FOREIGN POLICY MAGAZINE: A NEW PATH TO PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST IS NEEDED
This week Nathan Brown brainstormed possibilities for successful negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians and what the Obama administration should do. He laments that the new administration has not shifted the course of the dialogue concerning Hamas and the negotiations in the Middle East.
The argument against “engaging Hamas” completely misses the point. The important question is not whether the United States enters into formal discussions with the Islamist group, but what the United States says and does when other countries attempt to speak with Hamas. On this point, even the Bush administration itself quietly shifted last year when it endorsed Egyptian mediation between Fatah and Hamas.
Brown argues that the goals of renewed US involvement should be to encourage a Palestinian political system capable of making decisions, even if that includes Hamas. The second goal should be to convince the two sides that they need to make hard choices in order to have lasting peace–which means that Israel should not build settlements if they argue for a two-state solution and that Hamas should not engage in violence if they want to be part of diplomatic efforts.
Question to the Blogosphere: In your opinion, is a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict more or less possible today than it has been in the past? Do you agree with Nathan Brown that the Obama administration has not changed policy towards the peace process since the end of the Bush administration? Should the US support negotiations between Israel and Hamas even if we do not talk to them ourselves? What do you think of the long-standing taboo on negotiating with a terrorist organization?
Comments are closed.
In my opinion it isn’t more likely today to find a solution to the Israeli Palestinian question than it was in the past. I won’t go as far as to say it is less likely, but Nathan Brown didn’t even touch at some variables in the game that have to be considered too.
For one thing, one has to regard Israeli internal politics. After the 2009 elections Israel politics will move even further to the right under Netanyahu. The country will be represented by a foreign minister Lieberman, who does not appear to be the choice if you nourish hope for a successful peace process. And even if this gov’ment might give only a short intermezzo, Israel (like many other countries including my second native land Germany) seems to be right now a country tired of politics. In times like these, when the extremes are sought out more, stable political conditions with gov’ments respecting the achievements of their predecessors are unlikely to expect.
The ongoing political developments are accompanied by an ongoing world economic crisis. Israel is a nation those economy rests on foreign trade. The countries it trades with most e.g. the USA are also the countries most heavily hit by the crisis. Chances are high that the crisis will hit Israel with full force as well. While peace with the Palestinians could improve things as it erases security concerns keeping tourists from coming, lowest the costs of the defense branch etc., people have a habit of becoming more nationalistic in the face of such crisis.
And once I mentioned the comparative instability of Israeli gov’ment (compared to old-standing European democracies), I will not keep quiet about the counterparts on the Palestinian side. As I write Hamas and Fatah try to reach an understanding as to how to work together in a unity government. How a workable agreement can be reached is more than problematic since the Palestinian question can’t be looked at detached from the whole Middle Eastern situation.
While Arafat succeeded mostly in keeping the Palestinian question and the Palestinian struggle independent of external powers, trying to use the conflict as a substitute battle field, Fatah and Hamas are today firmly placed in two opposite camps (Saudi/Egypt – Fatah vs. Iran/ Syria/ Hezbollah – Hamas); both with their own agendas. As with the Israelis the Palestinians are hard to calculate as long as they don’t speak in one, preferable their own, and reliable voice.
As for the question of negotiations with Hamas – polls show that Hamas is gaining support in Gaza as well as in the West Bank. If the Palestinians were called to the ballot boxes Hamas would be successful. You need to talk and listen to a political part of the group (like it had been done in Northern Ireland), if you are interested in real peace. Yet as always, the other side needs to be interested in real peace as well.