Missing Pieces to the Middle East Puzzle

One of the encouraging events in the Obama administration’s efforts to revive the Middle East peace process occurred last week with almost no coverage in the western media. (The story is here and here) Following the meeting in Jerusalem between Netanyahu and Abbas, US envoy George Mitchell left for Lebanon and Syria to discuss the status of the negotiations.

Over past decades various US and regional actors have tried, in vain, to solve the ongoing puzzle of the Arab/Israeli conflict. These efforts have been thwarted by the fact there have been two pieces missing. The focus has always been on bilateral discussions between Israel and the Palestinians mediated by the US. All parties have ignored the part that must be played by Lebanon and Syria in achieving any comprehensive and lasting solution. Each of these countries has a significant role to play in resolving two of the most difficult issues, right of return for refugees and water.

Overall, there are close to 5mm Palestinian refugees from the 1948 and 1967 conflicts and their descendants residing in various countries within and outside of the region. Of these over 400,000 live in Lebanon, a country of 4mm people. These people have been housed in refugee camps in Lebanon which have among the worst living conditions that I have seen and have been denied the most basic opportunities to earn a living and provide for their families. My conversations with Lebanese of all political parties indicate to me that there is no political will for absorbing this population. (This would be the demographic equivalent of the US absorbing 30mm Iraqi refugees.) Any workable solution to the refugee situation must take into consideration the Lebanese point of view.

Control of water resources has always been a major part of Israeli settlement and occupation policies. Settlements in the West Bank have been built on strategic hilltops in order to insure Israeli control of access to the aquifer. Resolution of the conflict between Israel and Syria over the Golan Heights has been thwarted by Israeli insistence in retaining control over the headwaters of the Jordan River. Israel, along with Jordan and Syria have used so much of this resource that, by the time the Jordan reaches the Dead Sea, it has been transformed from a crystal clear mountain stream into a   polluted ditch.  No solution to the issue of fair water access for all is possible without a major role for Syria.

Previous efforts to ignore these issues during peace negotiations cannot be continued if there is to be any resolution. I don’t know what was discussed in Beirut and Damascus, but hopefully refugees and water came up.

Technorati Tags: Israel,Palestine,Lebanon,Syria,Peace Process

Korans, Islamic Centers and Being American

The 9/11/2001 attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon was the first enemy attack on US soil in sixty years. The shock of realizing that the US could no longer isolate itself from global violence had dramatic impact on the American psyche. Americans who previously rejected torture, extrajudicial killings and preventative war came to accept them as necessary and common place occurrences. This year’s 9/11 observance combined with announcements of the planned construction of an Islamic community center near the WTC site and “Burn a Koran Day” by Pastor Terry Jones of the Dove World Outreach Center brought issues and tensions of freedom speech and freedom of religion to the foreground.

When I was in Amsterdam a few years ago, I visited the Anne Frank house which has been converted into a museum and memorial to this courageous young girl. One of the exhibits was an interactive display that at the time was exploring the tension between freedom of speech and prohibition of offensive and hate filled speech. Using video news clips, visitors, after identifying their nationality, were asked their opinion as to whether or not the speech should be prohibited. It was interesting to observe that Americans generally came down on the side of freedom of speech whereas Europeans generally favored restrictions. This difference in mind set is reflected by America’s strong backing for the rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights and many European countries making such speech as Holocaust denial a crime punishable by prison sentences.

But just because you can do something, doesn’t mean that you should. Should Pastor Jones burn 1000 Korans? In my view, burning books is a really bad idea. In reality it is not the books that are being burned, they can be replaced. What are really being destroyed are ideas and opinions. As Nazi Germany demonstrated in the 1930’s, it is not a long journey from burning books to burning people. Fortunately Pastor Jones seems to have seen the light.

Should Imam Abdul Rauf and the Cordoba Project build the Islamic Center? In my view, absolutely they should. The construction of an interfaith center dedicated to religious understanding and cooperation is not a desecration of “sacred ground”. It is an affirmation of the values that define us as Americans when we are at our best. After a number of years of showing the world that we honor our values more in the breach than in actions, it is time to start showing America at its best, even in a time of stress and anxiety.

 

Technorati Tags: Koran Burning,Islamic Center

A Bad Start to Israel/Palestine Negotiations

Those involved in this week’s much discussed beginning of direct discussions between Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu were rudely introduced to the realities of the region when Palestinian gunmen shot and killed four Israeli settlers outside of the city of Hebron on the West Bank. Hamas, which in the recent months has observed a ceasefire, immediately claimed responsibility for the attack.

The US main stream media has described the attack as an effort by Hamas to sabotage the upcoming talks, citing their refusal to recognize Israel’s “right to exist”. While only Hamas knows their reasons for initiating the attack, my take is somewhat different.

Based on my discussions with Hamas leaders, I believe that Hamas would accept a solution that was based on the 1967 borders, East Jerusalem as the capital of the Palestinian state, a just solution for the refugees and approval by the Palestinian people in a referendum. (Khaled Mishal said similar things to NY Times here)

So why initiate the attack at this time? If the reason was to sabotage the negotiations, the attack was completely unnecessary. They will most likely fail without any help from Hamas.

I think that Hamas is trying to send two messages. One is that they cannot be ignored in any negotiations. They are a player and, as indicated by their victory in the 2006 elections, they speak for a large number of Palestinians. The US, Israel and the Palestinian Authority ignore them at their peril.

The second message is that the status quo is not sustainable. For the past two decades since the Oslo Accords, Israel’s policy towards the “peace process” has been to have all process and no peace. Through the use of walls, barriers, settlements, attacks, targeted killings and arrests Israel has succeeded in maintaining the occupation with a modicum of calm. They are perfectly content to have the negotiations either fail, with the Palestinians being blamed, or drag on endlessly. Hamas’ message is that they are not going to allow this scenario to be perpetuated indefinitely. It is significant that the deadly attack occurred in an area of the West Bank totally controlled by the Israelis.

It is unlikely that the US will hear this message and more innocent civilians will die on both sides.

Technorati Tags: Israel,Palestine,Hamas