ReportWire

Tag: Alon Ben-Meir

  • How Netanyahu Made the Creation of a Palestinian State Irreversible

    How Netanyahu Made the Creation of a Palestinian State Irreversible

    [ad_1]

    • Opinion by Alon Ben-Meir (new york)
    • Inter Press Service

    NEW YORK, May 24 (IPS) – It is ironic how Prime Minister Netanyahu, who vehemently opposed the establishment of a Palestinian state, made it all but irreversible because of his misguided policies and extreme ideological bent.

    The way he conducted the Gaza war has not only sealed the prospect of a Palestinian state but his political demise

    The recent recognition of a Palestinian state by Spain, Ireland, and Norway is the latest blow to Netanyahu’s horribly misguided policy toward the Palestinians, which he pursued throughout his political career to prevent them from ever establishing their own state under his watch, as he stated time and gain.

    This recognition is in addition to the overwhelming majority of United Nations General Assembly member states that have recognized Palestinian statehood. In truth, none of the above should come as a surprise, as the writing was on the wall for decades, and it was only a question of time before this inevitability unfolded.

    The recent decision of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to issue an arrest warrant against Netanyahu, charging him with war crimes, was another degrading rebuke of Netanyahu for his ruthlessness in the way he is conducting the Gaza war.

    The horrific death and destruction that has been inflicted on Israel and the Palestinians in Gaza as a result of Hamas’ October 2023 attack that resulted in the slaughter of 1,200 Israelis and the ongoing and unprecedented war against Hamas that killed 35,000 Palestinians, and the unspeakable human suffering has created a new paradigm.

    The establishment of a Palestinian state, which has been particularly resisted by Netanyahu for the past 16 years, has become front and center in the search for a permanent solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

    Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide could not have put it clearer when he stated: “The fact that this Israeli government, led by Netanyahu, has been so clear that it has no intention to negotiate with the Palestinian side and has been so accepting and even supportive of new illegal settlements, all that has contributed to the recognition decision. In some sense, it’s a reaction to that.”

    The tragic dimension of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that a majority of Israelis bought into Netanyahu’s false argument that a Palestinian state will pose an existential danger to Israel, and hence, the continuing occupation is necessary to prevent the Palestinians from realizing their aspiration for statehood. But what is the alternative to a two-state solution? After 57 years of occupation, even a fool would have concluded that the occupation is not sustainable.

    How much more death and destruction must both peoples endure before Netanyahu and his blindly misguided followers come to understand that if it takes a hundred more years and the deaths of a million Palestinians, they will never give up or give in on establishing a state of their own.

    What is further baffling is that the multitude of right-wing Israelis keep complaining about Palestinian violence. They ignore the elementary understanding that any people who have been living in servitude for decades under the harshest conditions would rise against the occupier, especially when they have a legitimate right to have their own state, enshrined by the same 1947 UNSC Resolution 194 that granted the Jews the right to establish their independent state.

    For 80 percent of all Israelis (those born after 1967), the occupation is a normal state of existence irrespective of the daily suffering and often inhumane mistreatment of the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, to which they have been and continue to be subjected.

    On January 10, 2024, I wrote: “Sadly, it took the Israel-Hamas war to awaken both sides to their tragic reality. They must now realize there will be no return to the status quo ante. The circumstances that led to the Israel-Hamas war only reinforced the inescapable requirement for a two-state solution. Simply put, there is no other viable option other than continuing the bloody conflict for decades to come.”

    But then, what would it take for Netanyahu and his messianic ministers, especially Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, to wake up and realize that every day that passes without a solution, not only will more Israelis and Palestinians be killed in vain, but the conflict will become ever more intractable.

    It will exact a mounting price in blood and treasure from both sides without any prospect of changing the inescapable requirement for a Palestinian state to reach a sustainable, peaceful coexistence.

    The hurdles to reaching this noble goal are massive; there is the psychological dimension to the conflict that must be mitigated, territorial claims and counterclaims, the dispute over the administration of the Temple Mount (Haram al-Sharif), mutual concerns over security, the final status of Jerusalem, and more. But then, regardless of how obdurate these conflicting issues may be, they will become far more daunting and perilous short of peace based on a two-state solution.

    US National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby recently stated: “The president still believes in the promise and the possibility of a two-state solution. He recognizes that it’s going to take a lot of hard work. It’s going to take a lot of leadership there in the region, particularly on both sides of the issue, and the United States stands firmly committed to eventually seeing that outcome.”

    Whereas I applaud President Biden’s position and sentiment regarding the requisite of a Palestinian state, he needs to move the needle further and warn Netanyahu that he can no longer take for granted the US position that the creation of a Palestinian state must emerge from direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.

    While Biden may choose, for political reasons, not to follow the footsteps of the prime ministers of Spain, Ireland, and Norway by recognizing the Palestinian state, he should, at a minimum, permit the Palestinian Authority to reestablish its mission in DC, and reopen the American consulate in East Jerusalem.

    That is, if Biden is truly committed to that outcome, then he must demonstrate that by taking real action on the ground. This is the time when leadership is truly needed, and no head of state worldwide can demonstrate that more at this crucial hour than President Biden to bring closer the two-state solution to reality.

    Surely, Biden believes in what Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez stated: “This recognition is not against anyone; it is not against the Israeli people. It is an act in favor of peace, justice and moral consistency.” And I might add, it is a moral imperative on which Israel itself was founded.

    It is time for Netanyahu to pay the price for dragging Israel into this perilous morass. But then again, he who has resisted the creation of a Palestinian state with all his might made it now more likely than ever before.

    Dr. Alon Ben-Meir is a retired professor of international relations, most recently at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU). He taught courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies.

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2024) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Israel-Jordan Relations in The Wake of The Gaza War

    Israel-Jordan Relations in The Wake of The Gaza War

    [ad_1]

    • Opinion by Alon Ben-Meir (new york)
    • Inter Press Service

    NEW YORK, Dec 01 (IPS) – Although the dire impact of the Israel-Hamas war has touched many countries in the region and beyond, no foreign country has been so profoundly affected by the war than Jordan. Israel must mitigate Jordan’s concerns to save its critical alliance with its neighbor while fully collaborating in the search for a permanent resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

    Under Prime Minister Netanyahu’s leadership, Israel-Jordan relations have hit a new low. Sadly, after 30 years of peace, there is deep sullenness and disappointment between the two countries. The aspiration for strategic partnership has fallen short, except for security collaboration. Jordan’s King Abdallah and Netanyahu do not see eye-to-eye on many issues.

    The King views Netanyahu as particularly responsible for the deterioration of the relationship between the two countries. Of specific concern to Jordan is the Israeli government’s brutal treatment of the Palestinians in the West Bank, its worries about any change in its status as the guardian of the holy Muslim shrines (Haram al-Sharif), and its concerns over the limits of the bilateral economic relations.

    What has added significant insult to the already injured relationship is the tragically inadvertent carnage and destruction being inflicted on the Palestinians in Gaza as a result of the Israel-Hamas war.

    For Jordan, the future resolution to the Palestinian conflict is the most contentious because whatever happens to the Palestinians, especially in the West Bank, has a direct and indirect impact on Jordan’s security, economy, and demographics due to its proximity and also because half of the population is of Palestinian origin.

    Netanyahu made hardly any effort to address King Abdallah’s justifiable worries about the rapidly deteriorating security conditions in the West Bank. Since the Israel-Hamas war began on October 7th, nearly 220 Palestinians have been killed in the West Bank as of this writing, and there is no sign that the violence will abate any time soon.

    Indeed, the absurdity here is that given that Jordan has been at peace with Israel since 1995, its proximity to Israel, and its mutual concerns over the region’s stability, the need for full cooperation on intelligence sharing, commercial ties, and national security become ever more critical.

    But then, Netanyahu has taken Jordan for granted when, in fact, Amman remained faithful to its collaborative efforts with Israel and continues to play a critical role in monitoring and securing the approximately 300-mile-long border with Israel to prevent the smuggling of weapons and infiltration of terrorists into Israel proper and the West Bank.

    The Israel-Hamas war has enormously changed the political dynamic of the Jordanian-Israeli relationship. Although Jordan expressed sympathy toward the Israelis for the unimaginable butchery that Hamas inflicted on innocent Israeli civilians, Israel’s invasion of Gaza and the horrendous destruction and death have enraged the Jordanians to a level unseen between the two countries since they signed a peace treaty in 1994.

    More than 50 percent of the Jordanian population are of Palestinian origin and have a strong affinity to their brethren wherever they reside. The death of more than 14,000 Palestinians in Gaza, including nearly 6,000 children and 4,000 women, caused an unparalleled stir in Jordan, damning Israel and demanding an immediate end to the hostilities. In fact, out of sympathy and solidarity, many Jordanian youth have chosen to adopt “Hamas ideology.”

    The UN Jordanian delegation presented a resolution to the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) calling for an “immediate, permanent, and sustainable humanitarian truce leading to a cessation of hostilities,” which was adopted by 120 countries. On November 1st, Jordan’s Foreign Minister Ayman Al-Safadi recalled Jordan’s Ambassador to Israel, saying that his decision was an “expression of Jordan’s rejection and condemnation of the raging war in Gaza, which is killing innocent people and causing an unprecedented human catastrophe.”

    Jordan considers the forced evacuation and displacement of Palestinians in Gaza as equivalent to a war against civilians that will fundamentally shake the bilateral Israeli-Jordanian relations, mainly because Jordan has the largest Palestinian refugee population of any other country, which makes it extraordinarily sympathetic and sensitive to the Palestinian cause.

    Of particular concern to the Jordanian government is that the Netanyahu government is determined to deny the Palestinians the right to statehood, which will have a significant impact on Jordan domestically. What worries the Hashemite Kingdom is that some ministers in the current Israeli government are resuscitating the notion that Jordan is Palestine by their actions in the West Bank.

    Although Netanyahu knows how sensitive the Jordanian government is about this momentous issue, he has done nothing to assuage the Jordanians’ growing anxieties that the West Bank Palestinians will be entirely pushed into Jordan.

    Amman can play a significant regional diplomatic role in stemming the escalation of the conflict, especially in the West Bank, before it spins out of control. Jordan, the most stable country with moderate political leadership in a region reddened with violent conflicts, has and continues to serve along with Israel as the cornerstone of the US-Middle East security partnership, which both countries must guard with zeal.

    There are several necessary measures that the Israeli government must take to alleviate and mend past and present Jordanian grievances and restore and further improve their bilateral relationship, which would best serve their national interests.

    First, given Jordan’s direct and indirect involvement with the Palestinians, Israel must not ignore Jordan’s concerns over the violent clashes between the Israeli settlers and security forces and the Palestinians. Recently, the increasing violence in the West Bank compelled Jordan to strengthen its border security to prevent the escalation of violence from spilling over into its territory.

    Nevertheless, it could precipitate an influx of Palestinians into Jordan, which Amman wants to avoid. Israel must restate in an unmistakable tone that it respects Jordan’s sovereignty, and any resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will be separate and apart from and would not infringe in any way on Jordan’s independence, which Israel recognizes.

    Second, Israel must commit to continuing water and gas supplies to Jordan without interruption. This is critical for restoring Jordan’s confidence in any Israeli government, which has been dangerously eroding under Netanyahu. The “Blue and Green Prosperity” project, financed by the UAE and signed in August 2023, enables the exchange of Israeli desalinated water for Jordanian solar energy. This is a significant project for Jordan and must be guarded and fully implemented under any circumstance.

    Third, although the collaborative security ties and intelligence sharing between Jordan and Israel remain close, the Israeli government must ensure their security collaboration stays intact and robust. Israel must also carefully address Jordan’s unique security needs given the continuing regional tension and the threats of extremist militant groups, as well as its concerns over Iranian threats, which Israel shares. Amman needs to feel assured that Israel has Jordan’s back.

    Fourth, Israel must assure Jordan that under no circumstances would it seek or facilitate any change in the custodianship and the administrative responsibility of Jordan over the Muslim holy shrines (Haram al-Sharif) in Jerusalem. From the Jordanian perspective, the current arrangement gives it a strategic basis that allows it to have a say in any future agreement with the Palestinians in connection with Jerusalem. Although Saudi Arabia aspires to assume that role, Israel should honor its agreement with the Hashemite Kingdom from the time Israel annexed East Jerusalem in 1967.

    Fifth, Israel ought to strengthen its economic ties with Jordan by expanding the import-export of goods and services, encouraging Israelis to invest in Jordan, especially in the technological sector, and increasing tourism once the Israel-Hamas war comes to an end and the anti-Israeli Jordanian public sentiment subsides.

    The current Netanyahu or any future Israeli government must stop short of nothing to safeguard its ties and constantly improve its relations with Jordan—Israel’s most important Arab ally, partner for peace, and its closest neighbor. Since they have a strong mutual national security interest and strategic alliance, Israel should work hand-in-hand with Jordan in the search for a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict because it will directly affect Jordan’s national interest on every front.

    To be sure, given the Israel-Hamas war, which makes it impossible nor desirable to restore the status quo ante, it is now more urgent than any time before for Israel and Jordan to mitigate their differences, strengthen their strategic alliance, and find common ground on how to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

    For more information on how a sustainable peace agreement based on a two-state solution can be reached, please refer to my essay in World Affairs, “The Case for an Israeli-Palestinian-Jordanian Confederation: Why Now and How?”

    Dr. Alon Ben-Meir is a retired professor of international relations at the Center for Global Affairs at NYU. He teaches courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies.
    [email protected]

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • What Is Israel’s End-Game in Gaza?

    What Is Israel’s End-Game in Gaza?

    [ad_1]

    Missile strikes on Gaza are continuing. Credit: UNICEF/Eyad El Baba
    • Opinion by Alon Ben-Meir (new york)
    • Inter Press Service

    NEW YORK, Nov 13 (IPS) – Unless Israel establishes an exit strategy and an end-game that will lead to a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in full coordination with the US and Saudi Arabia, the war against Hamas will only be another brutal violent episode that will prepare the ground for the next conflagration that will engulf the West Bank and potentially set the entire region on fire.

    What Is Israel’s End-Game in Gaza?

    As the Israel-Hamas war grinds on, the international call for a ceasefire or at a minimum a pause in the fighting for a couple of days to allow for the delivery of badly needed necessities is absolutely essential at this juncture. It is glaringly evident that there is growing international sympathy towards the Palestinians, given the magnitude of destruction and loss of life.

    This humanitarian crisis of such incredible scale is overshadowing the unconscionable slaughter of 1,400 people in Israel and the kidnapping of 248 others. Sadly though, although Israel has the right to self-defense, the campaign to eradicate Hamas is increasingly resembling a war of revenge and retribution. It has caused tremendous destruction and human suffering.

    After only four weeks, nearly 11,000 in Gaza are dead, one-third of them children under the age of 18, there is a horrifying scarcity of food, medicine, water, and fuel, and nearly half the population is now internally displaced.

    This calamity is unfolding in front of our eyes and must stop, even temporarily, to help save the lives of many of the tens of thousands who are wounded, bury the dead, and avert wide-spread starvation. And even though a temporary cessation of hostilities benefits Hamas, it is still worth undertaking not only to alleviate the horrifying suffering of the entire population in Gaza, but also to open a window for negotiating the release of as many hostages as possible, especially all women and children, in exchange for the pause in fighting.

    Whereas Israel’s stated goal from the onset was and still justifiably is the destruction of Hamas, Israel has not offered as yet any clear exit strategy nor endgame. Once Hamas is completely defeated, which is still a tall order, Israel with the support of the US and Saudi Arabia in particular will have to offer a sound alternative that meets the Palestinians’ aspiration and render Hamas irrelevant.

    President Biden should demand that Prime Minister Netanyahu and his military brass develop, in coordination with the US, a clear exit strategy and an end-game consistent with Israel’s, the Palestinians’, and the US’ national interests.

    The protests that have taken place across major cities in the US over the weekend, including Washington, DC, are arguably some of the biggest that we’ve seen in a long time. These calls for a ceasefire or a pause in the fighting for humanitarian reasons are exerting pressure on Biden to change his near-unconditional support of Israel’s war efforts, which he can no longer ignore. This is particularly important because the US’ unwavering support of Israel makes the Biden administration complicit to the unfolding tragedy, which is intensely criticized from the ranks of leading Democrats as well.

    What should be the end game? I believe there are three possible scenarios, two of which are impractical in a sense that they will not lead to a permanent solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

    Israeli control over Gaza

    First, Netanyahu is claiming that he wants to maintain security over Gaza, but he’s not saying who will govern and administer the Strip. Does he want to reoccupy all of Gaza or just the northern half, which may explain why he wanted the Palestinians to head south. President Biden is very correct to suggest that the reoccupation of Gaza, be that in part or in full, will be nothing short of a disaster for Israel and will only guarantee the prolongation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

    Moreover, it should be emphasized here that given Israel’s experience in the occupied West Bank, maintaining security was only marginally successful at best as evidenced by the continuing violence between Israeli forces and Palestinians, which has been increasingly escalating.

    Netanyahu is a fool to assume that he can maintain control over Gaza by establishing a security apparatus when the Hamas-affiliated militants in Gaza will subject the Israeli forces to terrorist attacks that will exact a heavy toll in blood and treasure. The violence in the West Bank will pale in comparison to what Hamas’ militants in Gaza will still be capable of doing against Israeli forces without an end in sight.

    Resettling Palestinians in Egypt

    The second option, which Netanyahu has been exploring with Egypt, would allow the settling of a few hundred thousand Palestinians in the Sinai; Egypt would assume administrative responsibility in Gaza while Israel maintains security. Egyptian President Sisi flatly rejected any future involvement with the Palestinians in Gaza, other than facilitating through the Rafah crossing the passage of people for justifiable reasons as well as the transfer of goods.

    The Egyptian government considers Hamas a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is outlawed in Egypt. For this reason, Egypt has also blockaded Gaza to prevent the infiltration of Hamas militants into the country.

    Moreover, Egypt has troubles of its own. The economy is in a dire situation, and its concerns over security are mounting. Egypt simply does not want to add more to its domestic problems. Thus, they are not interested in any solution that will burden them with the Palestinians. That said, President Sisi was clear that regardless of how this war ends, a framework for a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must be established, otherwise it will be only a question of time when this war will invite another.

    Transitional period for Gaza with UN supervision

    The third option may well be more viable as it would entail a transitional period whereby the United Nations would assume responsibility. Administratively, as is well known, UNWRA has been on the ground for decades, providing aid and development services, including education, healthcare, microfinance, and job training.

    Although it has not been involved in the running of Gaza itself, UNWRA is very familiar with the scene in Gaza. It is familiar with the population’s needs, the prevailing socio-economic conditions, and the day-to-day problems Gazans face. UNWRA is in the best possible position to assume greater responsibility under a modified and expanded mandate, provided that it receives the manpower and the funding necessary.

    In conjunction with UNWRA’s added administrative responsibilities, it will be necessary to establish a peacekeeping force to be in charge of security. This force ought to be comprised exclusively of the Arab states that are at peace with Israel, namely the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Bahrain, and Morocco, as well as Egypt.

    It should be made clear that although post-Hamas the West Bank and Gaza should be governed by the Palestinian Authority (PA), this should not and in fact cannot happen for at least a year to 18 months following the establishment of a UN administrative authority in Gaza.

    During this period, the Palestinians in both the West Bank and Gaza would prepare themselves politically for a new election. The current PA is corrupt to the bone; President Abbas is rejected and despised by the majority of Palestinians and must go. Only a new, fresh, and uncorrupt newly-elected leadership that enjoys the confidence of the people can succeed.

    On the Israeli side, no one should hold their breath waiting for Netanyahu and his gang of zealous coalition partners to agree on anything that even resembles an independent Palestinian state. Once the war ends, Netanyahu will face an inquiry about the unprecedented disaster that took place under his watch and he will have to resign or be ousted. Here too, a new government will have to be established in Israel which must commit itself from the onset to a two-state solution.

    Once the above two prerequisites are in place, the UN administrative authority will then relinquish its role and responsibility to the PA.

    The Arab states should condition their commitment to provide a peacekeeping force upon Israel’s acceptance of a two-state solution. That is, once such a peacekeeping force is created, the process of peacebuilding ought to commence in earnest toward that end. Any interim solution must be used only as a vehicle toward a final resolution, otherwise it would serve as nothing less than a respite from waiting for another disaster to unfold.

    The role of the US and Saudi Arabia

    Saudi Arabia and the US can play a major, in fact indispensable, role in this regard: The US has and continues to be the ultimate guarantor of Israel’s national security, and President Biden has done more than any of his predecessors in this regard and demonstrated that in the most unambiguous way by his unflagging support of Israel.

    He must make it very clear (and is in a position to do so) to Netanyahu or his successor that the US’ unwavering support bears considerable political cost to America both domestically as well as internationally. Many countries around the world view the US as complicit to the unfolding horror in Gaza. President Biden must put in place a framework for a two-state solution, which he has been advocating for many decades.

    The negotiating peace process will certainly take more than year to complete. 2024 is an election year in the US, but regardless of who the next president might be, Biden will have to stick to the plans because another Israeli-Palestinian conflagration will inescapably involve the US. It’s time for the US to put its foot down, no longer give Israel carte blanche to do as it pleases, and condition further support, financial and military, to genuine efforts to negotiate in good faith and reach a peace agreement.

    Saudi Arabia can complement the US initiative with its own most significant role by seizing on the breakdown in the Israeli-Palestinian relations and offering an unprecedented breakthrough to bring an end to the conflict. The Saudis should make it clear that once the war ends, they will be ready to normalize relations with Israel on the condition that a new Israeli government agree to a two-state solution and negotiate continuously until an agreement is reached.

    This war must end, leaving Hamas dramatically weakened and in disarray. But Hamas’ ultimate defeat will not be on the battlefield, it will be by creating an alternative to Hamas’ governance from which the Palestinians will greatly benefit. That contrast ought to be made clearly and immediately to demonstrate to the Palestinians that Hamas was not only the enemy of Israel but the enemy of ordinary Palestinians. Yes, all Palestinians in Gaza want to live in peace and prosper but were deprived of living a normal life because of Hamas’ violent resistance to Israel, squandering every resource to fight Israel while leaving the people despairing and hopeless.

    Israel should not prolong this tragic war by even one unnecessary day. Indeed, if this war lasts another month or two, it is almost certain that 20,000 to 30,000 Palestinians, mostly innocent civilians, and scores of Israeli soldiers will be killed. The continuation of the terrifying death and destruction in Gaza along with Israeli losses will only deepen the hate, enmity, and distrust between Israel and the Palestinians and make a solution to the conflict ever more intractable.

    Every Israeli should ask him/herself the painful question: do we want to memorialize the death of 1,400 innocent Israelis butchered by Hamas by killing, however inadvertently, 20,000 Palestinians? Is that how the Israeli victims should be commemorated? This is something that every Israeli needs to think about.

    Yes, Israel can and will win every battle against Hamas, but it will lose the war unless a peace process between Israel and the Palestinians begins once the war comes to an end, under the auspices of the US and Saudi Arabia, which must lead to a two-state solution.

    For more information on how a sustainable peace agreement based on a two-state solution can be reached, please refer to my essay in World Affairs https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/00438200211066350
    “The Case for an Israeli-Palestinian-Jordanian Confederation: Why Now and How?”

    Dr Alon Ben-Meir is a professor of international relations at the Center for Global Affairs at NYU. He teaches courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies. [email protected]

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Where Do We Go Once the Israel-Hamas War Ends? – Part I

    Where Do We Go Once the Israel-Hamas War Ends? – Part I

    [ad_1]

    • Opinion by Alon Ben-Meir (new york)
    • Inter Press Service

    NEW YORK, Nov 06 (IPS) – Since the 1967 Six Day War, many efforts have been made to reach a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians through mediation conducted by an impartial mediator, face-to face negotiations, international conferences, offering incentives, back-channel talks, interim agreements (in particular the Oslo Accords), and occasionally by an influential party exerting pressure on both sides, especially the US.

    None of the above approaches nor several others to reach a peace agreement have worked. The failures to reach an agreement are fundamentally attributed to the fact that both sides claim exclusive ownership to the entire land from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River, albeit they blame each other for failing to make the necessary concessions to reach a peace agreement.

    While the prospect of a two-state solution was viable following the 1993 Oslo Accords, the outlook for such a solution became progressively dimmer as Israel moved to the right-of-center. Prime Minister Netanyahu, who was bent on sabotaging the Oslo Accords when he served as prime minister between 1996 and 1999, and has been in power for most of the past 15 years, made it clear repeatedly that there will be no Palestinian state under his watch.

    The idea of a two-state solution was steadily losing traction in Israel, the occupation of the West Bank was normalized, and a de facto apartheid state was created, which became a way of life for most Israelis and Palestinians.

    The changing dynamic of the conflict

    It is well known in conflict resolution that sometimes it takes a major breakdown that precipitates an extraordinary crisis to change the dynamic of a conflict. The shockingly unexpected and devastating Yom Kippur War in 1973, which subsequently led to a peace agreement between Egypt and Israel, offers a potent example.

    As such, it made it simply impossible to return to the status quo ante. Indeed, neither Israel nor the Palestinians, including Hamas, will be the same following this most heinous and unprecedented massacre and Israel’s retaliation that has already exacted (as of this writing) more than 8,700 Palestinian casualties—not to speak of the unimaginable death and destruction that will occur as Israel undertakes its ground invasion of Gaza.

    This unfolding horror should have been expected because of what was happening on the ground in the West Bank and Gaza over the past few years, especially in the last 10 months since the formation of the most extremist right-wing coalition government in Israel’s history (as I pointed out in my article published on October 3, 2022). Indeed, it did not take a prophet to augur what would happen next.

    The increasingly violent flareups in the West Bank have been claiming hundreds of Palestinian lives, mostly under the age of 30, each year (so far this year over 300 West Bank Palestinians have already been killed, as of the time of writing, over 100 since October 7 alone). The frequent night raids, evictions, incarcerations, demolition of houses, and gross human rights abuses became the norm.

    Despair, depression, and hopelessness swept much of the Palestinian population, akin to the gathering of a ferocious storm that successive Israeli governments led by Netanyahu chose to brush off. Moreover, it is the psychological dimension of the conflict that has now come into full display, exposing decades-old mental and emotional trauma the Palestinians have been experiencing to which the wright-wing Israelis were oblivious and which was bound to manifest in an unprecedented way.

    The Palestinians’ resentment and hatred of Israel were intensifying. Since the new government could not formally annex Palestinians territories, it has resorted to intimidation and harassment of the Palestinians under the watchful eye of the criminal Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir, who gave the settlers free reign to rampage Palestinian communities in order to ‘encourage’ them to leave.

    The Netanyahu government’s intent to slowly annex much of the West Bank became abundantly clear. Needless to say, none of the above can justify under any circumstances Hamas’ heinous attack on Israeli civilians. Hamas must pay for it dearly, and pay they will.

    But such unthinkable carnage happened because of the perilous “strategy” that successive Israeli governments pursued that enabled Hamas and prevented the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. This also explains why Netanyahu consistently refused to negotiate with any prospective unity government between the PA and Hamas.

    The creation of Hamas

    Israel created Hamas to counter balance the secular national Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) movement led by Yasser Arafat, which was intended to divide the Palestinians into two camps and prevent the creation of a Palestinian state. The creation of Hamas by Israel, which has been confirmed by many top Israeli military and civilian officials over a number of years, is unquestionable.

    Former Brig. Gen. Yitzhak Segev, who was the Israeli military governor in Gaza in the early 1980s, told a New York Times reporter that he had helped finance Hamas as a “counterweight” to the secularists and leftists of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Fatah party, led by Yasser Arafat, stating “The Israeli Government gave me a budget and the military government gives to the mosques.” And among many others, Avner Cohen, a former Israeli religious affairs official who worked in Gaza for more than two decades, told the Wall Street Journal in 2009 that “Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel’s creation.”

    In a 2015 interview, Bezalel Smotrich, the current finance minister who is also in charge of Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), stated “The Palestinian Authority is a burden, and Hamas is an asset” . And in an article published in the New York Times on October 18, 2023, entitled “Netanyahu Led Us to Catastrophe. He Must Go.,” author Gershom Gorenberg stated that “Bringing Gaza back under the Palestinian Authority was apparently never part of the prime minister’s agenda. Hamas was the enemy and, in a bizarre twist, an ally against the threat of diplomacy, a two-state solution and peace.”

    Indeed, no Israeli prime minister has pursued this disastrous policy of divide and conquer more vigorously than Netanyahu. Although he maintained the blockade over Gaza, he allowed the flow of hundreds of millions of dollars from Qatar and other countries into Hamas’ coffers, knowing full well that more than 50 percent of these funds were used by Hamas to buy and manufacture weapons, including tens of thousands of rockets, and build a massive network of tunnels with command and control while readying itself for the next war.

    Gorenberg further stated that “In 2019, for instance, Netanyahu explained why he allowed the Hamas regime in Gaza to be propped up with cash from Qatar rather than have it depend on a financial umbilical cord to the West Bank. He told Likud lawmakers that ’whoever is against a Palestinian state should be for’ the Qatari funding…” Yuval Diskin, head of Shin Bet from 2005-2011, stated in January 2013 that “If we look at it over the years, one of the main people contributing to Hamas’s strengthening has been Bibi Netanyahu, since his first term as prime minister.”

    And in a more telling statement from someone who has been deeply immersed in Israeli politics and governance, Ehud Barak stated in August 2019, “His strategy is to keep Hamas alive and kicking… even at the price of abandoning the citizens … in order to weaken the PA in Ramallah…”

    Netanyahu’s ill-fated “strategy” was an illusion. He believed that he could control the monster that he nurtured over the years, which instead came back to slaughter hundreds of innocent Israelis who have been relying on their government for protection and were tragically let down.

    They have been betrayed by a prime minister who has been fixated on bolstering Israel’s security in the West Bank while weakening the security of the southern front along the Gaza border. And while Netanyahu was sparing no efforts to ‘reform’ the judiciary, Hamas was planning, training, acquiring weapons, and perfecting the technique to wage an assault against Israel more daring than anyone could have possibly imagined.

    It all happened under Netanyahu’s watch. And worse yet, how is it possible that the world’s most renowned intelligence agency, Israel’s Mossad, failed to detect the planning of an attack of such magnitude that it took perhaps more than a year to prepare? And why did Netanyahu ignore the warning of Egypt’s Intelligence Minister General Abbas Kamel, who personally called Netanyahu and warned him that Hamas was likely to do “something unusual, a terrible operation” only 10 days before the attack?

    I do not suggest or even imply that Netanyahu knew what was going to happen but chose to ignore it, but rather that he was simply dismissive of what Hamas is capable of and believed that he had a good handle on what was happening in Gaza. He was preoccupied with passing legislation that would subordinate the Supreme Court and the appointment of judges to elected politicians, which would have destroyed Israel’s democracy and allowed him to assume authoritarian powers, to which he badly aspired.

    Although the Palestinians on the whole, be they in the West Bank or Gaza, are innocent civilians, the extremists among them have committed many egregious acts of violence against Israel. The Palestinian leaders missed many opportunities to make peace, and made countless mistakes that aggravated their own situation.

    Moreover, by threatening Israel’s very existence, extremist groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad allowed successive Israeli governments to make a strong case against the Palestinians by portraying them as an irredeemable mortal enemy that poses the greatest danger to Israel’s national security and hence, the Palestinians cannot be a party to peace.

    With these perspectives established by the Israeli government, maintaining the occupation became the state policy, however unsustainable it has been deemed by any keen and informed observer.

    What’s next

    That said, once the war is over and the dust settles, a growing majority on both sides will come to recognize one irreversible fact. Co-existence is not one of many options, it is the only option, be that under conditions of peace or perpetual violent enmity. The two-state solution has come back to the table, as it has always been the only viable option. Both sides must now face this bittersweet reality.

    The question is what will happen now that Israel and Hamas are engaged in fierce fighting on the ground that will surely exact an immense toll on both sides. I maintain that whether Israel limits its ground invasion of Gaza to its northern part, or continues its targeted bombing of Hamas’s encampments while seeking to decapitate as many of its leaders as possible, or simply stops the fighting, which is unlikely, and focuses on releasing the over 240 hostages, nothing will change in any substantial way the irreversible new paradigm that has bitterly awakened both sides to their miserable, unsustainable status quo.

    To be sure, what option the Israeli government will choose to bring an end to the conflict will only define the length of time that that might take, the extent of difficulties in the negotiation, the modalities of the negotiating process, the level of public and international pressure to find a solution, and the likely intermittent violence. But none of these issues will change the fundamental point of departure that point to the endgame of a two-state solution, regardless of how many more hurdles might be encountered.

    Dr. Alon Ben-Meir is a professor of international relations at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU). He teaches courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies.

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Israel Must Remember Its Moral Values in Its Quest to Crush Hamas

    Israel Must Remember Its Moral Values in Its Quest to Crush Hamas

    [ad_1]

    • Opinion by Alon Ben-Meir (new york)
    • Inter Press Service

    NEW YORK, Oct 17 (IPS) – Israel will recover over time from its colossal intelligence failure and its tardiness in responding militarily to Hamas’ massacre. But it cannot do so unless it upholds its moral values and makes every effort to spare the lives of innocent Palestinians as it pursues Hamas’ destruction

    The unfathomable massacre of Israeli Jews by Hamas and its insatiable thirst for Jewish blood has rightfully evoked the most virulent condemnation from many corners of the world, including many Arab states. The call for revenge and retribution by many Israelis was an instinctive human reaction that can be justified in a moment of incomparable rage and devastation.

    The Israeli decision to crush Hamas and decapitate its leaders must indeed be pursued with determination and vigor by the Israeli army. That said, the pursuit of destroying Hamas and preventing it from being reconstituted so that it can never threaten Israel again should under no circumstances justify any acts of revenge against innocent Palestinian men, women, and children who have nothing to do with Hamas’ evil act.

    In fact, most of the Palestinians in Gaza have been victimized by Hamas itself, which has subjected them to a life of destitute and despair while they are frequently imperiled due to a lack of basic necessities like fuel, electricity, medicine, and drinking water.

    Meanwhile, Hamas has been concentrating on battling Israel and using the people of Gaza as human shields as it invested much of its financial resources in buying and manufacturing weapons, training its warriors, building tunnels, and preparing to waging yet another destructive battle against Israel.

    Hamas blames the plight of its people on Israel, using the 17-year-old blockade as a justification, which allows it to sow hatred and unrelenting enmity among the people against the Jewish state.

    That said, Israel’s indiscriminate bombing of Gaza that has already leveled entire neighborhoods, killed, as of this writing, in excess of 2,300 Gazans, one-quarter of whom are children, and injured nearly 10,000 with little or no access to medical care, only affirms rather than refutes Hamas’ claims against Israel.

    None of the dead or injured were asked by Hamas’s leaders whether they should go and massacre innocent Israelis at an unprecedented scale, but Hamas knew full well the unimaginable price these ordinary Palestinians, who just want to live, would end up paying.

    Hamas’ unprecedent onslaught against Israeli civilians and soldiers put a significant dent in Israel’s military invincibility that could have hardly been imagined only two weeks ago. And whereby the colossal failure of Israeli intelligence to detect what Hamas was planning may well be rectified over time, the carnage that Israel is inflicting on Gazans severely damages the high moral ground the Israeli army has proudly claimed.

    As the death toll and destruction rise in Gaza by the minute, the initial overwhelming sympathy toward Israel’s tragic losses is waning even among many of its friends. Indeed, once Israel loses its moral compass in dealing with the crisis, it will no longer be seen as the victim who rose from the ashes of the Holocaust and has every right to defend itself, but the victimizer whose survival rests on the ashes of its real or perceived enemies.

    Prime Minister Netanyahu, who has been busy trying to dismantle Israel’s democracy, will stop short of nothing to try to redeem himself by exploiting these tragic events, hoping to emerge as a “war hero” and save his political skin.

    How adversely his public call for revenge might impact Israel’s standing and its future relationship with the Palestinians is of no concern to him. Imposing a total siege on Gaza and depriving more than two million Palestinians of receiving basic necessities and demanding that over a million Gazans evacuate their homes and go south while bombing them to smithereens is a collective punishment that defies morality (and legality) by any measure.

    Netanyahu is justifying this collective punishment by dehumanizing the Palestinians, deeming them unworthy of humane treatment. Whereas he rightfully condemned the unimaginable evil act of Hamas that killed over 1,400 innocent Israelis, he is waging a merciless campaign against innocent Palestinians who had nothing to do with Hamas’ acts of terror.

    For Netanyahu, there is simply no moral equivalence. For him and many of his followers, the Palestinians are sub-humans and their lives are unequal to those of Israeli Jews.

    The dehumanization of Palestinians will come back to haunt the Israelis simply because the Palestinians have no other place to go. And whether they are ordinary human beings with hopes and aspirations, or subhuman, Israel is stuck with them. And regardless of how the war will end, Israel will have to address the conflict with the Palestinians. The depth of the scars of the war will define the relationship for years to come.

    Former Defense Minister and Chief of Staff of the Israel Defense Forces, Benny Gantz, who has just joined the government along with the current Defense Minister Yoav Galant, must resist Netanyahu’s call for vengeance. Yes, they will fight with their military might to crush Hamas, but they must also fight to safeguard Israel’s democracy and Jewish values, which forbid the indiscriminate killing of innocent people.

    Israel will win this war; the question is, will it win it while adhering to these moral values, or win it by leaving behind deep moral wounds that will be etched in memory and in history books as one of Israel’s darkest chapters?

    They must remember that just about every Arab country will quietly (and some even overtly) cheer the demise of Hamas, but they will be loud and clear about their objection to the killing of innocent Palestinians, especially women and children, and scuttle further any prospect of normalization of relations with other Arab countries.

    The imminent invasion of Gaza will result in the destruction of this enclave, the likes of which we have never seen before. However, as long as the invasion is not driven by revenge and retribution and instead seeks, as the war comes to an end, to create a new paradigm to bring an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, then all the sacrifices made by all sides will not have been in vain.

    This unprecedented breakdown in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could lead to a historic breakthrough, if only the moderate Israeli, Arab, and Palestinian leaders grasp the unparalleled moment this crisis presents.

    Dr. Alon Ben-Meir is a professor of international relations at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU). He teaches courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies.

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Can Netanyahu Rise to The Unparalleled Historic Occasion & Normalize Israeli-Saudi Relations?

    Can Netanyahu Rise to The Unparalleled Historic Occasion & Normalize Israeli-Saudi Relations?

    [ad_1]

    • Opinion by Alon Ben-Meir (new york)
    • Inter Press Service

    NEW YORK, Aug 18 (IPS) – The prospect of normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia will have enormous implications on Israel and the entire region. Since it will certainly take a personal sacrifice to put Israel’s national interests first, the question is, will Prime Minister Netanyahu muster the courage to do what’s best for the country

    Prime Minister Netanyahu faces a historic opportunity to normalize relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia and set the country on an unparalleled path of progress, security, and peace. But for that to happen, Netanyahu will have to agree to accept the Saudis’ reported demand to establish a path that will lead to the end of the occupation and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

    Given, however, Netanyahu’s personal legal woes and his dependence on the most hard-core racist government in Israel’s history to stay in power, will he sacrifice his personal interests by accepting the Saudi demands, which would certainly precipitate the collapse of his government and force him to face his legal peril?

    His other choice would be to forfeit such a historic opportunity by continuing to pursue policies that will dismantle Israel’s democracy, convert Israel into an autocracy, intensify the violent conflict with the Palestinians, and put Israel always on the defensive while its enemies lay in wait.

    Saudi Arabia is the de facto leading Arab state and is representative of Sunni Islam. Whether or not the Saudis care about the Palestinian cause, they cannot simply abandon the Palestinians to their own devices and still claim the leadership role they highly covet. The Saudis cannot and should not, under any circumstances, agree to normalize relations with Israel unless the Netanyahu government agrees to end the conflict with the Palestinians based on a two-state solution.

    For the Palestinians, Saudi Arabia offers the last hope to protect their national interests. Should the Palestinians feel abandoned by the Saudis and have nothing left to lose, they will feel that they have no choice but to resort increasingly to violence against the Israelis with the intent of destabilizing the region and disrupting the normalization process between Israel and the Gulf states, especially Saudi Arabia. The Palestinians know that should a major conflagration ensue between them and Israel, the Arab states will have little choice but to land on their side.

    The advantages to Saudi Arabia

    Saudi Arabia knows how much it can benefit directly from the normalization of relations with Israel in terms of technology, intelligence sharing, and above all regional security. Riyadh also knows that Israel wants normalization as much, if not more than they themselves.

    In addition, the Saudis know how much the Biden administration would like Riyadh and Jerusalem to reach an agreement because it would greatly serve the US’s overall regional geostrategic interests. This includes curbing China’s influence, containing Iran’s nuclear weapon program, weakening extremism, and stabilizing the region to ensure the US’ long-term unchallenged power over a region of pivotal strategic importance.

    Knowing how much both the US and Israel would benefit from normalization and how eager they are to conclude such an agreement, the Saudis put forth three major requirements from the US as a prerequisite to normalizing relations with Israel:

    Guaranteeing Saudi Arabia’s national security along the line of the US’ commitment to NATO, where an attack on any member state constitutes an attack on all member states, including the US.
    Providing nuclear facilities for civilian purposes including the production of clean energy and for medical purposes along with the prestige that goes with it.

    Approving the purchase of the US’ most advanced weapons systems, including the F-35 airplane among other arsenals. The Saudis are fully aware that President Biden wants to secure a major win just before the elections by building on the Abraham Accords. Obviously, they are in a position to hand him such a win provided that he meets their requirements.

    Regardless of how desirable and far-reaching the implications of normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia are, for President Biden it remains an extremely difficult task to achieve due to two major factors.

    First, the Saudis’ conditional requirements from the US will certainly evoke significant Congressional resistance. But if the deal ends the Israeli-Palestinian conflict based on a two-state solution, over which many Democratic leaders including Senators Chris Van Hollen and Tim Kaine insist, the Senate will more than likely approve it with some modifications because they understand and appreciate how significantly it will benefit the US’ geostrategic interest.

    The second and more daunting difficulty President Biden faces is Netanyahu’s objections to making any major concession to the Palestinians, especially one that would lead to the creation of a Palestinian state. In addition, Netanyahu’s current coalition partners vehemently oppose any major concession to the Palestinians and any such move could lead to the dissolution of his government should Netanyahu make even a partial concession, such as the freezing of settlement expansion or ending any further annexation of Palestinian territory.

    Juxtaposed to the position of Netanyahu and his government, it is critical for the Israeli public and a few of the less extreme members in the government to understand how paramount the consequences are for Israel’s future should it normalize relations with Saudi Arabia.

    The advantages to Israel

    It is hard to exaggerate the enormous advantages Israel would reap. To begin with, it will open the door for normalization of relations with most, if not all, of the Arab and Muslim-majority states, end once and for all Israel’s isolation, and dramatically strengthen its national security, as normalization of relations would inevitably entail security collaboration.

    And since any Israeli-Saudi agreement will have to include a definitive roadmap to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it will pull the rug from underneath Israel’s staunch enemy Iran and its proxy Hezbollah, and force Hamas to reconsider its militant posture toward Israel.

    Moreover, Israel’s export of technology and other scientific knowhow in all fields of endeavor, along with the export of military hardware, will exponentially grow along with foreign investments, making the country an economic powerhouse with a corresponding political influence.

    With that, Israel’s friendship and collaborative relations with the US and the EU will reach new heights and dramatically enhance their shared regional geostrategic interest and mitigate any friction in policy or strategy in dealing with any regional conflict.

    Finally, ending the occupation will restore Israel’s moral foundation, mitigate the poisonous hatred between Israel and the Palestinians, restore the dignity and the integrity of the Israeli military, and most importantly, end the dehumanization of Palestinians under occupation.

    Should an agreement be reached, given the complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflicting issues, Saudi Arabia and the US should establish a road map and timeline for the implementation of the various components of the agreement while monitoring the progress made to ensure that both sides are fully complying with the provisions included therein.

    Moreover, the Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement should be enshrined in a treaty between the two sides that binds future Israeli and Palestinian governments and is guaranteed by the US and Saudi Arabia.

    I concede that the prospect of Netanyahu changing his position is remote. But given his inflated ego and his concern over his legacy, coupled with increasing pressure from the US, there might be a small chance that he changes his mind, albeit such a leap is laden with considerable personal risk.

    The question is, will he nevertheless muster the courage and rise to the historic occasion, show statesmanship, and leave a legacy of one who sacrificed himself politically for the sake of the nation?

    I doubt he will, but miracles do happen, and Israel today is desperately in need of one.

    Dr. Alon Ben-Meir is a retired professor of international relations at the Center for Global Affairs at NYU. He teaches courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies.

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • The Saudis New Geostrategic Doctrine

    The Saudis New Geostrategic Doctrine

    [ad_1]

    • Opinion by Alon Ben-Meir (new york)
    • Inter Press Service

    NEW YORK, Apr 11 (IPS) – The resumption of diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran, and the Saudis’ diplomatic overtures toward Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, are part and parcel of the Saudis’ overall reassessment of their geostrategic interests, which rest on three distinctives goals: regional stability, exerting greater regional and international influence, and uninterrupted oil exports. These three fundamental goals are tightly linked and are within the Saudis’ reach.

    Regional stability

    The resumption of diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran mediated by China was central to its strategy. Both countries have come to the conclusion that notwithstanding their enmity and regional rivalry, they have to coexist in one form or another.

    They realized that the eight-year-long war in Yemen has done nothing to improve their regional standing. It was a lose-lose proposition. Iran failed to establish a strong and permanent foothold in the Arabian Peninsula and although Iran continues to support the Houthis, they have no illusion about converting Yemen into an Iranian satellite.

    Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, having prevented Iran from dominating Yemen, no longer feels that the continuation of the war will yield any further benefit regardless of how much more money and human resources they pour into the war effort.

    This explains why they have agreed on the ceasefire and further extended it until they could find a mutually accepted solution. The resumption of diplomatic relations would accelerate this reconciliation process.

    This, needless to say, is not guaranteed because the adversarial relations between the two countries run deep, but their national interest resulting from their rapprochement overrides, for the time being, those concerns.

    Both sides know that it will take time to fully normalize relations while testing each other’s true intentions as well as their conduct.

    For the same reason, the Saudis decided that Syria’s President Assad is not going anywhere. He has weathered the most devastating war since the last World War, albeit at the expense of destroying half of the country while inflicting massive suffering on nearly half of Syria’s population.

    Millions are still refugees languishing in camps in many countries in the region, especially in Turkey, and millions more are still internally displaced. Thus, mending relations with Syria will be a win-win for the Saudis as this would only enhance its influence.

    Regional influence

    The Saudis fully understand that they cannot boost their regional influence by remaining disengaged from their neighbors. Given Iran’s nuclear weapons program and the Saudis’ extreme concerns, the resumption of diplomatic relations could potentially ease those apprehensions.

    How the Saudis can help change the dynamic of Iran’s nuclear program remains to be seen. One thing, however, is certain: the Saudis have placed themselves where they can potentially bring Iran back to negotiating with the US, albeit indirectly. Whether or not they succeed, they can still exert greater influence in this area by engaging Iran, which they did not have before.

    And to further exert regional influence, the Saudis wisely decided to invite Syria’s Assad to the Arab League summit that Riyadh is hosting in May. Syria was suspended from the organization in 2011, and was sanctioned by many Western powers and Arab states because of Assad’s fierce onslaught against protesters that led to a long, drawn-out civil war during which more than 600,000 lost their lives.

    The Saudi invitation certainly signals an extremely important development that will bring about the reintegration of Syria into the Arab fold—a move that would lead to the resumption of full diplomatic relations between the two countries.

    There is no doubt that other Arab states will follow suit, which only strengthens Saudi Arabia’s leadership role among its fellow Arab countries.

    By reopening diplomatic relations with both Iran and Syria, the Saudis will have a say about any future settlement to the Syrian conflict, where Iran still exerts considerable influence.

    Given that the Saudis have deep pockets and the Syrian regime is dire economic strains and needs tens of billions to rebuild, the Saudis can do a great deal more than Iran to provide financial aid to Syria. And, of course, with financial aid comes influence.

    President Assad is more than eager to cooperate not only for the critically important financial aid, but also to begin the process of ending Damascus’ isolation. Restoring diplomatic relations between Syria and the other Arab states will contribute significantly to calming the region and making it possible for Saudi Arabia to sustain its ability to supply oil in huge quantities without interruption.

    Uninterrupted oil export

    For the Saudis, continuing to export oil in enormous quantities and the revenue it generates is central to its objective to becoming a regional player to be reckoned with. Having the largest reservoir of oil gives the Saudis significant advantages, as many of its oil customers know they can rely on the Saudis for energy supplies for many years to come.

    Thus, its resumption of diplomatic relations with Iran and Syria and financially aiding other Arab states like Egypt, would invariably contribute to stabilizing the region and in turn allow the Saudis to continue its oil exports with the least interruptions.

    None of the above however will impact adversely the Saudis’ relationship with the US nor its tacit relations with Israel. The Saudis are fully aware of how critical the US’ role in both, as the main supplier of weapons to the kingdom and the region’s ultimate security guarantor.

    Moreover, regardless of its discord with Israel regarding the Palestinian conflict, Saudi Arabia’s tacit cooperation with Israel on intelligence sharing and transfer of Israeli technology are and will remain an integral part of its geostrategic objective.

    Riyadh wants to develop inroads into both its past adversaries including Iran and Syria while maintaining its current relations with the US and Israel, regardless of the occasional ups and downs between them.

    At the same time, Riyadh is cementing its bilateral relations with China, the world’s second-largest superpower to which Saudi Arabia exports one quarter of its annual oil output ($43.9 billion’s worth in 2021, out of $161.7 billion in total exports), while becoming the de facto leader of the Arab states.

    To be sure the Saudis have, thus far, been able to successfully utilize its wealth to its advantage.

    Needless to say, however, many external and regional occurrences could directly and indirectly impact Saudi Arabia’s new geostrategic calculus, including the Ukraine war, the growing tension between the US and China and Russia, and the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

    However, under any circumstances the Saudis stand to gain as time and circumstances are on their side.

    Dr. Alon Ben-Meir is a retired professor of international relations at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU). He taught courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies for over 20 years.

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Erdogans Desperate Bid to Become the New Atatrk

    Erdogans Desperate Bid to Become the New Atatrk

    [ad_1]

    • Opinion by Alon Ben-Meir (new york)
    • Inter Press Service

    NEW YORK, Jan 27 (IPS) – As Turkey approaches its centennial anniversary this October, President Erdogan is stopping short of nothing to win the election in June to fulfill his life-time dream of presiding over the celebration. The Turkish people should deny him this historic honor because of the reign of terror to which he has mercilessly subjected his countrymen.

    Righting the Wrong

    Had Turkey’s President Erdogan continued with his most impressive social, economic, judicial, and political reforms that he initiated and implemented during his first years in power, today’s Turkey would have been a great country, respected and prosperous while enjoying tremendous regional and global influence under his leadership.

    Instead, Erdogan reversed his remarkable achievements on all domestic and international fronts in pursuit of building an authoritarian regime that could satisfy his unquenchable thirst for ever more power. Erdogan will stop short of nothing to win the upcoming elections in June.

    He certainly hopes to preside on October 29 over the hundredth anniversary of the establishment of the Turkish Republic by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and to be recognized as the new Atatürk (father) of modern Turkey. The Turkish people must deny him that honor because of his continuing horrific human rights violations.

    To put in perspective as to why Erdogan does not deserve to preside over the anniversary and should be handedly rejected in the June elections, it is first necessary to provide a brief account of his relentless reign of terror and his unremitting campaign to harass and delegitimize the opposition parties to achieve his sinister objective.

    Following the failed coup of July 2016, Erdogan arrested tens of thousands of innocent people, including hundreds of security officials, academics, and military personnel suspected of belonging to the Hizmet (Gülen) Movement and charged them with participating in the coup. He uses Article 301 of the Anti-Terror Act to crack down on dissent and even criminalize criticism of “Turkishness.”

    He arrested hundreds of journalists accusing them of spreading anti-government propaganda, shut down scores of TV and radio stations, and imposed restrictions on the use of social media. Nearly 200 journalists have been imprisoned since 2016; currently 40 remain incarcerated in subhuman prisons, which blatantly defies the convention of freedom of press, especially in a NATO member state.

    Thousands of university graduates are leaving the country in the search for job opportunities and to free themselves from Erdogan’s shackles. Leaving their country behind is causing an alarming brain drain, which is affecting just about every industry.

    The Council of Europe and the University of Lausanne reports that Turkey has the largest population of prisoners convicted on charges related to terrorism. As Turkish journalist Uzay Bulut notes, “The report, updated in April 2021, shows that at the time there were a total of 30,524 inmates in COE member states who were sentenced for terrorism; of those, 29,827 were in Turkish prisons” .

    As Leo Tolstoy observed in War and Peace, “One need only to admit that public tranquility is in danger and any action finds a justification… All the horrors of the reign of terror were based only on solicitude for public tranquility.” To that end, Erdogan proclaims to be a pious man, but he cynically uses Islam as nothing but an evil political tool to project a divine power to assert his dictatorial whims unchallenged.

    The World Organization Against Torture (OMCT) reports that Erdogan conveniently uses Anti-Terrorism Law No. 3713, which was enacted by his AK Party-led, rubber stamp parliament to stifle freedoms and silence the voices of those who defend human rights. The law allows him to label peaceful human rights defenders as ‘terrorist offenders’.

    OMCT states that “Official data show that in 2020, 6551 people were prosecuted under the anti-terrorism law, while a staggering 208,833 were investigated for ‘membership in an armed organization,’” typically those involved with the Gülen movement.

    Erdogan continues his crackdown on his own Kurdish community which represents nearly 20 percent of the population, depriving them of basic human rights. His systematic persecution of the Kurds seems to have no bounds, as he accuses thousands of being supporters of the PKK, which he considers as a terrorist organization and which successive Turkish governments have been fighting for more than 50 years at staggering human and material cost.

    He consistently demands that various Balkan and EU states extradite Turkish nationals whom he accuses of being terrorists to stand trial in his corrupted courts, denying them due process and subjecting them to ferocious torture in order to extract confessions for offences they never committed.

    He is preventing Finland and Sweden from joining NATO unless Sweden extradites about 130 political refugees, mostly Turkish Kurds, to stand trial in Turkey. Sweden has rejected his demand knowing that once they reach Turkish soil, it will be tantamount to the kiss of death. To be sure, the rule of law in Erdogan’s Turkey has been effectively dismantled.

    To improve his chances of being re-elected, Erdogan wants to ensure that the Kurdish political parties are denied representation in the Parliament. He has incarcerated many of the 56 members of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) and removed its remaining members from the legislative process; he is determined to close the party altogether.

    In addition, he arrested many members of the Democratic Regions Party (DBP), accusing them of unfounded terrorism-related offenses and illegally replacing them through government-appointed trustees.

    Erdogan is asking the Biden administration to issue a statement in support of his policies to help him in his bid for reelection when in fact he is at odds with President Biden on a host of critical issues, including his egregious human rights violations, his refusal to allow Sweden and Finland to join NATO, his purchase of the Russian-made S-400 air defense system, his money laundering, and his ceaseless corruption.

    And in 2019, he tried to block NATO’s plan for the defense of Poland and the Baltic states unless NATO identified the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces as terrorists.

    One would think that if he is so desperate to be re-elected come June, he would make significant concessions both domestically and in his relations with the US and the EU. Why not offer amnesty to all political prisoners, free the journalists, stop harassing and jailing leaders of opposition parties, and fully adhere to human rights and the rule of law?

    Why not drop his opposition to Sweden’s admission to NATO? Why not rescind his purchase of a second batch of S-400s and decommission those currently in use, which are totally incompatible with NATO’s air defense systems? Finally, why not restore the democratic principles which every member state of NATO is required to uphold?

    But then, Erdogan’s obsession with absolute power has blinded him from seeing and feeling the plight of his own people, which only demonstrates his ignorance and shortsightedness. As Jorge Luis Borges aptly observed, “Dictatorships foster oppression, dictatorships foster servitude, dictatorships foster cruelty; more abominable is the fact that they foster idiocy.”

    A number of years ago, Erdogan’s former prime minister Davutoglu told me that by the year 2023, Turkey will have restored the glory, the global influence, and prestige that the Ottoman Empire enjoyed in its heyday. Needless to say, Davutoglu’s prophecy has not come to pass.

    To the contrary, today, Turkey’s economy, social and political order, and democracy are in complete disarray; Turkey is far from having “zero problems with neighbors,” and remains estranged from the US and the EU.

    If Erdogan manages to be re-elected through cheating and by disenfranchising the opposition parties, he will celebrate the centennial anniversary while presiding over a country in retreat, with a disillusioned and despairing citizenry and diminishing regional and international stature. He will not be the new Atatürk even though he so frantically wants to portray himself as a great reformer leading a constructive and great power on the world stage.

    Instead, Erdogan will be remembered with scorn and contempt for having squandered Turkey’s huge potential while degrading the anniversary that could have been Turkey’s greatest celebration in one hundred years.

    Dr. Alon Ben-Meir, a retired professor of international relations at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU), taught courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies for over 20 years.

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2023) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link

  • Israel’s Democracy is in Peril

    Israel’s Democracy is in Peril

    [ad_1]

    Prime Minister Yair Lapid of Israel addresses the UN General Assembly’s seventy-seventh session. September 2022. He told delegates a two-State solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was “the right thing” for Israel, but he cautioned that a future Palestinian state must not be “another terror base”. Credit: UN Photo/Cia Pak
    • Opinion by Alon Ben-Meir (new york)
    • Inter Press Service

    NEW YORK, Oct 07 (IPS) – By all accounts Israel is considered a democratic country, but a close look at its domestic political combustion sadly reveals that Israel’s democracy is in tatters and is tearing at the seams. This is due to the political leaders’ dismal failure to summon their collective resourcefulness and energy to respond to the call of the hour

    Righting the Wrong

    Israel is now in the midst of its fifth election in four years. None of the coalition governments that were formed during this period has lasted more than a year. Why is that? The answer is fairly simple but extremely troubling.

    Although the political parties are broadly divided into two camps, left vs. right, nearly fifteen political parties are running for 120 seats in the Knesset (Parliament). Most, but not all, will pass the threshold of 3.25 percent to qualify for the minimum of four seats.

    The country’s political squabbles are centered around personalities and not policies: who gets what position in the government, how to lure or bribe this or the other party’s leader to join the government, which ministry the numerous contending politicians want to hold (regardless of qualifications), the financial appropriations promised for pet projects, and the list goes on.

    And to cap it all, just about every head of each party feels they are the most qualified to become the prime minister, yet none can clearly articulate a national agenda to set the nation on a steady course to safeguard its democracy and political stability.

    The gravest threat to Israel’s democracy, however, is the sheer failure of all party leaders to grasp that the country is polarized and divided almost evenly between the anti-Netanyahu and pro-Netanyahu blocs (which largely but not exclusively align with left and right), and that neither of the political blocs has been able to form a functioning coalition government that enjoys a stable majority in the Knesset.

    Presently, numerous polls which are conducted almost daily show that the result of the coming election will not be much different. The competing two blocks are hovering around 57 and 59 seats, and the country may well have to endure another exhausting cycle of elections and still end up with roughly the same configuration.

    One would think that under such circumstances—when the country is existentially threatened by Iran which is racing toward acquiring nuclear weapons, when the West Bank is simmering with violence and Palestinian casualties are mounting, when the prospect of a Palestinian uprising of unprecedented scale is becoming increasingly plausible, when extremist groups such Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah pose an omnipresent danger, when social cohesiveness is sourly lacking, when poverty is rampant and debilitating the social fabric—the leaders of all parties would come to their senses and put the nation’s interest above their own and their party’s.

    Together, one would expect that they would seek common ground and reach a consensus to address the urgent issues facing the nation. But that is not the case.

    The extent of Israel’s political malaise and the erosion of its democracy cannot be better exemplified by any other than the despicable former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. No prime minister in Israel’s history has been as corrupt or would stoop so low to get his way like Netanyahu.

    His lust for power knows no bounds. He faces three criminal charges and is willing to destroy the judiciary to make these charges disappear. He is willing to sell the soul of the nation to the likes of Itamar Ben-Gvir, the fascist, Kahanist leader of Otzma Yehudit who is known to seek the expulsion of all Palestinians from Israel, as long as he could help Netanyahu form the next government.

    So, when you have a country that has been governed consecutively for more than 12 years by a bigot like Netanyahu who potentially can still form the new government, you know that Israel’s democracy is suffering from an endemic malaise and needs major political remedies.

    Just like here in the US, if the Republican party manages to cheat its way through the electoral college and Trump, the most morally bankrupt former president, wins the next presidential election in 2024, our democracy will be shattered and the American dream will wither and die. Israel could face the same fate under Netanyahu.

    Thus, if Netanyahu is left with an ounce of dignity and a shred of concern for the nation’s future, he should step aside, face the court with poise, and ask for forgiveness and President Herzog may well pardon him for his service to the nation. This will pave the way for the establishment of a stable wide-based coalition government that can endure and attend to the urgent business of the country.

    More than any time in its history, Israel today is in desperate need of a decent, honest, courageous, visionary, and decisive leader to meet the call of the hour. Yair Lapid meets some of the above attributes. He has demonstrated exemplary capability of making the necessary compromises to reach a consensus for the sake of the country.

    He is politically savvy and has shown that in his meetings and dealings with global leaders. He demonstrated courage when he stated at the UN General Assembly that the a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains the only viable option.

    He bravely spoke time and again against the occupation and its demoralizing effect on the entire country. He passionately advocated for equality among Israeli Jews and Arabs, and called for lifting the poor out of their miserable existence. And finally, he strived to nurture a healthy and cohesive society which is the beating heart that sustains democracy.

    This round of elections may well be one of the most consequential since Israel occupied the West Bank in 1967. Every political leader, regardless of his or her political leanings, should ask themselves what kind of a country Israel should be in 10 to 15 years. The Israelis want unity of purpose, they want to preserve their democracy, prosperity, security, and peace.

    Normalizing relations with more Arab countries is of paramount importance and it should be pursued, but it will not save Israel’s democracy. Nor will using Israel’s remarkable new technologies to buy political influence abroad, however desirable that may be.

    Nor will multiplying its trade with foreign nations, which is extremely vital to Israel’s economy and should be further expanded. Nor will maintaining its military prowess and credible deterrence, which is critical to the country’s national security.

    Nor will making remarkable advances in just about every sphere of endeavor, including medicine, agronomy, chemistry, military innovations, engineering, electronics, and so many other fields, which are outstanding achievements that every Israeli should be proud of. Indeed, regardless of how crucial all of the above are to the country, none will preserve and safeguard Israel’s democracy.

    Israel cannot secure and sustain its democracy unless the political leadership engenders social cohesiveness and equality with a functioning political system that offers political stability and where the national interests come first.

    Moreover, Israel cannot and will never be a free nation and a true democracy until it ends the infamous occupation which dishonors Israel at every turn. It is, to be sure, the Achilles’ heel that will eventually make or break Israel’s democracy.

    Dr. Alon Ben-Meir is a retired professor of international relations at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University (NYU). He taught courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies for over 20 years.

    IPS UN Bureau


    Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram

    © Inter Press Service (2022) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

    [ad_2]

    Global Issues

    Source link