Not long ago I watched the movie, “127 Hours”. It’s about an extreme outdoor athlete who, while out on a solo hike in the Arizona Desert, gets trapped in a canyon, his arm pinned by a boulder that fell while he was descending. It took him 127 hours to free himself. He did it by cutting his arm off at the elbow with a dull, Swiss Army knife!
Today, Obama called on renewed peace talks between the Palestinians and Israel, contingent on the premise that any settlement to the conflict will be based on the pre '67 borders, give or take necessary land swaps to encompass large Israeli cities on the other side of “the green line.” Apparently, Prime Minister Natanyahu angrily fought to have “pre '67 borders” stricken from Obama’s remarks, and one can only imagine the great cry of “foul play” or “betrayal” that will rise from the organized Jewish Community as soon as Obama’s speech is fully digested. I’m not a member of the Natanyahu fan club nor do I have much faith in the hawkish and in my opinion, often-thoughtless organized Jewish communal response regarding Israel. I do get one thing about their views – there is no reason to be optimistic about making peace with the Palestinians, or Syria. Look how quickly the “Arab Spring” has turned dark and foreboding. Without any tradition of civic engagement for the public good, without even a trace of history of benevolent rule let alone democracy, why would anyone expect much good to come from such chaos? The “Arab Spring” is an Israeli nightmare, which only strengthens its enemies, including Iran, who regularly vows to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. As for the Palestinians, in Gaza, they protested Bin Laden’s death; what great neighbors Israel has!
Nevertheless, I am 100% behind Obama’s remarks and this is why: time is not on Israel’s side. There is no viable alternative to the Two State solution for Israel. The Palestinians know this and now openly talk about a One State solution, which of course would be the end of the Jewish state. Even now they are working toward a unilateral proclamation of their independence, which will likely be recognized by the U.N., an Israeli diplomatic disaster. And, beyond the politics is the fact that the occupation, whether justified or not, is morally corrosive; even if Israel could maintain the status quo indefinitely, which it can not; the cost is too high.
Now you see why I started this blog with a recap of the movie “127 Hours”; it seems like an apt metaphor for the decisions Israel has to make; die trapped in a “twice narrow place” or risk cutting off a limb to save the rest of the body and soul.
I just read your blog and I would like to support your comments 100%. It may not be the ideal that we,as Jews, would wish for Israel, but I we no longer have the option to disagree! Time is definitely running out and I am very fearful for the future of our Jewish state.
ReplyDeleteThanks for stating your opinion. I always respect what you have to say (although I'm not good at responding!!)
I agree with the support of Obama's outline, with one exception: He said the issue of a Palestinian right of return can be put off until later. That seems unbalanced -- Obama is right to put pressure on Israel to swallow hard and give up something it really wants (at least as a starting point), and he should be equally clear with the Palestinians that some of what they want cannot remain in the mix (at least as a starting point).
ReplyDeleteWell said, George. I agree.
ReplyDeleteAlbert, I also agree with you that it would be nice to resolve the issue of a right of return now, but if there's a way to take that issue off the table permanently, I think it would be best. Obama's suggestion to put off the discussion, if acceptable to the Palestinians (and I find that highly unlikely), would be the way to do that.
George, I am pleased to see your conclusion, with which I completely agree. Your characterization of the "Arab Spring" might benefit from the passage of a bit of time. I doubt many of us comprehend the complexities involved, let alone the likely outcomes. In my view, it is hard to see the uprisings in the various countries as a bad thing--for their citizens, for the spread of democratic values, and ultimately even for Israel.
ReplyDeleteDavid B. Wolf
Your analogy is quite apt. Each side has to understand that, in order to get what is most important, one has to be willing to give up matters that are of lesser importance. What is most important to Israel is its security as a Jewish and democratic state. What is most important to the Palestinians is the establishment of an independent state. Within that context, issues such as borders, settlements, Arab right of return, East Jerusalem, etc., can be worked out.
ReplyDeleteDear friends,
ReplyDeleteI am inspired and encouraged to see the compassionate and responsible perspectives that George and all of you have posted. I pray that people of faith and humane wisdom on all sides of this conflict can steer themselves and their communities away from the death spirals into which militarists and dogmatists are dragging them.
Having spent considerable time in Israel over the past few years I have a different, although not unique, perspective. I agree that the ultimate resolution will be a two state entity but this is highly unlikely to occur in our lifetime.
ReplyDeletePresident Obama, albeit probably well-meaning, is at best naive. There are moderate Palestinians, but certainly in the minority. The bulk of the Palestinian population and their leadership do not have the primary goal of an independent state. Had this been the case it could have been accomplished on at least two prior occasions. The PLO (now Palestine National Authority), was created with the goal of obliterating Israel. Its ultimate objective is the total destruction of the Jewish state. They say this, teach this, and act towards this end, now aided and abetted by Hamas and its Iranian patron.
The outcome of Israel’s withdrawals from Gaza and southern Lebanon prove Netanyahu is right in his refusal to commit national suicide. The only time a viable peace has been possible was after it became advantageous for Egypt and Jordan to do so subsequent to repeated military defeats.
In 1967, the Arab Summit Conference declared "No peace, no recognition, no negotiations"; effectively, the Palestinian message remains so today