While the United States continues to insist, at least in public, that we are committed to a two-state solution and that that is a viable option, in reality that window has long since closed. Thing is, Im beginning to believe that the Obama administration knows that, and is simply allowing the alliance to run on momentum while, behind the scenes, far more interesting developments are at work, suggesting how the Middle East is changing. Even though I think a one-state solution is the best remedy, I wonder if Israel has not pushed too far for even that (and if uncritical supporters of Israel realize what kind of incredible damage the country has done to its security). Unsurprisingly, Israels stock in the Middle East and much of the planet is at a terrific low, and more likely than not the country will face increased attack, in coming years, by non-state actors, complicating the countrys security posture. And the most recent war on Gaza proves one thing: Israel cannot defeat non-state actors. Indeed, considering that Israel has penned in the Gazans, put them under blockade, and repeatedly invades their territory and bombards their infrastructure (and citizenry, rather indiscriminately), Israel has no real answer to Gaza. The ideal answer is clear: Israel wishes Gaza, like the Palestinians, could simply disappear. But while Israel dithers, trying not to confront reality--there is a Palestinian people, and theyre not going away--things are changing. What is Israels answer to the inevitable development of militant movements with whom it has no chance of negotiation, no hope of blockade, movements formed of people whove emerged from years of violence, trauma, and dislocation, and will not be easily intimidated, if at all. They fought Soviets, Americans, and each other, for years, and simply do not care. Since the government of Israel has to pound Gaza every few years, without accomplishing much beyond the deaths of large numbers of civilians, how will Israel deal with extremist groups with far greater range of operation? ISIS is, for example, the clear result of an evolution in extremism, as non-state actors learn, become more sophisticated, tactically savvy, and strategically brutal. They might be evil, but theyre all the more dangerous for their increased sophistication. One day, there will emerge such a movement that will, in the manner of Salah ad-Din, try to organize the regions different peoples through a clear and obvious external opponent. Why fight Sunnah and Shia, they will say, when we can fight Israel? And so he will rally fighters from across ethnic, sectarian and national boundaries. And at that point, Israel will suffer a restive internal population nearly equal its own, and an extremist movement without. While Israel is, without a doubt, the more powerful party right now, especially against the occupied Palestinians, this is not in my mind sustainable. In fact, American rhetoric is duplicitous. Even while Obama supports and arms Israel, our country is trying to revive a relationship with Iran. A neutral observer can only guess what that means: Americas beginning to rethink how it relates to the region. If you step away from what is happening right now, and consider how this may play out in years to come, you would realize that the people who are doing the most harm to Israel are not Hamas, with its indiscriminate attempts to target civilians, largely impotent (but still immoral), but the people who unquestioningly support Israel and endorse her policies, who seem to think that the status quo is somehow going to last, and that the implosion of the Middle East will somehow pass Israel by. That includes the Obama administration, and much of our clueless media. These are not friends of Palestine, but they are not, by any measure, friends of Israel, either.
Posted on: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 01:30:15 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015