The Narrative I’m not Seeing – Why European Offers of Peace Seem Strange
Ok so like I said earlier I’m not really writing blogs anymore, I am writing something larger but I do feel the need to write this because there is something I’m seeing, but am not reading, perhaps I am mistaken but I think the conclusions are pretty evident, perhaps I am wrong.
So first, this does require some extra reading, yes, reading, sorry, I know how frustrating that is but if you have a spare couple minutes I think it’s worth the read.
Today I read: (14.6.2011)
Berlusconi offers to host Mideast peace talks in Sicily (full article link below)
http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=224804
“ROME – Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi offered to take personal steps to help restart stalled peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians, telling Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in Rome on Monday that he would be willing to host negotiations in Sicily.
In a press conference of the two leaders following a meeting that both sides said went well, Berlusconi reiterated his opposition to UN recognition of a Palestinian state at the General Assembly session in September.”
Then today: (14.6.2011)
EU pushing peace plan based on Obama's '1967 borders' speech (full article link below)
“Ashton's (EU's foreign policy chief) letter was coordinated with the governments of France, Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain, a senior European diplomat said. The diplomat added that the Americans had rejected the French peace initiative, but EU countries had decided that the U.S. needed to be pushed to advance a peace plan that would head off the Palestinian effort to secure recognition of an independent state at the UN in September.
Secretary of State Clinton and the U.S. administration are not enamored of Ashton's initiative at this point, a senior European diplomat has told Haaretz, adding that the Americans are losing precious time in which to attempt to stop the Palestinians' UN plans for September.
The Americans prefer to secure Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's support for renewed negotiations with the Palestinians, based on the Obama State Department address. However, Netanyahu is not expected to respond positively to that suggestion when he meets U.S. Special Envoy for Middle East Peace, David Hale, who arrives in Israel tomorrow.”
Now something struck me as strange, I remember reading this last week:
Haaretz exclusive: Secret cables show Israel's battle plan over Palestinian UN bid:
- Published 10.06.11
Israel has started mobilizing its embassies for the battle against UN recognition of a Palestinian state in September, ordering its diplomats to convey that this would delegitimize Israel and foil any chance for future peace talks.
"The goal we have set is to have the maximum number of countries oppose the process of having the UN recognize a Palestinian state," Barak wrote to Israel's ambassadors in his cable, which was sent June 2. "The Palestinian effort must be referred to as a process that erodes the legitimacy of the State of Israel...
"The primary argument is that by pursuing this process in the UN, the Palestinians are trying to achieve their aims in a manner other than negotiations with Israel, and this violates the principle that the only route to resolving the conflict is through bilateral negotiations."
"The goal is to get the country in which you serve to vote against recognizing a Palestinian state," Barak wrote. "Your plan must include approaching the most senior politicians, mobilizing the relevant force multipliers [such as local Jewish communities, nongovernmental organizations], using the media, influencing local public opinion, and public diplomacy aimed at all the relevant communities."
Don’t these statements from foreign officials in the highest of offices, sound like the stated aims of a clear propaganda campaign?
What is worrying here is where this leads next.
If the Palestinians do not accept these calls for talks, they are ‘stalling the peace process’. Do not be surprised if that is the narrative that is taken, that is repeated consistently from most ‘pundits’ and ‘middle east experts’ (rarely, if ever Palestinian, of course).
Now, were the calls for peace genuine, the ‘commitment to resumption of the peace process’ sincere, we could accept that. However when you consider this in light of recent events with regard to peace talks will it be any wonder that the Palestinians do not accept?
Just a quick summary: (if you want references, read the Guardian, London independent, Al Jazeera or Haaretz for the timeline references)
· Obama Govt. sponsors peace talks with Palestinian Authority and Israel
· Talks fall over when freeze on illegal Israeli settlement building (settlements which are illegal under international law on what is recognised as ‘Palestinian territory’) ends and Israel refuse to extend the freeze.
· Obama Govt. offers 4 billion in military and financial aid to Israel in exchange for a temporary 30 day settlement freeze with NO ONUS to ever freeze settlement building again
· Israel refuse
· Talks end
· Al Jazeera release Palestine paper: leaked documents show Palestinian Authority willing to compromise further than publicly shown including huge concessions before unheard of to an unwilling Israeli government.
· Israel has announced the building of 1000’s more dwellings for settlers in illegal settlements and extensions to settlements.
Now when one considers how often these Peace talks were used to legitimise (Oslo, Camp David) more land grabs in the form of illegal settlement building I do not think it is surprising if the Palestinians spurn these half hearted attempts at Peace.
Rightfully so, where was the EU pressure during Operation Cast Lead? Why has Berlusconi not spoken clearer during the US sponsored talks?
I too would think this most certainly a case of too little too late.
That is under the presumption that the intentions are honest, when past experience shows that most of the time the peace talks have been used to maintain status quo.
Palestinians occupied, settlements unabated and so it goes. With some pandering words to ‘peace’ and ‘viable two state solutions’ (of course) but very little in the form of action or reform.
So this leaves me with the question, why is Israel and the United States so scared of Palestinian recognition by the UN?
If a precursor to Palestinians being “viable partners for peace” is being their recognition of the State of Israel, how about the Palestinians, after entering into peace talks after peace talks, get a bit of recognition for a change?
But the question remains, why are they so scared of UN recognition of the Palestinian state? Might be that change thing Obama was talking about.
But after Binyamin Netanyahu gets over 55 standing ovations in congress ‘more than the average Baath party congress in Damascus’ (as Robert Fisk wrote) for directly defying their President’s wishes, and US elections around the corner, I seriously doubt it.
No comments:
Post a Comment