.S. pressure on Israel to remove those facts to make way for Palestine.
But if Israel is still not ready to give up West Bank land, it's debatable whether the West Bank Palestinian leadership is ready to deliver peace. The Bush administration has invested heavily in Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayad. And, although the pair evidently mean well, it is widely believed that if the Israeli army pulled out of the West Bank as part of a peace deal, the Abbas-Fayad government would be overthrown by Hamas and other militant organizations.
In principle, most Israelis favor trading land for peace. But in practice, they're against doing it now in the West Bank; they fear giving West Bank terrorists a free hand to rocket Ben-Gurion Airport like Gazan terrorists have rocketed Israeli border towns since the army's pullout from the Strip three years ago.
There has been one encouraging sign in recent months: U.S.-trained Palestinian police have largely taken over for Israeli troops in the West Bank city of Jenin and around Hebron, where they are cracking down on Islamic militants. However, Abbas's men are still a long way from being able to shut down West Bank terror on their own.
So the deal remains land for peace—but neither Israelis nor Palestinians are holding up their end.
Three weeks after Obama takes office, Israel will have its own election day, and this week's polls showed the right wing resurgent, with former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu galloping ahead of moderate Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni in the race for the top spot. Palestinian officials warn that the current, halting peace negotiations will end altogether if Netanyahu wins and goes ahead with his campaign promises to take the issue of Jerusalem off the table and shift the focus of the talks from land for peace to Palestinian economic development.
If Netanyahu, the Likud party leader, wins on February 10, it could foreshadow interesting times for the U.S.-Israeli alliance, which thrived during the Bush years. Perhaps the clearest hint the American president-elect has given of his view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict came in a February campaign meeting with Jewish voters in Cleveland. He was quoted as saying: "I think there is a strain within the pro-Israel community that says unless you adopt an unwavering pro-Likud approach to Israel, then you're anti-Israel, and that can't be the measure of our friendship with Israel."
Soon after taking office, he may get the chance to test that idea.
- Read more about The World Obama Inherits
- Read about how Obama will change Cuba policy
- Read about Iran's nuclear challenge
Reader Comments
PALESTINE
The short sighted step of creating Israel on the ruins of Plaestine and its innocent people has led to the creation of terrorist groups who are ready to sacrifice their own bodies in a holy war against Israel and the countries that suport its apartheid regime.Once we stop our unlimited support to the Israeli military gangs whose only game is to kill as many Palestinian women and children as they can everyday,once all Palestinian refugees return home to their stolen land and belongings under un resolution 194 which Israel arrogantly refuses to implement,once a secular state is established on all the land of Historical Palestine for Jews,Moslems and Christians with equal rights and responsibilities and without any apartheid or descrimination, all terror on the world will definitely disappear forever.
To be quite honest . . .
This dilema has become a photo op for American Presidents to be seen in the middle of the hand shake between an Israeli PM and an Arab counterpart. This is especially the case now becasue of Obama's weakness with regard to international diplomacy.
It's seen as a rather pathetic gester anymore. I think it was Carter and the media that made much to do about nothing. Now every President since sees this dilema as a photo op and a way to show off diplomacy muscle. Pretty lame, since nothing constructive is ever achieved.
What?
Frances, your post is laughable. The Jews chose to be Europeans? No! There's this thing called the Dispersion in which the Jews lost their temple in Jerusalem and were persecuted all over the Roman Empire. Eventually, some were able to build communities in Europe. Those that remained in Israel were faced with three options: flee Islamic rule, die, or stay. Most fled. Eventually, a large Jewish population was seen in Europe. Hitler, needing a scapegoat, chose the Jews to be the target of his people's anger. Not to help create the nation of Israel. And most Jews didn't want to leave, but many were forced out by persecution or exile.
As for Palestinians, they were offered a two-state resolution but they rejected it by fighting the Zionists in the first Israeli-Arab conflict in 1948. Israel has tried to give Palestinian areas like the Golan heights and Gaza autonomy, but Hamas and others keep throwing mortar rounds into Israel. Also, there are Arabic political parties in Israel, so it is not as if they do not have a voice in the government.
advertisement
