This following article from Al Jazeera Online is an important reminder of the inter-connectedness and the necessity of solving the Israel-Palestine conflict as part of the whole. It was written by Rami G. Khouri, a Jordanian-Palestinian national, is a senior public policy fellow at the American University of Beirut and a senior fellow of the Harvard Kennedy School of International Affairs.
* * *
"To Defeat ISIL, the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Must Be Resolved
A top Obama administration staffer admits that the long-running conflict is an obstacle to regional peace"
"Acknowledging that resolving the conflict would not be a “magic wand” . . . Malley made the critical point that 'the absence of a resolution is fueling extremism' and that . . . [resolving it] 'would be a major contribution to . . . the kind of cooperation that is needed [to take on] what should be a common challenge, which is the challenge of [ISIL] and of other extremist organizations.'"
[Khouri then adds his own views.]
"He [Malley] is correct, even if he carefully framed the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in utilitarian terms rather than affirm the primacy of international law and the moral urgency of resolving it. . . . [T]he Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been the single most radicalizing and destabilizing force in the Middle East for nearly a century. Resolving it would contribute immeasurably to a more peaceful Middle East — just as leaving it unresolved for decades has contributed to the sort of mass frustration, humiliation and radicalization that ultimately spawned ISIL.
"Washington’s imbalanced diplomatic support for Israel contributes to chronic tensions between Arab citizens and their governments, which rely on Washington’s political and military support. . . . Washington’s total failure [at resolving the conflict] reflects its biased approach to the process, which favors Israeli perceptions over the equal rights of both sides. . . .
"A genuinely impartial mediation effort would quickly improve public perception of the U.S. throughout the Arab world. Polls have repeatedly shown that Arab public opinion has always judged the U.S. through the lens of how Washington deals with the Palestinian issue. . . .
"[M]any other tangible benefits would accrue to the region and the rest of the world by resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. For example, the grotesque modern legacy of Arab military rulers . . . who seized power by arguing that only their military rule could protect Arab states from Israeli threats and promote national development. Their decades in power drove Arab economies and political systems into the ground . . . . [and] contributed to a loss of popular faith in the performance and even the legitimacy of autocratic governments, which in turn contributed to the uprisings and civil wars of the past five years.
"The expansion of Israeli settlements fuels widespread Arab perceptions of Israel as an instrument of Western imperial and colonial power in the Middle East. . . . Islamist movements such as the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and Hezbollah have grown steadily over the past half-century, in part because of popular resentments against Arab governments’ failure to check the Israeli threat to Palestinian territories . . . ending it could improve relations on those fronts as well.
[Khouri concludes:] "It is not clear if Malley’s statement on the urgency of resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in order to defeat ISIL is a sign of White House policy or simply one knowledgeable man’s honest personal reflection. Hopefully, it’s both."
* * *
Please note that (1) Malley is a White House official and, we can presume, was reflecting its official position; and (2) he was speaking to two Israeli institutions, albeit liberal ones: the Israeli newspaper Haarez and the New Israel Fund. So he, and presumably the Obama administration, was not trying to hide this position from Netanyahu and his coalition.
Even if Malley was going beyond "official" White House policy, there is no doubt his point of view must be pretty well accepted within official discussions at the highest level. Otherwise, he would not still be in his position or allowed to speak to such a gathering from that position. Khouri, the author of the Al Jazeera article, obviously focuses on the Palestinian perspective and not the Israeli counter-perspective. But I do not believe that he is wrong in his arguments.
How refreshing it is to see President Obama unleashed from the shackles of political constraint he has had to endure for the past 7 years. Am I remembering the line right? "Freedom is just another word for having nothing left to lose."
Ralph
Even if Malley was going beyond "official" White House policy, there is no doubt his point of view must be pretty well accepted within official discussions at the highest level. Otherwise, he would not still be in his position or allowed to speak to such a gathering from that position. Khouri, the author of the Al Jazeera article, obviously focuses on the Palestinian perspective and not the Israeli counter-perspective. But I do not believe that he is wrong in his arguments.
How refreshing it is to see President Obama unleashed from the shackles of political constraint he has had to endure for the past 7 years. Am I remembering the line right? "Freedom is just another word for having nothing left to lose."
Ralph