|
|
 |
 |
Isreali and Palestinian flags
Photo: MTV News
|
Perhaps no conflict on earth has lasted longer, is more bitter, or has
attracted greater attention from US foreign policy makers over the years than
the Israeli-Palestinian standoff. It is a dispute that arguably goes back
not just years, not just decades, not just centuries, but millennia.
Indeed, there may be no region in the world with a longer list of intractable
problems than the Middle East.
Sadly, the prospects for peace in the region appear as dim as ever these days.
As of February 4, Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat was, for all intents and
purposes, under house arrest by the Israeli military, which has positioned
tanks just a hundred yards outside his offices in the Israeli occupied
territory known as the West Bank. The move to box Arafat in comes in the
wake of a string of suicide attacks on Israeli civilians by Palestinian
militants. The clamp down was also prompted by the Israelis’Äô recent seizure
of a boat containing 50 tons of heavy weapons, which they said was en route
to the Palestinian territories at the behest of one of Arafat's closest aides.
Current Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Arafat are long-time nemeses
that met in combat during the 1980’Äôs when Sharon was a general in the Israeli
military and Arafat was leading his Palestinian Liberation Organization in
armed rebellion. Enmity between the two clearly remains. Unlike his
predecessors, Sharon has steadfastly refused to shake Arafat’Äôs hand during
their previous meetings. He recently declared that he is sorry he did not
kill Arafat on the battlefield when he says he had the chance. And Sharon
says that he now considers Arafat "irrelevant" to forging peace in the region.
When faced with such a stalemate in the past, US foreign policy leaders might
have stepped in to soothe nerves and bring both parties back to the
negotiating table. But at least for the time being, the Bush Administration
is siding unambiguously with the Israelis.
"I am disappointed in Yasir Arafat," Mr. Bush told reporters during a visit
to Portland, Maine on January 25. "He must make a full effort to rout out
terror in the Middle East. Ordering up weapons that were intercepted on a
boat headed for that part of the world is not part of fighting terror, that's
enhancing terror, and obviously we're very disappointed in him."
The Israelis cite the arms shipment as evidence that Arafat has merely been
paying lip service when he says he deplores the attacks on Israeli citizens.
They say his efforts to rein in radical elements in the Occupied Territories
have been half-hearted and intentionally ineffective. They say his real
agenda remains the destruction of the Jewish State.
For his part, Arafat has said he knew nothing of the shipment and opposes
terrorism against Israeli civilians. In an op-ed essay published February 3
in The New York Times, he wrote, "I condemn the attacks carried out by
terrorist groups against Israeli civilians. These groups do not represent the
Palestinian people or their legitimate aspirations for freedom. They are
terrorist organizations, and I am determined to put an end to their
activities."
Moreover, he said he is ready to negotiate a peaceful settlement with Sharon
but will only do so when Israel begins to recognize the Palestinians as equal
partners in peace, not as inferiors. "Israel has yet to understand that it
cannot have peace while denying justice," he wrote.
A Bloody 16 Months of Tit-for-Tat
With consistent ferocity, Palestinian radicals have staged suicide bombings
and shootings against Israeli civilians during the last 16 months. And with
ruthless reciprocity, the Israelis have undertaken harsh and repressive
measures against Palestinians living in the Occupied Territories.
In a coordinated attack on December 2, two Palestinian suicide bombers killed
10 Israeli civilians and wounded 150 others at a crowded pedestrian mall in
Jerusalem. On January 18, a lone Palestinian gunman strode into a bar
mitzvah celebration in the Israeli town of Hadera and opened fire. In a
flash, six were dead and 25 more were injured. The assailant was killed by
police officers arriving on scene moments later.
These were but two of the numerous terrorist attacks that have frayed Israeli
nerves and galvanized its political leaders to take military action over the
past year.
Among the tactics employed by the Israeli armed forces have been targeted
killings of figures they say coordinated terrorist attacks on Israeli
citizens. For example, on January 14 Raed Karmi, who headed a militia
affiliated with Arafat's Fatah Party died in an explosion attributed to
Israel. Karmi had apparently claimed to be responsible for killing two
Israelis in Tel Aviv last year.
On February 4, Palestinian security officials said Israeli helicopters fired
missiles at a car carrying five members of the Democratic Front for the
Liberation of Palestine. All inside were killed. As of that evening, Israel
had declined to comment on the incident or identify what attacks the five may
have been responsible for.
The Israelis have also used highly aggressive tactics of displacement. On
January 10, the Israeli army sent two bulldozers into a West Bank community
near the Egyptian border and leveled homes leaving 93 families, or 600
people, homeless according to the Red Cross. The move was designed to
prevent Palestinian militants from using the homes to conceal tunnels into
Egypt through which weapons could be transported, claimed the Israeli
military. According to one Israeli human rights group, more than 5,100
Palestinians have been left homeless in the past 16 months as a result of
Israeli army demolitions.
The Palestinian leadership claims that Israel’Äôs targeted killings are merely a
ssassinations designed to destroy destabilize the Palestinian Authority,
which has nominal control of the Occupied Territories. They say the Israelis
have provided scant evidence of guilt of those they have killed. And they
denounce the leveling of the West Bank homes by Israeli bulldozers as
unjustified acts of immense cruelty.
Israel counters that Arafat has not taken appropriate steps to rein in the
terrorists who are launching attacks on Israeli citizens, so instead they are
taking care of the problem. They point to a series of promises Arafat has
made that, they say, he has not kept.
Where the US Fits In
President Clinton put solving the riddle of the Middle East at the top of his
foreign policy agenda. Throughout much of his presidency, he and his team of
advisors worked long hours to hold the Israeli-Palestinian peace process
together. The president was reportedly on the phone with leaders from both
camps up until the final hours of his presidency. And until the violence
re-escalated in Israel and the occupied territories 16 months ago, it seemed
likely that Clinton’Äôs role in bringing Arafat and former Prime Minister
Yitzhak Rabin together to sign the Oslo Peace Accords in 1993 would go down
as the crowning achievement of his presidency.
President Bush and his team have pursued a somewhat different approach to the
region. Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Advisor
Condoleeza Rice acknowledge that resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
remains among their top priorities. But they have been unwilling to invest
as much public political capital in negotiating a settlement between the two
sides. Compared to his predecessor, Secretary Powell has made relatively few
trips to the Mideast.
Instead, the administration has designated retired Marine Corps General
Anthony Zinni as its envoy to the region. But General Zinni’Äôs efforts have
had little impact in reducing the bloodshed.
Glimmers of Hope
Still, despite the accusations and the bloodshed, slivers of hope remain for
peace in the Middle East.
Putting aside his tough talk, Prime Minister Sharon met covertly with three
Arafat envoys on February 1. And Mr. Arafat’Äôs essay in the Times in which he
stated, "Israel's peace partner is, and always has been, the Palestinian
people" was a clear indication that he, too, is unwilling to abandon the
peace process altogether.
Moreover, it is in the long-term best interests of both the Israelis and the
Arabs to find a lasting resolution to their dispute. The ongoing conflict is
enormously hurtful to both sides when measured both in terms of anguish and
economics. The mutual benefits Israelis and Palestinians would enjoy if they
could find a way to live peacefully alongside one another would surely be
substantial.
Will Israeli and Palestinian leaders have the courage to put aside their
longstanding grudges, to challenge the militant elements in their respective
societies, and to take the risks needed to accomplish the goal of peace? It
remains to be seen.
Just as it is inevitable that years of mistrust, anger, and division will
continue to drive the two parties apart, so it is that the common benefits of
peaceful coexistence will continue to pull them back the negotiating table.
The prospective benefits of peace are simply too alluring to be ignored.
By Ethan Zindler
Tune into "Be Heard: An MTV Global Discussion With Colin Powell," premiering February 14 at 8 p.m. ET. Colin Powell answers your questions about world events during the show. Check the Weekly Schedule for encore air times.
Share your thoughts in You Tell Us.
 Back to Fact Files Index
|
|
