Outgoing P.M. Ehud Olmert is telling a leading Israeli paper that Israel has to withdraw from almost the entire Occupied Territories if it wants to save itself from the crisis it is now in. From the Times' Ethan Bronner, this morning:
“What I am saying to you now has not been said by any Israeli leader
before me,” Mr. Olmert told Yediot Aharonot newspaper in the interview
to mark the Jewish new year.. “The time has come to say these things.”
He said
traditional Israeli defense strategists had learned nothing from past
experiences and seemed stuck in the considerations of the 1948
Independence War. “With them, it is all about tanks and land
and controlling territories and controlled territories and this hilltop
and that hilltop,” he said. “All these things are worthless.” [Ravishing]
a senior Palestinian official, told Palestinian Radio that it would
have been better if Mr. Olmert had taken this position while in office
rather than while leaving it and that Mr. Olmert had not yet presented
a detailed plan for a border between Israel and a Palestinian state.
Two comments: The idea that the generals control Israeli policy is familiar to the left wing, and is the theme of Michael Desch's great chapter on Israel in his new book Power and Military Effectiviness. You think it's a democracy re military policy, it's not. A clutch of generals runs the show. Sharon wanted the Big Plan for Lebanon when the government said it wanted the Little Plan. Who won that policy decision?
Second, per Rabbo, why is it that Israeli Prime Ministers and American Presidents only get around to the truth about Israel/Palestine at the end of their presidencies? Because our politics are broken by the lobby here and theirs by the structural weaknesses of their democracy, and probably by the lobby too. Who knows. There's complete corruption of the discourse and no one can even say the word, Jerusalem, there or here. And look at the achievement here of the CFR, Brookings, Yivo, the New York Times, the New Yorker: minimal intellectual leadership (at least Remnick and Bronner are ringing the alarm clock).
What you need is guys like Gilad Atzmon and Shlomo Sand questioning the Jewish "biblical" and "genetic" claim on Jerusalem, to move this conversation forward. Please. (And thanks to Hannah Rappleye.)
"almost the entire Occupied Territories" is often interpreted to mean keeping all the settlements around Jerusalem. So there's nothing new here, really.
And the settlements aren't put up by generals, but by more-or-less free-lance bigots, of whom there seem to be an unending supply.
I hope this is just pandering and that Palin left out the word "other."
"President Peres of Israel yesterday met for the first time with Governor Palin and with Senator McCain, who called the veteran Israeli statesman "my old friend." The warm handshake and exchange of broad smiles occurred during an international gathering known as the Clinton Global Initiative, hosted by President Clinton. "I wanted to meet you for many years," Ms. Palin told Mr. Peres, according to an aide to the president. "The only flag at my office is an Israeli flag," she was quoted as saying, "and I want you to know and I want Israelis to know that I am a friend.""
http://www.nysun.com/national/palin-only-flag-in-my-office-is-israeli/86671/
The reason that the Israel/Palestine peace efforts are consistently delayed by live politicians, is that the problem is KNOTTY, and risks consuming all of the executive's political capital.
For example, to rant that Obama wouldn't spend his first six months on Israel/Palestine would be a ludicrous insistence, given the larger issues that are primary.
Palestinians play into the wrong side of this. If Palestinians were to offer big carrots to prospective Israeli politicians, that they could make into a successful strategy, they would do much better.
What is happening now, is that prominent PA officials are threatening joint intifada with Hamas if peace is not adopted. That puts the Israeli politicians immediately into paranoia gear.
It immediately requires defense, rather than reconciliation.
Now is the time for Palestine to promise to reward sincere efforts by a subsequent administration, not to threaten.
"Palestinian play on the wrong side of this. If Palestinians were to offer big carrots to prospective Israeli politicians, that they could make into successfull strategy, they would do much better.".
Richard, this is truly an universal truth. I can see exact parallels in American-Russian politics.
Americans play on the wrong side in this. If Americans were to offer big carrots (? like free gift of Alaska, maybe?) to prospective Russian politicians, that Russians, could make into successful strategy (like acquiring american land one state at the time maybe), Americans would do much better.
Your logic is impeccable.
The logic of resistance only appeals to anger.
In contrast, it WILL affect the Israeli vote, and if they are scared (which a threat of third intifada will do), they will elect Likud.
If you think that there is no difference between Likud and Kadima or Labor, then you are in the ozone.
NOONE in Likud regards the Palestinians as anything more than mosquitos.
Olmert has had the balls to state that "the idea of Greater Israel is dead", and that "Palestinians are human beings deserving a decent life."
Why should Palestinians concern themselves with Israeli politics, if they have no vote, and no say, and all Israeli political permutations have resulted in increased territorial encroachment, ever increasing daily humiliations, and progressive apartheid?
Your advice reminds me of old catholic advise to battered women: "God has a plan for you, just submit to your husband in humility and have faith in sanctity of marriage".
So the cherished light to the world reveals that you need balls to declare in public that the Palestinians are humans deserving a decent life?