Palestine’s Time Must Come Soon
Written by Major Tom
Filed under: Global Politics
November 24, 2007
It should be now or never. For the nth time, the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict is once again at the forefront of world affairs as U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had worked so extraneously hard to bring important parties to meet at a yet another peace summit in America—to be held this time in Annapolis, Maryland.
Seven years ago—during the ending days of the Clinton administration—both sides of the conflict have tried to resolve the issue in Camp David, but had been so luckless in the end, leading to the collapse of the talk when the issue on East Jerusalem met a piteous dead-end.
But now, the main issue could hugely depart from the usual questions of territory, like the unwillingness of Israel to forego of East Jerusalem (which it had annexed in 1980, despite the harsh reprimand from the United Nation) or the refusal of the Palestinian side to forego of 8% of West Bank as a bumper zone for Israel. The main query now is whether or not Palestine would finally gain its sovereignty and soon becomes a state apart from the Israel ’s sphere of control and influence. And this time, the aim or aims of the peace process might just be reachable and realistic since even Israel had long voiced-out its concurrence to the establishment of a Palestinian state. And since the greater issue becomes too ideal to forego, smaller issues of territories should become easier to settle and compromise upon.
When Secretary Rice had asked U.S. President George W. Bush on this issue some weeks ago, Bush had answered this particular question in the affirmative, signaling support to the creation of a Palestinian state—seemingly spontaneous and without hesitation. But how much support Bush would have on this latest initiative remains now of great interest to anticipate, one that needs to be responded to this coming Tuesday in Annapolis, when all parties involved in the seemingly never-ending Israeli-Palestinian Conflict would meet once again to find possible solutions to a quarrel that had dragged for so long, almost a century now, running like an endless river without an ocean to arrive at.
In my mind, President Bush should see the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict as a huge part and parcel of the whole peace policy and stabilization campaign in the entire Middle-East region, and would hopefully give similar amount of concern over it, just like it has on Iraq or Iran.
Along this line, final resolution to the conflicts there should involved a major infusion of financial assistance to the Palestinian areas, and not merely in trickles as it had been happening over the years, where despite of years of infusion of small caches of aids, Palestine remains torn and disorderly. The lack of economic opportunity and activity over there had brought forth widespread social disarray that has become ripe for radicalism and extremism. Without the sizable economic assistance component, the plan for the establishment of Palestinian statehood would merely be futile and aimless.
Israel should note this very well, and should in fact be cooperative on this aspect, instead of having a countering stance. It should be well- remembered that Israel had achieved such level of state maturity and strength in such a short period of time because of very sizable money infusion from wealthy Jewish benefactors in America and Europe, and even from the governments of United States and EU. It had achieved such level of economic independence at the soonest time possible, and was able to strengthen and hold it’s population with a very strong bind, unrelenting and sturdy even at the face of repeated crisis that had loomed over it over the decades.
Palestine as a new state, should have the same support and program from its benefactors, and from bigger participants like the EU and America.
Secretary Rice should see this aspect very clearly. While it is very commendable how she seem to have moved heaven and earth in order to bring final resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, traveling frequently towards that region in recent months (this despite and perhaps mostly because the Bush Administration is about to end and the remaining months would be her last window of opportunity), she must bring the economic component of the peace process to the forefront as soon as possible.
This idea is not merely all about the money though; it is not that way. It would be more on the ability of a working economy to stabilize once ravaged situations. The Marshall Plan had done wonders in rebuilding Europe and maintaining up to this time a strong order in that region—from a state of conflict and warfare to an atmosphere of peace and cooperation.
A similar plan (like the Marshall Plan) could enliven and strengthen a new Palestinian state, and would thereupon spur economic stability and steady peace and order. If this would become the final result, Israel as a state would greatly benefit for not having to hold down a raucous enemy just next door, almost all the time, for an unknown period of time.
The gain of Palestine then would be the gain of Israel.
Part of Stubbornness of resolutions to the Middle East Conflict is the Unconditional Support of the U.S. to Israel as an extension of their security in the troubled region and also a commitment to the continuous existence of the Jewish State.
Secretary Rice may have considered this issue as she embarks in another attempt. If Israel is certain that the U.S. as a matter of Foreign Policy is also committed to the Existence of a Separate, and sovereign Palestine, then maybe they can come up with a compromise that will eventually lead to total agreement. Just hope so, otherwise, the internal conflict within Palestine itself between differing factions will add more chaos to the already chaotic region…
Comment by vic — November 26, 2007 @ 2:02 am
I hate to say this but peace it seems, is but a lofty dream in that place. Everyone wants something but is unwilling to give something in return. And with Iran saber rattling these days, it makes the dream even more unattainable…
Comment by snglguy — November 26, 2007 @ 7:15 am
I hope something can be done this time but people are still pessimistic whether the state of Palestine can be a reality. The reason is extremists from both sides - Israel and Palestine are incessantly derailing the efforts. Die hard Jewish supporters in the US are not also too keen with the idea of a Palestinian state. For the sake of lasting peace in the world we hope that this endeavor would finally come to fruition, so there will be no more Irans and Syrias threatening to nuke Isreal out of the map.
Comment by bw — November 26, 2007 @ 10:28 am
I fervently hope that this will materialise. If it will be soon, the better. But this is as old as the land that continues to divide people.
Will peace be attainable? Hopefully!
Comment by ipanema — November 26, 2007 @ 7:22 pm
To Vic: Compromise is the key and with a promise of statehood, Palestine may be wont to accept almost anything. The last time around, it scoffed at foregoing 8% of West Bank in favor of Israel. Maybe this time, it won’t be such a hard bargain for them.
Comment by Major Tom — November 27, 2007 @ 5:06 am
To sngl: Iran’s latest bradagaccio moves have in fact makes the resolution of the Palestine-Israel conflict an inevitable precedence and necessary. It would certainly diffuse a lot of tensions over there.
Comment by Major Tom — November 27, 2007 @ 5:09 am
To BW: it should be the main point, to eliminate extremist sentiments on the issue, to complete deny their rhetorics on this issue. If the moderates among the parties could become stronger and more prevalent, I don’t see it as a major stumbling block to the latest peace initiative over there.
Comment by Major Tom — November 27, 2007 @ 5:11 am
To ipanema: With a vibrant personality like Condoleezza Rice involved now, hope is ever flowing this time.
Comment by Major Tom — November 27, 2007 @ 5:14 am
Before there was an Israel, Arabs and Jews existed without friction. Both even fought against the Brits for freedom. Jews actually used car bombs to terrorize the Brits.
Proxy wars should once and for all stop and Israel should look back into its history to see if they are just and fair before condemning those who rise against them.
Comment by Schumey — November 27, 2007 @ 2:07 pm
I am a bit of a cynic and I don’t believe peace has a chance.
The Palestinians got millions from the Europeans and it ended all in the pockets of corrupt officials. There are so many fractions among the Palestinians that Israel and the US don’t have a reliable representative group to speak with.
I feel for the Palestinians alas they have bad leaders.
Comment by Sidney — November 27, 2007 @ 7:36 pm
To Schumey: That’s a good info bro-I can’t believe there ever was a time that the Israelis and Palestinians were once cohorts in some mortal undertaking. It’s simply unimaginable.
Comment by Major Tom — November 27, 2007 @ 8:43 pm
To Sidney: I’ve heard about that Sidney–about how corruptions is so bad in Palestine that it was even rumored or alledged how Arafat had become so wealthy while the rest remained in dire situations.
The problem before, or at the present condition, donors just seem to release the money and then forget about it. There should be a more focused attempt at rehabilitating and reconstructing Palestine, to the extent that donor countries would even manage and administer the use of funds there. This is possible through the utilization of non-governmental entities like the World Bank or IMF, especially IBRD (International Bank for Rural Development).
Comment by Major Tom — November 27, 2007 @ 8:48 pm
If its for peace, glorious peace (whether very parochial or international) we should never stop trying.
Comment by annamanila — November 27, 2007 @ 11:00 pm
There’s also the issue of Palestinian refugees who fled their homes during the 1948 war. Some of them want a right of return to their homes which are now part of Israel. Some have also suggested that borders be drawn back to the Pre-1967 borders. I do remember Edward Said saying that the only way for peace to be achieved was for Palestine and Israel to co-exist (i.e. it’s not an either/or situation).
Comment by Wil — November 29, 2007 @ 8:56 am
in 1948, Israel tried but failed to get the Palestinians to agree to a partition. Before he left office, even while he was packing to be Citizen Clinton, Clinton tried, too.
I wish it works this time. Within our generation.
Comment by Atticus — December 2, 2007 @ 2:12 pm
To annamanila: So right and very timely. I agree 100%.
Comment by Major Tom — December 3, 2007 @ 2:40 pm
To Wil: That’s one of the hardest part to negotiate over the years, the right to return for some Palestinians who have fled in the 60’s war.
But suggestions for a mutual state system is always high, and within that, such idea may be so tenable.
Comment by Major Tom — December 3, 2007 @ 2:42 pm
To Atticus: As long as talks like these are always opened, peace is always hopeful. Not much, but it should be what we could hope for at this time.
Comment by Major Tom — December 3, 2007 @ 2:45 pm
I’d be a pessimist on this one particular issue — I don’t believe that peace will ever reign over this region, for hatred for each other seem hardwired into these peoples’ DNA. This conflict dates back to biblical times.
Comment by eric — December 4, 2007 @ 8:28 am
I’d be a pessimist on this one particular issue — I don’t believe that peace will ever reign on this region, for hatred for each other seems hardwired into these peoples’ DNA. This conflict dates back to biblical times.
Comment by eric — December 4, 2007 @ 8:34 am
Hey all,
If you’re looking for a good site about investing and making money check out:
www.investmentsforme.com
Comment by craig — December 17, 2007 @ 11:12 am