Novak meets Hamas.
How astonishing. Even Robert Novak appears to have stumbled upon the fact that the Israelis have no real interest in a two state solution, although he comes to a different conclusion than the one staring him in the face.
During a recent visit to Israel he managed to obtain an interview with Naser al-Shaer, education minister and deputy prime minister in the new coalition government of the Palestinian Authority.Shaer signaled that the regime recognizes Israel's right to exist and forgoes violence - conditions essential for talks about a viable Palestinian state adjoining Israel - even if Hamas does not. "We hope that it is going to be a matter of time," Shaer told me. "But there is a big chance now."
When I asked whether Hamas agreed with Fayyad's formulation, Shaer said it did not matter: "We are talking about the government, not groups." He said Hamas was no more relevant to Palestinian policy than the views of extremist anti-Palestinian cabinet member Avigdor Lieberman are to Israeli policy. Unexpectedly, Shaer expressed dismay that "previous attempts at peace were ruined by suicide bombers. Now, we look forward to a sustained peace."
I asked to talk to Elliott Abrams, the deputy national security adviser who is most influential in policy on Israel. Abrams was once a fellow Cold Warrior and friend whom I have defended, but an aide let me know on Thursday that Abrams would not talk to me about Hamas. A senior State Department official also showed no interest in what Shaer said.His "Cold Warrior" friend had no interest in discussing anything concerning Hamas splutters Novak. I actually think there is something rather sweet about Novak's astonishment at this, it's almost as if he has actually believed that the Israelis are serious about finding peace and a two state solution to the Israel-Palestine crisis.
They've managed to avoid making peace for the last forty years and are certainly not going to be forced to do so just because the Palestinians are keen for this to happen.
He concludes:
While avoiding Israel-bashing, Shaer conjectured: "I don't think the Israeli government wants a two-state solution. Without pressure from the president of the United States, nothing is going to happen." That sounded like a plea for help from George W. Bush. But will he hear it if Elliott Abrams does not listen?Poor Mr Novak. He thinks that Elliot Abrams is holding George Bush back from stepping in and doing the right thing. He seems not to understand that the whole neo-con attitude towards the Palestinians was summed up best by Donald Rumsfeld's phrase, "The so-called Occupied Territories". These people are the US arm of the Likud Party, they see no essential difference between the US national interests and the interests of Israel. To them, they are both one and the same.
Indeed, their attitudes were noted by British Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw - who is himself Jewish - when he was dealing with Scooter Libby. Straw stated:
"On any given day it's a toss-up whether Libby is working for the Americans or the Israelis."To these people the interests of Israel are paramount, and if Israel is not interested in a two state solution that involves handing back settlements then neither are the neo-cons. And no matter what game they play publicly, their policy line remains tied to whatever the state of Israel wants.
However, although Novak has been incredibly naive in the conclusion he has reached, he has - at least - noticed the dichotomy and commented upon it. Were others to follow suit, then maybe the scales would begin to fall from the American public's eyes about the sheer level of disconnect between what they are told is their government's stance regarding the Middle East and what is actually the reality of that position.
When the government has to be duplicitous about it's position, I suspect it's because they know the US public would not actually approve of what they are doing.
Click title for Novak's article.
4 comments:
Even Robert Novak appears to have stumbled upon the fact that the Israelis have no real interest in a two state solution
What fact? You have produced know evidence of any fact. You highlight a representative of the Palestinian Authority statnig that he doesn't think Israel is interested in a two-state solution, but of course he would say that. Not addressed is their continued insitance on the so-called "right-of-return", which can never happen if Israel wants to remain a Jewish state.
However, although Novak has been incredibly naive in the conclusion he has reached
In what way has Novak been "incredivly naive in the conclusion he has reached"?
I could be mistaken but I get the impression from this piece that you are assuming the overwhelming support for Israel is mostly from "neo-cons". Of course, that would be far from true. A February 2006 Gallup Poll (not that I put much faith in polls, but you seem to) had the US public opinion on the PA at 11% favorable and 78% unfavorable. I know, that seems odd that we don't care much for people who kill our citizens and danced around like a bunch of savages when the towers collapsed, but I guess polls don't lie.
In what way has Novak been "incredivly naive in the conclusion he has reached"?
I could be mistaken but I get the impression from this piece that you are assuming the overwhelming support for Israel is mostly from "neo-cons".
Novak is naive because he appears, as I said in the piece, to assume that Bush would intervene if only Abrams was not withholding information.
And again, as I said in the piece, American support for Israel is very strong across the board, but the fact that the government has to be duplicitous about it's position makes me think that they know this support would not be as strong if the public actually knew what it is that they are supporting.
Kel,
Thanks for this article. I am resuming blogging after a short recess and I am going to link to this one and to the video on orientalism. This is very Interesting stuff and I am glad that even some Bush supporters are starting to see fractures in the neocon illogical attitude toward the israeli palestinian conflict.
This is a murderous and dangerous attitude.
Welcome back Sophia!
Post a Comment