Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s Foreign Minister, recently announced that a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians was not possible, “not next year and not for the next generation,” according to the Jerusalem Post. Lieberman’s comments come at a time when Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian National Authority, and President Barack Obama are meeting in Washington for yet another round of Israel-Palestinian peace talks.
Lieberman’s comments are disappointing, and it is strange that he would criticize his own administration, especially when Netanyahu appears to have high hopes. Perhaps, if Israel gives up some land here and some land there, Abbas and his Palestinian Authority will be happy, and we can all move on with our lives. But this is the Middle East. And, peace isn’t as easy as a few concessions here and a few concessions there.
Talks between Israel, and the Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza, despite concessions on Israel’s behalf, have never been successful, and it seems that relations between the sides are as tenuous as ever. Despite the abandonment of Jewish settlements in Gaza in 2005, the Palestinians have demanded more from Israel. The recent flotilla incident and operation “Cast-Lead” have further brought to light the fact that the region is always close to combustion. The negotiations happening this month could resolve the tension, or they could, as they have in the past, have little or no effect.
The fact about the Middle East, and specifically Israel versus the Palestinians, is that it’s complicated. It’s really, really complicated. Often it’s hard to pick out the good guy and the bad guy, and most of the time it’s just not as simple as taking a side. But, peace between Israel and the Palestinian people will take more than just a meeting at the White House. Israelis are notoriously unable to agree on just about anything, and Palestinians may be even worse. Even if Abbas can pound out an agreement with Netanyahu that allows for, in the best possible situation, the creation of a Palestinian state with its capitol in East Jerusalem, it would be highly unlikely that the general Palestinian population would be satisfied. Hamas, the terrorist group violently elected to run the Gaza Strip in 2006, describes in its charter the necessity to destroy the state of Israel and cites The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a fictional anti-Semitic account of a series of meetings between Jewish leaders, as hard fact. How should Israel proceed in negotiations with groups like Hamas, which refuse to even acknowledge Israel’s existence?
On Aug. 31, less than a day before negotiations began in Washington D.C., four Israeli civilians were shot dead driving near the West Bank settlement of Kiryat Arba. Hamas quickly and gladly took responsibility, and a Hamas spokesman in Gaza praised the attacks and stated that they were the most natural response to “the crimes of occupation.” Abbas, leader of the Palestinian Authority, which governs Arab populations in the West Bank and Gaza, including Hamas, condemned the attack.
George F. Will, a columnist for the Washington Post, points out in an Aug. 19 column that, since 2000, Palestinian-Israeli conflict has accounted for the deaths of more than 1,000 Israelis. As a percentage of the population of the U.S., that would equal 42,000 Americans. How would the U.S. react to that kind of sustained attack during a period of peace? Why should we pretend that the recent talks between Israel and the Palestinians will be successful, when one side, the side that includes Hamas, is clearly only interested in a one-state solution? The only solution for Hamas is the destruction of Israel and the creation of an Arab State in its place, and that is one concession that Israel is not prepared to make.
Contact Ben at bnegley@asu.edu