Extremist Opposes Arab Peace Initiative
Extremist Opposes Arab Peace Initiative
Presumably from a comfy chair somewhere safely out of the line of fire, Max Boot declares the 2002 Arab peace initiative to be “laughable“:
The plan, in case you’ve forgotten, calls on Israel to withdraw completely from the lands occupied in 1967, including East Jerusalem, returning to the lines of June 4 1967; to accept a mutually agreed just solution to the refugee problem according to the General Assembly resolution 194; and to recognize the independent state of Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital. In return, there would be an end to hostilities between Israel and all the Arab countries, and Israel would get full diplomatic and normal relations.
That this is not actually a solution to the Israeli-Arab dispute should be obvious to anyone with even a modicum of understanding of the region.
Apparently, among those who lack even Boot’s modicum of understanding of the region is Israeli President Shimon Peres, who has praised the plan as “a serious opening for real progress.” In a December interview with Middle East Bulletin, Peres explained that his interest in the plan is the result of “a study of the Initiative’s details and the realization that it presents Israel with a good opportunity that should not be missed.”
Arab colleagues told me explicitly: end the conflict with the Palestinians and get peace and normalization of relations with all of us. They don’t ask extra concessions of Israel, only that we end the conflict with the Palestinians, an end toward which we are working anyway, but they offer us extra benefits. [...]
Arab leaders think that ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would lead to comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace, which would in turn undermine extremists, end the regional turmoil and pave the way toward a different Middle East.
Among the extremists who would be undermined: Hamas, Hezbollah, neocons.
Ghaith al-Omary, a former adviser to Palestinian President Abbas and director of advocacy for the American Task Force on Palestine, wrote that “there is little doubt that the Initiative is a significant document.”
It provides symbolic incentives in the form of Arab and Islamic normalization with Israel, concrete security guarantees, as well as obvious political incentives (the first Israeli Prime Minister to visit a Gulf capital will go down in history.)
If nothing else, it represents a major departure in the Arab nations’ articulation of their understanding and definition of the conflict with Israel. It posits the conflict not as an existential one—as was defined in previous Arab League decisions, most notably the “three no’s” of the Khartoum summit—that can only be resolved by the destruction of Israel. Instead, it defines it as an issue that is related to the Israeli occupation: once that ends, hostility to and conflict with Israel end with it.
It’s pretty astounding how cavalierly Boot dismisses a plan that offers Israel full recognition by the 22 members of the Arab League. That seems like something an actual supporter of Israel would be in favor of.
4 Responses to “Extremist Opposes Arab Peace Initiative”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Wonk RoomContact Us
Donate
This offer has been on the table since 2002. It matches the essentials of the US and UN proposals. Iran has said it will accept any agreement the palestinians make. It doesn’t move because of opposition from AIPAC and American zionists.
January 26th, 2009 at 10:37 amThe number increases to 57 or 58 if you include the Member States of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, which has also supported the initiative. Of course some of these countries already have relations with Israel, but adding countries like Indonesia and Malaysia to the carrot side of the equation should be enticing.
January 27th, 2009 at 4:29 amMax Boot doesn’t give a rat’s ass about Israel or America. He only cares about making himself feel smart due to the insecurity he feels about his pathetic lack of understanding.
January 27th, 2009 at 10:01 amI really don’t see how any of this is relevent.
1) Shimon Peres is President not Prime Minister, in Israel that means he has no power.
2) Arafat, when he was still alive and head of the PA was offered an extremely similar deal by Israel through Prime Minister Barak and the Clinton administration (the deal did not include normalization of ties with other Arab countries to Israel.) Arafat rejected the deal. He went on Palestinian television at the same time as the talks and told Palestinians, in arabic, how Israel needs to be wiped off the map. Israel for its part, did not follow through with all the steps of Clinton’s plan. This is an ambiguous point however because Arafat violated the Clinton plan in a far more emphatic way.
3) Israel can make deals all day and all night with other Arab countries. There won’t be peace unless they can make a deal with the people they are fighting with; namely the PA and now Hamas. My opinion, and its just that… my opinion, Hamas under its current ideology will never recognize Israel’s existence, therefore at the moment, there is no possibility for hostilities to truly end or for the Palestinians to get a country.
War in this region will drag on and on until there is a strong non-extremist leadership in the Palestinian territories and an ideology of peace or coexistence or whatever just not what it is now. I know nothing about Mr. Boot, but I do believe that this Arab peace initiative is an exercise in futility unless you can replace Hamas and give Abbas some backbone.
February 5th, 2009 at 12:42 am