2 - 8 May 2002
Issue No.584
|
Al-Ahram Weekly Online 2 - 8 May 2002 Issue No.584 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
Dangerous liaisons
Assertive US "engagement" in the conflict in Palestine may prove no less dangerous than the vacillating posture it has adopted so far, writes George Giacaman*
There are two main dangers surrounding the present, and possibly the future, of US involvement in the war Israel is waging against Palestinians.
The first is simply the kind of "involvement" we have witnessed so far: hesitant, weak, and ultimately spineless. Second, though, the US might play a somewhat more assertive role -- perhaps sometime in the coming months, especially if things continue to deteriorate. The danger comes if US involvement is too focused on a "political horizon" designed to be acceptable to the government of Israel, and to be forced upon Palestinians.
Both courses of action are bound to bring continued blood-letting and instability to the region.
The US administration's role so far requires an explanation. After several months of inaction and torpor, it was prodded into action after the Israeli reoccupation of the remaining parts of the West Bank on 29 March. Credible voices in the US were heard decrying the administration's lack of "involvement," demonstrations in Arab capitals began to threaten US-"friendly" governments, and there appeared to be a danger that Europe might actually be tempted to "go it alone" for Middle East peace. The credibility of the US as the sole superpower was at stake.
Two UN Security Council resolutions followed, demanding that Israel withdraw from recently occupied territory. Demands to the same effect were made publicly by President Bush, and Secretary Powell was sent on his mission with the backing of the "Quartet" at Madrid. The world and Israel were told that the US administration was no longer speaking with two voices.
Secretary Powell failed to meet two of his main objectives during his visit: to get Israel to withdraw from recently occupied Palestinian territories, and to arrange for a cease-fire. Why did he fail?
Well, it turned out that the administration was indeed speaking with two voices.
No sooner had the secretary left the US than the rug was already beginning to be pulled from under his feet. A chorus of supporters of Israel, otherwise known as the Zionist lobby, immediately set to work. Their numbers include a majority of Congressmen, well-placed "commentators," and varied media outlets. The lobby is a virtual fifth-column working for the interest of a foreign country against the interest of the US. This, at least, is the way that many inside and outside the administration, as well as close European and Arab allies, see it.
But in this particular case, the state of Israel may not have been well served by their efforts, since they undermined the position of the Labour party in the present Israeli government. As is well known, Labour was waiting for an opportune moment to leave the coalition. That moment could have come during Secretary Powell's visit had it been clear that the extreme right-wing majority in Ariel Sharon's government was leading Israel to a clash with the US.
A second relevant factor should also be mentioned. It has to do with the fact that the interests of the US in the Arab world have not been affected. Were it not for the fear felt by Arab governments allied with the US, a fear of their own populations, the US may well have left things to thrash about as they may. Weak, dependent on the US for their survival, and undemocratic, these governments can only "supplicate" with the US, as the foreign minister of Qatar said publicly in a frank moment a few weeks ago.
But there is every reason to believe that this last episode in the war against the Palestinians will leave an indelible mark in the collective Arab consciousness, as well as in the Islamic consciousness in the world at large, the repercussions of which we are yet to witness. It is clear that democracy in most Arab countries is not in the interests of US policy in the region, subservient as it is to the interest of the "sole democracy" in the Middle East.
The second danger comes from any "peace initiative" the US may espouse if it falls short of what by now is widely accepted as the only credible, realistic, and potentially stable solution, the outlines of which began to be discussed at Taba in Egypt in early 2000, while Ehud Barak was still prime minister of Israel. Any attempt to impose upon the Palestinian Authority an agreement that will be deemed by most Palestinians to be unjust and unacceptable will only sow the seeds of internal discord and external conflict.
There is no reason to believe that a fair agreement is possible with the present government of Israel, or if Israel is left to its own devices. The "negotiated process" basically involves different Israeli parties negotiating among themselves as to what they can agree to offer the Palestinians. The US remains wedded to this approach.
Yet the more right-wing the national drift, as has been the case in the last decade, the less the Palestinians are offered. Israel has been far too successful in neutralising outside pressure, thanks largely to its hold on US policy in the region. Ironically enough, Yitzhak Rabin paid with his life for this "success," which made it possible for the right wing to drift to such extremes. That is why the "peace process" broke down in the first place.
If Europe does not have a unified and effective policy to approach the present conflict, and if the US only has a domestic policy vis-a-vis Israel, perhaps this is what politics is about: to wait for the next explosion, perhaps this time a regional one. To wait for the day after, and sift through the pieces.
*The writer is dean of Graduate Studies at Birzeit University in the West Bank and co-editor of After Oslo: New Realities, Old Problems.
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page