Israeli-Palestinian Peace Talks

First, please see my thoughts from earlier this month on why conservatives should support the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

Peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority will commence in Washington DC later today. Though many were suspicious of John Kerry's pursuit of these talks, their occurrence proves that peace is always a worthy pursuit. Of course, the negotiations face many challenges. President Abbas remains handicapped by a Hamas governing authority in Gaza which continues to reject Israel's right to exist. Prime Minister Netanyahu leads a coalition which, at least in part, is made up of politicians who see no merit in the peace process. Charismatic newcomer, Naftali Bennett, provides one such example. However, regardless of the difficulty, peace is certainly worth a try. Ultimately, following yesterday's referendum approval, Israelis will have to grant assent to a final deal. In this sense, there's no harm in talking.

             As the parties meet in DC, much of the negotiations will focus on the seemingly intractable issues - the future of Jerusalem and the prospective contours of the West Bank. Yet, Netanyahu's decision to release over a hundred Palestinian prisoners illustrates his commitment to the serious pursuit of peace. Some have suggested that Netanyahu is playing a game here - doing just enough to satisfy the US, but in reality, unwilling to make major sacrifices for peace. I disagree. Netanyahu is no game player. Israelis know that and they trust him for it. Releasing the prisoners was a bold and courageous move and one for which Netanyahu is already paying a significant political price. Now President Abbas will have to meet the Israeli leader's endeavor with his own courage. From here on in, reciprocity will be key.

As I argued in The Guardian a few weeks back, John Kerry deserves much credit for his role in making this meeting happen. While it's likely that the days ahead will bring many criticisms, this effort is nonetheless deserving of support.

For a selection of my other thoughts on Middle Eastern related security issues, please click here.

Conservatives should support the Israeli-Palestinian peace process

Speaking on Fox News yesterday, Rush Limbaugh declared that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be resolved only when ''one side surrendered''; for Limbaugh at least, Kerry's peace efforts are a waste of time. I strongly disagree with this assessment. Instead, I think there are four important reasons why the pursuit of peace deserves the support of American conservatives.

1) National Security - Resolving this conflict is a critical interest of American national security. The continued suffering of the Palestinian people (both real and perceived) feeds anti-American extremism around the world and in so, helps to weaken the position of regional pro-American moderates like President Abbas. Islamic extremists thrive in the well of absent justice. As numerous national security officials have stated, a durable peace deal would serve American interests in crucial ways. This isn't left wing hyperbole, rather it's the analysis of top military thinkers like Gen. Petraeus. 

Those who argue in implicit support for perpetual conflict are either willfully delusional or poorly informed. Or both.

2) Diplomacy - The US Secretary of State's primary responsibility is to advance the cause of American diplomacy. Peace building efforts have always been a central component of this effort. Let's cut the BS. There's simply no reason why the US Government cannot manage the Egyptian crisis whilst also advancing the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Since when have conservatives favored an America that seeks only to manage events, rather than taking an active, positive stake in shaping them? If we believe in global leadership our global efforts cannot exist in a 9-5 mentality.

3) Legitimacy - In another regard, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict plays an intimate role in shaping delusional understandings of both America and Israel. These false conceptions of truth serve to weaken our voice in the Islamic world and beyond. A durable peace deal would empower the US with a newly perceived legitimacy on a range of other diplomatic issues - engendering further co-operation on counter-terrorism for example. Our influence would grow.

4) Israel - American conservatives (myself included) have always regarded Israel as an important ally. But we do no service to our friends if we lack the courage of boldness. Again, the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would greatly advance the interests of the Israeli people. From trade to security, peace would empower Israeli society. Though some like to claim that Israel's security wall has won the Israeli people a secure future, the facts speak to another reality. For years, successive Israeli Prime Ministers (including Netanyahu) have entertained serious compromises in pursuit of peace. They recognize that a lasting deal is crucial for Israel's security.

Conclusion

Let me be clear, I'm not advocating that Israel make all the concessions - Palestinian reciprocity must be equally forthcoming and energetic (and Palestinian recognition of Israel's Jewish existence is obviously non-negotiable). Nor am I blind to the nature of Israel's enemies - Hamas are anti-Semitic totalitarians and the Lebanese Hizballah are anti-democratic thugs. These enemies will not cease to exist when a peace deal is eventually signed. However, they will be weakened. 

In the end, I firmly believe that by using the existing negotiating templates of Camp David 2000 and Olmert 2008 (which have addressed numerous issues of contention: right of return, West Bank, water etc.), a just peace is reachable. Peace is always a noble ambition worthy of our support.

 

Hezbollah scared, Arabs annoying posh London, Bombing in Iraq, Israel West Bank operation, Chicago violence

1) Hizballah is freaking out because their buddy Assad is screwed. By allying themselves with his regime, Hizballah is suffering serious damage to their brand. IE - The group is suffering from a profound degradation of their carefully cultivated (albeit false) image as a cross-sectarian liberation force. Nasrallah understands that when Assad falls, Hizballah will not only have lost a key ally, by supporting his brutal crackdown, the group will be politically weakened in Lebanon and beyond. I expect that Hizballah will attempt to increase tensions with Israel in 2013, in an attempt to reconstruct their 'defender' image. Regardless, in the long term I believe that the organization will share Assad's fate. By using murder and intimidation as primary political tools and by supporting authoritarians who deny basic freedoms to their people, Hizballah will find it increasingly difficult to win legitimacy and corresponding popular support. True, Hizballah retains strong sympathy among poor Lebanese Shia, but in order to maintain its considerable power base the group must attract a wider base of interest.

2) Posh Londoners are upset because Arab playboys are driving super cars late at night. Although the noise might be annoying, I'm going to venture that these visitors make a rather positive contribution to the UK's economy. But I guess its a question of priorities - posh Londoners getting relaxing sleep, or poorer Londoners having jobs (in the clubs, bars, restaurants and stores that the playboys visit)... Ah the complexities of the British class system!

3) Around twenty people were killed in an explosion in Iraq today. The cause - a terrorist attack that was probably conducted by the Islamic State of Iraq. This organization is attempting to ignite sectarian war in the country. An ISI strategy that has elevated in momentum over the past year. As I argued back in July, the US must provide the Iraqi Government with the intelligence support that it may need in order to confront the terrorists. We must not allow extremists to erase the security successes that our military worked so hard to achieve in Iraq. Having said this, we also need to pressure PM Maliki to build cross-sectarian consensus in his country.

4) Chicago is suffering the impact of a terrible gang war. As in many American inner cities, the Democrats have failed Chicago. Conservatives can and should re-engage with these citizens to offer solutions.

5) Unless the Israelis were A) seriously concerned about leaks, or B) had imminent actionable intelligence, their raid on a West Bank apartment was a serious error. These kind of actions make President Abbas look weak and delegitimize his leadership in the eyes of Palestinian voters. The Israelis should be working to empower Abbas and isolate HAMAS, not vice versa.

Tom Rogan Thinks..

1) Failed Taliban attack on US diplomatic convoy - http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/21/world/asia/21pakistan.html?hp It makes my day when the Taliban/friends blow up one of their own people with no other casualties. All time favorite - the body cavity bomber - http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/31/ibrahim-hassan-al-asiri-bombmaking-suspect


2) Libya is the definition of mission creep http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/21/world/africa/21libya.html?hp. I didn't support US involvement in the intervention, but now that we are committed we have to bring the conflict to resolution.


3) This will be great http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/13466915.stm
Some of Di Canio's 'finest' moments -


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWdf5ZLbtYo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw0kgk2qkDc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TFVuHrwgyY


4) Roddick saving his energy for one last attempt at Wimbledon - http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/french11/news/story?id=6567324