Forty years ago, Israel captured the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan Heights after a lightning six-day war that repelled the armies of Egypt, Jordan and Syria. Today, ending the occupation of Palestinian territories that began that June seems as distant a dream as ever.
The Somalia-like chaos and civil war that is now unfolding in Gaza as a result of this decades-old stalemate can be blamed partly on ill-conceived Israeli policies, and partly on a US administration that, for six long years, relegated the cause of Israeli-Palestinian peace to the bottom of its agenda. But it is misleading to attribute the failure of the Palestinians to develop an orderly system of self-government to only the pernicious effects of Israeli occupation and US policies.
The Palestinian crisis is first and foremost one of leadership. True, Yasser Arafat was not a model democrat, but his charisma and political acumen were crucial for holding all the Palestinian factions together. Now, not even Fatah, Arafat's own party, can claim to be a coherent organization. Hamas' electoral victory in January last year was largely due to Fatah's fragmentation under Arafat's successor, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. With no effective central authority to inspire fear or respect and the Palestine Liberation Organization devoid of legitimacy precisely because of its refusal to give Hamas its rightful share in the organization, a grotesquely ineffective brand of "cohabitation" between a Fatah president and a Hamas prime minister has emerged. As a result, Palestinian politics has degenerated into a naked struggle for the spoils of power.
Last February's Mecca agreement, which created the Fatah-Hamas unity government, was supposed to establish a civilized system of power-sharing, but that deal now appears to be collapsing. The current flare-up is largely due to the fact that Fatah, encouraged by the international community's boycott of Hamas, never really accepted its electoral defeat and Hamas' right to govern.
Moreover, since Hamas' rise to power, Fatah's challenge to the new Palestinian rulers was enhanced by the lavish financial support it secured from the US and Europe, and by a generous supply of weapons from both the US and Arab countries. Thus, the current conflict is essentially a pre-emptive war by Hamas -- aggravated by lawlessness and banditry, clashing free-lance militias, tribes, and families, and a spiral of senseless massacres -- to prevent Fatah from being turned by the international community into a formidable challenger to its democratic right to govern.
For Hamas, this is a life-and-death struggle. It has not shrunk from bombarding Abbas' presidential compound, attacking Fatah's command centers, and targeting Fatah military leaders like Rashid Abu Shbak, the commander of Fatah's internal security and many others, all of them lieutenants of the supreme Fatah military authority in the Gaza strip, Mohamed Dahlan.
Hamas' determination to assert its authority can be gauged by the desecrated corpses of Fatah fighters, many of them with bullets fired at their heads, a practice dubbed "confirmation of death." The rocket attacks against Israeli territory are a transparent attempt to divert attention and rally the masses around Hamas as the true champions of the Palestinian cause.
Tragically, all this is not only about human victims, but also about the Palestinians' political horizon. Three times in their history -- in 1937, 1947 and 2000 -- the Palestinians were offered a state, and three times their leaders failed to meet the challenge -- admittedly never an easy one for a nation built on such an unwavering ethos of dispossession.
Today, when the US finally understands how vital an Israeli-Palestinian peace is for its fortunes in the broader Middle East, and the Arab world is for the first time committed to pursuing a comprehensive settlement with Israel, anarchic Palestinian politics is making a decision for peace nearly impossible. However vibrant, Israel's democracy is not exactly manageable or predictable, either. Although Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert might seek to regain his popular credibility by a major new peace demarche, the two-headed Palestinian Authority, always a dubious partner in the eyes of the Israelis, is now more suspect than ever.
"Every day that goes by only causes more people to wish for the renewal of the Israeli occupation of Gaza. Let the Jews come already and save us!" But that despairing hope, uttered by a desperate Gazan, will not materialize. Israel will avoid at all costs a large ground incursion. Yet, engaged in a war driven by fury and vengeance, the Israelis are now focused again on a manhunt for gang chieftains, targeted killings of Hamas squads, and the arrest of its political leaders, not on peace overtures.
Only a dramatic move by external powers can still save Gaza from becoming a second Mogadishu and both Palestinians and Israelis from a total war that would only breed more rage and desperation. For the building blocks of a renewed peace process to be sustainable, an international force must be deployed along Gaza's border with Egypt to prevent the constant smuggling of weapons and isolate the conflict. Simultaneously, the international community must help make the unity government work by recognizing Hamas' right to govern in exchange for a performance-based stability plan.
Shlomo Ben-Ami, a former Israeli foreign minister, now serves as vice president of the Toledo International Center for Peace in Madrid, Spain.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Ursula K. le Guin in The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas proposed a thought experiment of a utopian city whose existence depended on one child held captive in a dungeon. When taken to extremes, Le Guin suggests, utilitarian logic violates some of our deepest moral intuitions. Even the greatest social goods — peace, harmony and prosperity — are not worth the sacrifice of an innocent person. Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), since leaving office, has lived an odyssey that has brought him to lows like Le Guin’s dungeon. From late 2008 to 2015 he was imprisoned, much of this