I wonder what full diplomatic ties with the Arab world are worth to Israel. The prospect of a new Arab invasion has never been lower, with Syria in turmoil and Iraq in ruins. Yet, the democratic swell from the Arab Spring has cast future relations with Egypt in doubt and thrown the region into confusion. Elected Arab leaders are more dangerous to Israel than kings and dictators because they must answer to their people who are stridently opposed to Israel’s occupation of land seized in the 1967 war. If Israel could get diplomatic relations with the Arab world at an early point in this democratization process, it could be a huge boon. Without it, Arab politicians may vie with each other to be the most anti-Israel.
I also think that there is an economic component that should be considered. Diplomatic ties can lead to economic ties, and Israel has a lot of potential for growth. It might be more convincing to the Israeli electorate to make an economic argument for peace than a security argument. And I believe that the biggest obstacle to peace right now is the Israeli electorate. The Arab League is making a reasonable offer to do land swaps rather than insisting on the pre-1967 lines. Yet, the reaction hasn’t been all that receptive.
Israel will keep refusing to negotiate on the basis of a total withdrawal from land it seized during the 1967 Six-Day War, a minister said Wednesday after the Arab League modified its peace plan.
“If Israel agrees to come to the negotiating table while accepting in advance that talks would be held on the basis of the 1967 lines, there wouldn’t be very much to negotiate about,” said Gilad Erdan, a minister in the security cabinet and considered close to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
“We cannot start negotiations after agreeing in advance to give up everything,” he told public radio…
…“I hope that Abu Mazen doesn’t think that Israel will give up its positions and agree to hand over all the land where we believe we have a right to settle,” said Erdan, referring to Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas.
Obviously, Israel’s “right to settle” land they obtained in the 1967 war is the key bone of contention, but the whole point of the Arab League’s new proposal is that they are giving up on asking Israel to give up “all” of it. The problem for Israeli leaders is that a lot of the voting public is currently residing on occupied land, which makes it politically difficult to say ‘yes’ even to reasonable offers.
It’s a problem of their own creation, but a problem nonetheless.
This is interesting, never heard Bibi say anything similar in past 18 years …
And don’t forget PM, the Palestinians elected Hamas in Gaza because of the corruption in the PA. Are the Israelis getting warm around the collar as the Arab Spring is bringing about budding theocracies in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt and soon to Syria and Jordan. As I have written so often … US Will Be Ousted by Saudi King Abdullah in Middle-East.
At last, a US President thinking of Homeland security in dealing with Israel? It would be a welcome change! A long, long way to go, but those first steps are so essential.
Israel currently is bi-national through their assertion of control of Judaea and Samaria. The form of that bi-nationality is apartheid.
Note that the “right to settle” is qualified with “land where we believe we have a right to settle”. That’s the crucial fraud.
Israel has no legitimate recognized “right to settle” land outside their 1967 borders. Thus their Greater Israel position is based on their “belief” they (should) have such a “right”. They “believe” Israel should be accorded (more) Arab land on which to settle more Israelis. Based on what? Scripture? But even their rightwing leaders know they don’t have an actual legal “right” to expropriate more land.
As for any possible economic benefits of not being a regional pariah or diplomatic benefits of behaving justly, their leaders possess a remarkable tunnel vision, with only an apocalyptic view of the future to “guide” them. By isolating themselves ever further by their unjust actions and driving away all international supporters, their terrible vision becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Unfortunately they do still have the most important international supporter, the US. As long as they know they can get away with anything, they have no reason to modify their rhetoric or their behavior.
It is irrelevant whether Israil can say yes or not: it does not WANT to say yes! And there ends any discussion. And the wierd USA-ians agree with Israel. Very nasty of them.
Well of course if you suggest that a bank robber give back even a little bit of the money he has stolen at gunpoint (while killing a few people), he’s going to refuse to negotiate. Because that would imply the money wasn’t his in the first place, and opens further lines of inquiry…
An imperfect analogy, to be sure, as Israel is no mere bank robber. Its crimes are far, far worse.
Netanyahu likely does not have these thoughts, but Israeli politicians open to accepting the 1967 borders no doubt think about Yitzhak Rabin a lot.
The thieves will assassinate a prime minister in order to avoid giving their stolen land back.
Sadly, I think BooMan is right about the Israeli public. Labor is dead. Peace Now is dead. The fight over the peace process is over, and peace lost.
Barack Obama didn’t address the Knesset when he went to Israel; he gave his big speech in a convention center full of college kids. For Israel to become a serious partner for peace will take a generational change.
Or the loss of $3 billion a year.
Exactly. The US could easily move things along if it got over its craven pandering to Israeli imperialism.
This isn’t 1972. Israel, even without any further American military support, will be the big boy on its block.
I’m sure they like the economic benefit of saving that $3 billion, but they seem to like settling the West Bank quite a bit, too.
It doesn’t have to stop with military aid. And I suspect the Israeli public wouldn’t treat even that loss lightly.
If we have to wait for the current youth to have power, then not only is peace not going to happen (it never was, as no Israel leader was ever truly interested in anything but theater), but Israel won’t last.
Oh, come on. They are stridently opposed to the existence of Israel. This is what you call “an existential threat.”
Oh come on…. where did you find that quaint phrase? Israel has never and will never pose an existential threat to the Palestinians. No, never. The Israelis just take land, water and what ever they can their hands on…houses, for instance. They destroy existence, they destroy and usurp. Oh come on…
So, the Arab League comes to you and they say, “Hey, Philo, I have a proposal. If you trade me some of the land you took from us for some other land, we’ll stop trying to kill you and you can come over for dinner with the wife and we’d even be willing to buy that old lawnmower off you.”
And your response is, “You are just trying to kill me.”
The League’s offer is staggering. They are accepting that Israel should be allowed to negotiate for the land they stole, that they deserve to profit from the theft. But that’s clearly no enough, because God Gave.
Too bad the worst possible player in this tedious and destructive game, the US, is the only one with the leverage to open Israel’s eyes to its real situation. As long as they can count on a $3 billion handout forever, why wouldn’t they keep playing cowboy? The US has ample leverage to change everything except the courage to go up against the Israel lobby. So the timebomb keeps on ticking.
The military lobby that sells its military toys to Israel has more power than the Israeli lobby.
Good point.