Israel's just fears of a 'Palestinian state'
Writing in al-Guardian's 'comment is free' section, Carlo Strenger, a self-proclaimed supporter of the 'two-state solution' lists what he calls Israel's 'just fears' of a 'Palestinian state.' Unfortunately, he has not and is not likely to take his analysis to its logical conclusion and realize that the only way to keep Israel safe from those fears is to reject a 'Palestinian state.'The first is about security. Israel's citizens are traumatised by years of rocket attacks from the Gaza Strip, which only intensified once Israel withdrew from there. The international community has shown somewhat limited understanding for Israel's concerns, because these attacks have not cost many lives. While I think that the incursion in Gaza was conducted with excessive force, Israel had no choice but to do something to stop the attacks – and was severely condemned for this.But the world seems determined to push Israel to commit suicide anyway.
What would Israel's situation be after withdrawing from the West Bank to the 1967 borders? All major population centres of Israel would be in range of Katyushas. These rockets were sufficiently destructive to bring life in northern Israel to a complete standstill when Hezbollah fired large numbers of them into Israel during the second Lebanon war in 2006. If Israel is attacked from the West Bank, the impact will be devastating, and Israel will have no choice but to react forcefully – and as a result will, once again, be the target of international condemnation.
Hence Israelis say "we are damned if we do and damned if we don't" – if Israel continues the occupation of large parts of the West Bank, it is under constant international criticism but at least it is relatively safe. If Israel withdraws from the West Bank, it will open itself to attacks from there, and any retaliation will lead to massive international condemnation. Ergo, many Israelis think, it is preferable to maintain the status quo, unpalatable as it is.
The second issue is the lack of clarity as to whether Fayyad and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, represent all Palestinians: there are currently two governments, with Hamas ruling Gaza. Hence Israelis ask whether anything signed by the Palestinian Authority that is de facto Fatah will in any way bind Hamas, which has already rejected previous agreements with Israel.
Israelis justifiably ask: what if Hamas wins the general election again? Israel will be open to attacks from the West Bank by a government whose charter includes rabid antisemitic rants from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and which is currently armed and influenced by Iran, whose president keeps reiterating that Israel needs to be wiped off the map of the Middle East.
What could go wrong?
1 Comments:
Isi Liebler has a good discussion of the big picture at the Jerusalem Post . The settlement freeze in the end is all about Iran. Europe is hostile to Israel. The only country that will allow Israel the latitude to act against Iran is America. For that, Israel had to pay a price to keep the US happy and that is a temporary settlement freeze. No - the Palestinians don't pose an existential danger to Israel. They are an irritant. Iran is seeking the means to destroy Israel. The national camp must therefore behave responsibly and fight Iran as if the freeze did not exist and fight the freeze as if Iran was not an issue. Right now, Israel must focus on stopping Iran. Every thing else is a secondary concern.
Post a Comment
<< Home