Since the
end of July, 2013, the US has attempted to broker what it calls a peace between
Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA). For this peace, Israel wants to be
recognized as the national home of the Jewish people.
The PA
rejects that recognition. It demands a ‘peace’. But it claims that recognizing
Israel as ‘Jewish’ would require it to rewrite its entire Arab narrative about ‘Palestine’.
Therefore, recognizing Israel as ‘Jewish’ is out of the question.
If you want
a state of your own, why should your neighbour’s self-identity matter to
you? Your goal should be that state, not
the neighbour’s self-identity.
Nobody asks
this question. Nobody
notices that Israel’s self-identity shouldn’t have any connection at all to Arab
statehood desires.
Nobody confronts this Arab intransigence. Nobody
asks the Arab for an explanation.Is everyone afraid to anger the Arab?
For a while,
the US remained silent about this issue. The Arabs kept restating how they
would not recognize Israel as Jewish—and the US continued to say nothing. Then,
on February 21, 2014, US Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro said something. He supported
Israel’s demand for recognition (“US Framework to Demand that PA Recognize
Israel as Jewish State”, Arutz Sheva).
Ambassador
Shapiro was quoted as saying that the PA ‘will be obligated’ to give Israel that
recognition (Arutz Sheva, ibid). The PA immediately rejected this
requirement. But the US did not back down. Recognizing Israel as the Jewish state,
Shapiro said, would be part of the ‘framework’ agreement the US was creating
for the two ‘peace partners’ to sign.
That angered
the PA. The PA became incensed. It repeated its demand: it would never
recognize Israel as a Jewish state (“Abbas Repeats Rejection of Israel as a
Jewish State”, Arutz Sheva, March 7, 2014).
Now, less than three weeks later, the US does
a flip-flop. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki now says that the “United
States believes there is no need for the Palestinian Authority (PA) to
recognize Israel as a Jewish state as part of a peace agreement” (“U.S.: No
Need for PA to Recognize Israel”, Arutz Sheva, March 9, 2014). Suddenly,
the US endorses the PA’s anti-Israel position.
We have seen
this anti-Israel flip-flop before. In August, 2013, as the current round of
peace talks were just beginning, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that
new building permits would be issued for new Jewish homes to be built over the
green line. Israel briefed Kerry about this announcement. His response was
clear: he had no objection to the new building because it did not affect areas
destined to be given over to the PA for their new state.
The PA didn’t
like Kerry’s silence over the new building permits. It got angry. It became incensed.
As a result
of that anger, Kerry changed his tune. Suddenly, those new building permits
weren’t okay.
Prompted by
the PA anger, Kerry made the anti-Israel declaration that “settlements at any
time, and not just during the peace process, were considered illegitimate by
the United States” (“Kerry admits Netanyahu said he'd be building in places
that don't affect 'peace map,' but lacks integrity to back Netanyahu”, Israel
Matzav, August 14, 2013).
Flip-flop is
not a strategy for a successful foreign policy. It’s a strategy for failure.
Would you
buy a used car from someone who flip-flops? Would you sign a peace agreement from
a broker who flip-flops against you?
Why would
you sign a peace agreement with someone who refuses to accept your identity?
Why would Israel
give to an enemy what belongs to the G-d of Israel?
No comments:
Post a Comment