Critics of President Obama’s Middle East policy like to say the Palestinians have “never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity.” It’s a twist on the quote from Abba Eban, the Israeli diplomat and politician, who said after the Geneva Peace Conference in 1973: “The Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.”
Their point is that the Israelis do not have a partner for peace, and until they do, there should be no peace process. Moreover, the Palestinian leadership in the West Bank is extremely weak. In the absence of a partner, Israel certainly should not be pressured to make concessions.
I’ve always believed this line of thinking stands logic on its head. It’s the peace process (not unilateral Israeli moves) — including the active engagement of the United States bringing Arab nations along – coupled with economic improvement for Palestinians on the ground, that will over time create the partner.
An article on the front page of the New York Times today, “Signs of Hope Emerge in West Bank,” is a reason for optimism.
The first movie theater to operate in this Palestinian city in two decades opened its doors in late June. Palestinian policemen standing beneath new traffic lights are checking cars for seat belt violations. One-month-old parking meters are filling with the coins of shoppers. Music stores are blasting love songs into the street, and no nationalist or Islamist scold is forcing them to stop. …
For the first time since the second Palestinian uprising broke out in late 2000, leading to terrorist bombings and fierce Israeli countermeasures, a sense of personal security and economic potential is spreading across the West Bank as the Palestinian Authority’s security forces enter their second year of consolidating order.
The International Monetary Fund is about to issue its first upbeat report in years for the West Bank, forecasting a 7 percent growth rate for 2009.
Police checking cars for seat belt violations? Are we in Nablus, or suburban Central Jersey?
The article is accompanied by a photo of Palestinian teenage girls – hair straightened, wearing rhinestone-studded jeans, glittering belts, and showing some skin — buying movie tickets in front of a huge poster of Johnny Depp from Pirates of the Caribbean. It chronicles a surge in car sales, the success of a seven-story home furnishing store that sells the latest espresso machines, and a growing trust between Israeli and Palestinian forces, some of whom have been trained abroad.
If social and economic conditions continue to improve in the West Bank, isn’t it possible — despite all the heated rhetoric and even anti-Israel propaganda — that moderation will ultimately attract more disciples than fundamentalism? And that if this is coupled with continued engagement by President Obama, in a regional strategic approach with the Arab states, it could strengthen West Bank leadership, and embolden them meet the Israelis half-way?
“Twice in recent months we have been amazed,” an Israeli general told the New York Times, speaking about the seriousness of Palestinian security forces, who in June clashed ferociously with Hamas terrorists, fighting them to the death.
The West Bank. Where amazing happens? It’s only twice, but it’s a start.
ND,
If the peace process created a partner, there would be peace already. Madrid, Oslo, Camp David, Annapolis. These should have all created peace, according to your reasoning, but they have not.
And I think you misstate the hawks’ position somewhat. It’s not that they believe there is no partner. It’s something more fundamental: It’s that they believe the Palestinians aren’t interested in peace or the right of Jews to a Jewish state.
One needn’t go far to find recent examples of this attitude, but for a nice collection go to Memri.org.
The problem with the “peace” camp is its utter disregard for the truth. It’s staring us all in the face: the Palestinians don’t want two states. They want one, it’s called Palestine and Jews aren’t welcome there.
HP,
I appreciate the comment.
To your first point, I actually believe that Madrid, Oslo, Camp David, Annapolis — all of those negotiations over all those years in the 90′s — DID create a partner. That’s exactly my point. I lived in Israel at the time, and there was a strong Palestinian middle. Contacts between Israeli Jews and Palestinians, from security forces to fruit vendors, were myriad. More walls were coming down than were going up. Negotiators, over that time, started to trust each other.
As to your second point, I wonder where you get your information to make such a sweeping claim that Palestinians, as a whole, “aren’t interested in peace.”
According to a 2006 poll taken by the Jerusalem Media and Communications Center, a Palestinian organization that provides information to the media — and is periodically quoted in Western newspapers including the NY Times — a solid majority of Palestinians want exactly what you claim they don’t.
“Many residents of the Gaza Strip and West Bank think the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be solved if two sovereign countries can be established, according to a poll by the Jerusalem Media & Communication Center. 52.4 per cent of respondents prefer a two-state solution.
“Conversely, 23.6 per cent of respondents would establish a bi-national state on all of Palestine where Palestinians and Israelis enjoy equal representation and rights.”
And that was two years into the second term of the BUSH administration.
Or, consider this, from a 1998 NY Times article:
“This month, Israelis and Palestinians conducted their first-ever joint public-opinion poll. The survey, taken by Palestinians from the Jerusalem Media and Communications Center and Israelis from the Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace Research at Tel Aviv University, found that a majority in both groups support the Oslo process — 59 percent of the Israelis questioned, and 68 percent of Palestinians.”
That is, more Palestinians than Israelis supported the two-state solution. It’s exactly the opposite of what you claim. The Oslo process, according to anecdotal evidence I’ve seen first hand, as well as these and other polls, did in fact go a long way to creating a partner for peace.
Sure, you can point to plenty of example of Palestinians who now want a one state solution — even that poll in 2006 found that 23 percent wanted a binational state. That’s a lot of people. Way too many. And I’m sure Memri chronicles many more examples.
But let’s remember, that poll was taken after six years of complete U.S. disengagement and abdication, the total ABSENCE of a peace process, and, yet, still, more than 52 percent of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank wanted “two sovereign countries.”
There has been no serious peace process since the Clinton framework collapsed. That’s a big part of the REASON there are many Palestinians now who want a binational state. That’s my point.
I’m frankly surprised that you could argue the peace camp has “utter disregard for the truth.” This is a highly emotional, charged, complicated issue with well-meaning people on both sides. We may see “truth” differently, but I can assure you I don’t disregard it.
-ND
You have made some decent points there. I looked using the net for that issue and found most individuals might be and together with your website.