The latest US stand on the solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict is a mockery of reality. They want to convince the world that they have tried their best to solve the problem but have failed. Now it is up to the Palestinians and the Israelis to find out a solution. That is what Israel wants. It is actually an Israeli agenda. Because they know, they are by far the strongest party. And when two parties are not equal, the solution is imposed by the stronger party if impartial “third parties” do not mediate, propose and implement a just and equitable solution. The implementation mechanism must be there in the solution.
The present crisis has taken a pause after a ceasefire has been reached between the two parties shortly after Joe Biden´s real pressure on B. Netanyahu. But new flare-ups in foreseeable time cannot be ruled out till a permanent solution is achieved. The pause to and recurrence of devastating attacks and counterattacks have been going on for decades. The world knows that the overwhelming victims of casualties are Palestinians. But Israel has not achieved the coveted peace in spite of declared victories every times. To achieve a lasting peace it must be based on justice.
It is not correct to say that the US has tried its utmost to find a “just” solution to this conflict. Rather they have entertained and patronized Israeli-sought solutions which are tilted heavily towards Israeli demand-list. Many fundamental and genuine Palestinian interests have been ignored. Take for example the widely publicized “Two-State” solution. The Palestinian leaders agree to a two-state formula. And Israel outwardly says that they are also in favor of a two-state solution. But what type of two states they actually want. It became clear during the Oslo summit where Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin represented respectively Palestine and Israel. It is not only the tiny size of land that was unacceptable to the Palestinians. But the boundaries Israel wanted to demarcate was a virtual negation to the viable statehood of Palestine. The proposed Palestine state was divided into several tiny parts many of which were not connected with one another. They offered a Palestine state like the one the then apartheid South African colonial power offered to the black South Africans in the form of mutually disconnected “Bantustans.” Knowing fully well that Bantustan-like offer would not work, Israel placed a similar proposal to show the world that they were willing to a two-state solution. Had USA and other mediators tried sincerely and steadfastly to establish a viable Palestine, it would have been established at that time and even earlier. If the US and Israel are serious about a two-state solution, they must ensure the viability of the proposed state of Palestine.
Some are even proposing a one-state solution where both the Palestinians and the Israelis will live side by side in Israel. The proponents of this solution are living in a fool´s paradise. If all the Palestinians, including the “refugees” living in Gaza, Ramallah, and the West Bank are allowed citizenship of Israel with equal political rights, the basic character of the state of Israel will be changed. In that case, the demography will change in favor of Palestinians. They will be either majority or almost equal in numbers. Israel will no longer remain a Jewish state which is the basic character of Israel. The Zionist forces which govern the state of Israel will never accept such a scenario.
The present Israeli-Palestinian crisis might lead to a greater crisis of mass expulsion of Arab Israelis from the Zionist state. Now around 20% of population of Israel are Arab-Israelis most of whom are Palestinian Israelis. Lately, they have gained considerable political power. They have become a deciding factor in the formation of the government. At present there are 10 Arab-Israeli members in the Knesset. Extremist Israelis do not like this. They want to get rid of the growing influence of Arab Israelis. Many observers believe that this is one of the reasons of recent riots between the Arab Israelis and Jewish Israelis inside Israel. Some Jewish groups want to expel Arabs from the Jewish state. Their calculation is, if rioting continues, many Arabs will be forced to leave Israel. In that case, the remaining Arabs will be further marginalized, their representation in the Knesset will be insignificant and their influence will be diminished. They can get rid of Arabs without official expulsion. This is a new dangerous development.
The solution is possible if the international community, particularly the US takes an unbiased and active role with the determined commitment to bring the conflict to an end. The basic principles of solutions have already been categorically envisaged in the relevant proposals adopted by the UN long ago. Israel must withdraw from the occupied territories there a Palestine state should be really established. The existence of Israel and Palestine must be guaranteed by the world community including the big powers. If the US argues that Israel and Palestinian authority/entity should themselves find out a solution, then it is the imperative duty of Washington to establish a balance of strength between Israelis and the Palestinians, because without equal footings and powers it is impossible to attain any just solution. And it is mainly the USA that has destroyed the balance of strength between the two parties. They must amend it.
Anisur Rahman is a senior Bangladeshi journalist now living in Sweden. Email: anisur.anis@gmail.com
GET COUNTERCURRENTS DAILY NEWSLETTER STRAIGHT TO YOUR INBOX
The article begins with the following sentence, which is the first sentence of the article: “The latest US stand on the solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict is a mockery of reality. They want to convince the world that they have tried their best to solve the problem but have failed.” In the third para, the article says: the US “have entertained and patronized Israeli-sought solutions which are tilted heavily towards Israeli demand-list.”
The article tells in the last para the following: “The solution is possible if the international community, particularly the US takes an unbiased and active role with the determined commitment to bring the conflict to an end.”
Then, in the last sentence, the article says: “And it is mainly the USA that has destroyed the balance of strength between the two parties. They must amend it.”
It is, now, difficult to understand as at the beginning it is told that the “US stand … is a mockery of reality.” But, the article, then, finds the solution, as it tells in the last para, on “an unbiased and active role” of “international community, particularly the US”, although it says in the same para that “the USA … has destroyed the balance of strength between the two parties” and in the third para, the US have entertained and patronized Israel-sought solution. So, it appears that the article banks on the party which has made mockery of reality, which has patronized one party! is it possible?
Confusion increases as the article also says in the last sentence: “They must amend it.” Who are these “they” — international community or the USA? Who shall amend and shall be amended?
The confusion increases if the first para is again looked in, where the article says: “Now it is up to the Palestinians and the Israelis to find out a solution.” If that — solution — is to be found out by the Palestinians and Israel, then, what the international community, particularly the US to do?
The confusion increases further, as the article says in the first para, Israel is “the strongest party” and “when two parties are not equal, the solution is imposed by the stronger party if impartial “third parties” do not mediate, …” If stronger party imposes solution, if the US have done a mockery, then, what solution is to be found?
The article also says, in the last para: “If the US argues that Israel and Palestinian authority/entity should themselves find out a solution, then it is the imperative duty of
Washington to establish a balance of strength between Israelis and the Palestinians, because without equal footings and powers it is impossible to attain any just solution.” If the US makes a mockery of reality, if Israel, as the stronger party, imposes its solution, then, the articles tells that imperative duty of the US is to establish a balance of power. Is it?
The article also says: “The basic principles of solutions have already been categorically envisaged in the relevant proposals adopted by the UN long ago.” Are there in those UN proposals any suggestion of establishing a balance of power by the US?
The ideas or proposals in the article are difficult to understand. I am sorry for my inability to understand.