Peace a Wild Dream

Tuesday, 03 July 2007
By Sabria S Jawhar

THE United Nations, from the outset, has always endeavored to address the conflict in the Middle East in a manner that saves lives and improves security. However, all its efforts have failed to bring about peace in the region. Today, the situation is at its worst because of the US policy of aggression in the region and the continuation of its blatant support to Israel, which has encouraged the Jewish state to reject and sabotage various peace initiatives over the years.

Last week, the Department of Public Information at the United Nations held a seminar on peace in the Middle East in cooperation with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan in Tokyo. The seminar aimed at restoring the path to peace by reengaging Israeli and Palestinians in the search for a comprehensive and lasting political settlement. It brought together almost 100 participants from the Middle East and other parts of the world. Current and former policymakers, parliamentarians, representatives of civil societies and labor unions, mayors, academics and journalists were among the participants.
Yet, despite the high-profile participation, the seminar failed to come up with even a list of recommendations that can be followed up some day. It also fell short of convincing some of the participants to overcome their ill will towards each other, which resulted in the discussion being reduced to a bitter argument that was unprofessional despite the organizers' best efforts to create a friendly atmosphere.

For me, the seminar was nothing but a reflection of the real big picture of the situation in the region. If we are ever to achieve peace in the Middle East, I wonder, do we need a new approach? Why have previous efforts to achieve peace failed? What led to the present situation of unbridled violence and loss of life?

From the Madrid and Oslo accords in 1991-93 to the Arab Initiative of 2007, the international community has been yearning for peace through a strong political settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which guarantees peace and a secure future for a new Palestinian state and for Israel as well.

But peace will remain elusive so long as Israel wields the power to resist moves to find a solution to the Palestinian issue. Simply put, the scale of power weighs heavily in favor of Israel.

There is no denying that the US government has contributed to this power imbalance with its huge financial and military support to Israel over the decades. US aid to Israel exceeds the amount of foreign aid it provides to any other country. In contrast, the US began providing limited financial assistance to the Palestinian Authority only since 2002.

Now, following the violent takeover of Gaza by Hamas, the US government, which regards Hamas as a terrorist organization, aims to pour money, aid and political recognition on the West Bank. But how can the US ever be committed to the West Bank and Gaza as it struggles to extricate itself from the Iraqi quagmire, especially with the mounting pressure inside the US for withdrawal? What will happen if those anti-war advocates win?

Another obstacle to peace is the US habit of using its veto power to strike down UN Security Council resolutions that criticize Israeli actions, even as it condemns other nations for similar actions. This favoritism and unlimited support to Israel by the US, along with its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, have compelled many in the region to perceive the US as a cruel occupying power. It has created an increasing feeling of ill-will against Israel, the US and the countries supporting US foreign policy. US policy regarding Israel, Afghanistan and Iraq, and its threatening manner towards Iran, have angered youths in the region and led to the creation of several extremist organizations with their individual anti-US and anti-Israel agendas.

When Hamas got involved in the political process in Palestine and gave up its role as a resistance group, it won 62 percent of the Palestinian vote in an election that was deemed legal by the international community. But rather than honor the will of the Palestinians to practice democracy through a legal election, the US criticizes Hamas as a terrorist organization and declares it would not work or cooperate with the newly elected government.

The blockade and isolation of Hamas by the US and Israel created confusion. Even Hamas leaders did not know what role to play - resistance or a legal government? Following the disagreement between Hamas and Fatah that temporarily ended with the Makkah agreement, Hamas agreed to fall in line, accepting the least influential ministries and with the minimum authority. But did this put an end to its isolation? The answer is No.

Let's take as an example the Arab peace initiative that was initiated at the Beirut summit in 2002 and collectively agreed upon at the Riyadh summit in 2007. The initiative tackled most, if not all, the major issues between the two sides. Considered a progressive proposal, it calls for Israel to withdraw its forces from all the Occupied Territories, including the Golan Heights, to recognize "an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital" in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, as well as a "just solution" for the Palestinian refugees wanting to return to their homes. In exchange, the Arab states affirmed they would recognize the state of Israel, consider the Arab-Israeli conflict over and establish "normal relations" with Israel.

In response, Israel is still imposing conditions for negotiations that make the whole process nothing but a wild dream.

The US and Israel seem also to be overlooking the role of Iran and Syria in the peace process, with whom they refuse to negotiate. While the US, in the past few months, has loosened its rigid position of not negotiating with Iran and Syria - although it's still a long way from meaningful dialogue - it continues its counterproductive polices by hinting at possible military action against both countries but for different reasons. The point, though, is that the more the US escalates its threats against those two influential countries in the region, the more they will create trouble by provoking extremist groups.

The insecurity and instability that such countries are able to create by using their influence would generate a new generation of extremists who believe in nothing but violence as a way of obtaining political gains; a new generation that is well-versed in technology and scientific infrastructure of modernity; a generation that embraces modern technology but rejects cultural modernity including democracy.

With the shocking developments in Gaza, the peace process dream seems to have become unattainable. This deteriorated situation is a natural outcome of the Bush administration's six years of negligence.

Are the US and Israel aware of the consequences of the collapse of the unity government and the isolation of Hamas in the Gaza Strip? The answer is no as it seems that they have both found a good opportunity in this development.

The US and Israel certainly had their own agendas in mind when they quickly expressed support for the Palestinian Authority. It seems that the Bush administration is aiming to guide the West Bank towards significantly better living standards, by providing political, economic and military support, while at the same time seeking to teach Hamas a lesson by leaving the people in Gaza to languish in poverty and misery through the economic blockade and political isolation.

Maybe it is trying to force Hamas supporters, both in Gaza and West Bank, to turn away and align themselves with Fatah, accusing Hamas of being the main reason behind their misery.

This scenario is likely but officials in the US have to keep in mind other scenarios too. For instance, the support that Hamas gets from Iran and Syria, What if Hamas manages to establish a lawful and prosperous nation? What if it succeeds in bringing about security? By isolating Hamas, the US and Israel are giving it a chance to reorganize its military operations and start a new furious wave of resistance. If Hamas loses control of Gaza, this would open the gate for terrorist groups from all over the world to turn it into a new training ground for terrorists to target Israeli and American interests in the region.

The solution to the Middle East crisis doesn't lie in the region. On the contrary, it lies in Washington. Any delay in accepting comprehensive initiatives such as that of the Riyadh summit will worsen the situation and make the confrontation more violent and bloody. It will also create an atmosphere for terrorism that would be exported not only to the neighboring countries but also to the rest of the world.