Life After Bush:
Forecasting Peace in Palestine
By Ramzy Baroud
ccun.org, October 4, 2008
President Bush sounded much less uncertain of his peace "vision" when he
received Palestinian Authority's Mahmoud Abbas in Washington on Sept.
25. Certainly much has changed since the Nov. 2007 conference in
Annapolis, Maryland, where Bush and his secretary of state Condoleezza
Rice exhorted that a Palestinian state can only be created through
moderate forces, thus designated Hamas and other Palestinian groups as
enemies of peace. They marked the end of 2008 as the deadline for an
agreement to create that state.
If the last 10 months were a lesson, it was that neither the Bush
administration is ready to abandon its pro-Israel position — which has
jeopardized any real chance at true peacemaking — nor is the Israeli
government under Ehud Olmert ready or willing to advance the cause of
peace. It also became obvious that Abbas is hopelessly ineffectual in
exercising any pressure, or holding any leverage to determine the speed
or direction of peace negotiations with Israel. This, once again,
reinforces the belief that the re-launch of peace talks under American
auspices was a strategic choice pertinent to isolating Hamas following
its election victory in Jan. 2006, and its clash with Fateh in the
summer of last year.
Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat reportedly conveyed Bush's pledge to
Abbas, made "behind closed doors", according to AFP, "that if a
Palestinian state does not come about during his presidency, it will
happen in the near future, not more than a year."
If true, this would be the first indication that the end of the 2008
deadline is being abandoned as unrealistic and unfeasible. But can a
truly viable and just peace agreement be achieved "not more than a year"
following Bush's departure?
There are no indications that a Barack Obama presidency with Joe Biden
as vice president, or John McCain's along with Sarah Palin will make a
measurable difference if compared to the 8-years of Bush-Cheney
leadership. The marked difference between the latter and the formers,
however, is that Bush disowned the peace process altogether in his early
years in office. The next president is likely to avoid such a
miscalculation.
Various factors contributed to Bush's reluctant return to his
self-declared role as a peace broker. One was the death of PA Chairman
Yasser Arafat, and another was the need to create distraction from the
Iraq fiasco. Abbas was recreated to present the antithesis of Arafat and
enjoy the legitimacy of a statesman. He was further bolstered following
the political rise of Hamas, whose existence was presented as the only
obstacle to the peace process.
But will Obama-Biden, or McCain-Palin approach the Middle East's
toughest conflict differently, especially as Israel is itself being
shaped by a seemingly major political reformation with the advent of
Tzipi Livni as Israel's next prime minister?
Presuming that Livni's Kadima party victory on Sept. 18 will yield a
stable government or coalition that would keep her at the helm, one
finds it difficult to believe that any combination of future Israeli-US
administrations will bring about a satisfactory peace agreement between
Palestinians and Israelis. This is not an outcome of sheer pessimism or
even empirical review of history, but simply because none of the names
above has exhibited any promising signs of change.
Obama's grovelling to Israel at the recent American-Israeli Public
Action Committee's conference and his increasingly hawkish foreign
policy stances — consistent with the expectations of Israel and its
friends — was meant to "assure" Israel and its backers that Obama's
Muslim's middle name will not interfere with the "historic
responsibility" every US administration is obliged to feel towards
Israel. His devastating comments declaring Jerusalem as the "undivided
capital of Israel" was a violation, not only of international law, but
of the US's own foreign policy. Obama's choice of Senator Joe Biden, a
devout "friend of Israel" — who tenaciously declared in an interview
with Jewish-American cable network, Shalom TV, "I am a Zionist." — was
meant as further pledge that his love for Israel is unmatched, undying.
Nonetheless, the Obama-Biden ticket is faced with real competition, a
McCain-Palin line-up, who represent an ideal manifestation of everything
that compels many Americans to stand for Israel, right or wrong: one is
a hawkish militant, and the other is a religious extremist. It's this
mix of militancy — McCain is willing to stay in Iraq as long as it
takes, and bomb Iran at a whim — and religious zeal — Palin comprehends
world affairs in biblical terms, and the Iraq war as a mission from God
— that Israel and its Washington backers find particularly comforting;
this mind-set guarantees unqualified support for Israel's occupation and
war adventures in the ME, and ignites the passion, thus political and
financial support, for Israel among a growing constituency of Christian
Zionists.
Whomever will be chosen to dwell in the White House is likely to
maintain the "special relationship" between his country and Israel. If
they were to differ on any thing it would be on the type of symbolism
that would accompany the tangible support. A McCain presidency is likely
to infuse more religious characterizations of the US-Israeli rapport and
continue to champion the Israeli cause separate from the UN and the EU.
An Obama administration will likely emphasize the need to enlist the
support of the international community, but only to maintain the
existing regime of unconditional support for Israel, which often means
the isolation and targeting of Israel's enemies.
A similar assertion can be made regarding Israel. Regardless of whether
Livni managed to prevail over Israel's stormy politics and shaky
coalitions, or Likud opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu managed to
snatch a win in possible general elections, the outcome is likely to
remain the same as far as the peace process is concerned. Livni would
likely maintain the charade of a peace process to no particular end:
maintaining the illusion of peace making, but never a real peace.
Netanyahu is likely to stall, delay and postpone his dealings with
Palestinians, to please his more hawkish supporters; different
approaches, same outcome.
Similarly, Livni will exploit the unconditional US support of Israel,
and whatever agenda she will find suitable for her country's "security"
needs. A worldly Livni with experience in foreign policy and
international espionage is likely to present a better match with an
Obama-Biden administration. Livni is an intelligent, shrewd, and
calculating rightwing politician with reasonable foreign policy
experience. She would certainly struggle to explain Israel's war and
regime change doctrine — the original Bush Doctrine — to Palin who has
repeatedly proved to be clueless in foreign policy matters, and much
else.
There are no signs that change, true change, is coming, regardless of
who wins the White House and regardless of who rules Israel. The fact
remains that the relationship that governs the US-Israeli love affair is
much more convoluted, deep-rooted, and institutionalized to be affected
by the exit of one man and the advent of another.
-Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net)
is an author and editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His work has been
published in many newspapers and journals worldwide. His latest book is
The Second Palestinian Intifada: A Chronicle of a People's Struggle
(Pluto Press, London).
Fair Use
Notice
This site contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this
constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for
in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.
Section 107, the material on this site is
distributed without profit to those
who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information
for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.