PAGE 7
NORTH COAST TIMES E A G L E , JULY 2002
CAN THE
MIDEAST
STALEMATE
BE RESOLVED?
BY DAVID A. HOROWITZ
Now that news headlines have temporarily strayed from
the deadly casualties of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, a persist
ent stalemate remains, paralyzing hopes for both a stable peace
and a creditable U.S. posture in the region. The resolution
recently passed by Israel’s Likud party, which rejected eventual
acceptance of a Palestinian state, implies an Israel intent to
maintain virtual dominance over the occupied territories in the
West Bank and Gaza. Although Prime Minister Ariel Sharon
argued against the measure, his insistence that a limited Pales-
tinan state be formed only after ten to twenty years of peaceful
coexistence is not much different in spirit.
As housing minister in the 1980s, Sharon devised the
use of Jewish settlements as a guarantee that Israel would
never cede authority to a West Bank state with continuous
territory. Positioning himself as the foremost opponent of the
Oslo Peace Process, he used the occasion of his election in
2001 to declare that he would seek only interim agreements
with the Palestinian Authority. Sharon carefully pointed out
that the great bulk of the settlements (comprising well over
200,000 people) and the status of East Jerusalem never would
be negotiated Once President Bush initiated the war against
terrorism, the former general sought to frame Israel military
actions within the rhetoric emanating from Washington.
Intent on scoring political points with Republican
nationalists, white southern evangelicals, and some Jewish
voters, and seeking a strategic consistency to the War on
Terrorism, the Bush White House has been unable to extricate
itself from the rhetorical trap which Sharon set for it. Therefore,
despite Washington’s interest in placating Arab allies in the oil
rich Mideast, thereby reducing opposition to its proposed war
on Iraq, Bush has not had the political will to effectively restrain
Israel’s use of force in the occupied territories or to press the
Israelis to engage in a meaningful political track in negotiations.
He and Secretary of State Colin Powell have preferred instead
to lecture Yasser Arafat and regional Arab nations on the need
to denounce Palestinian terrorism and violence.
The implications of the Bush/Sharon Axis have been
utterly disastrous for the Palestinian people and their national
movement. The Occupation’s mass arrests, employment of
lethal force against demonstrators, targeted assassinations,
house demolitions and restrictions on everyday movement have
now been surpassed by outright assaults on Palestinian villages,
town and refugee camps. Operation Defensive Shield’ not only
wrought physical destruction upon schools, mosques, factories,
media outlets and government facilities, but systematically
eradicated the vital data banks of nearly every private and
public institution in Palestinian society. Despite outcry from the
Arab and Islamic street, Europe, and the international commun
ity, there appears to be little movement toward a political settle
ment
VAN DUSEN BEVERAGES
ASTORIA, OREGON
325-2362
Ironically, the “Saudi" two-state solution already has
been endorsed in resolutions of the United Nations Security
Council, the European Union and the Arab League. Even
President Bush, as well as 52% of the Israeli public, have
demonstrated support for the plan’s basic framework. Yet
the Palestinian national movement has no viable strategy
for implementing the two-state fix. Certainly there is no chance
of a military outcome imposed by regional Arab and Islamic
states or by guerrilla warfare from within, and only a remote
although potentially effective chance the Saudis and others
would resort to the “oil weapon.” Therefore, a negotiated peace
likely would require Israel and Palestinian agreement to terms
set by the United States.
Yet there are two serious impediments to such a deal.
First, nothing will compel the Israelis to make peace with those
who appear to be striking at the very existence of their state
through suicide bombings against civilians inside the Green
Line. However Sharon exploits the situation, Israeli soldiers
insist they are defending “their home” when they strike at the
“terrorist infrastructure” in the occupied territories. An Israeli
public sensitive to the Holocaust’s legacy of anti-Semitic
violence strongly supports them on this account. Second,
the Bush administration will not desert the logic of the War on
Terrorism by allowing the Israelis to face the kind of civilian
atrocities against which the entire weight of U.S. foreign policy
is now deployed, a position the American public and media
strongly support for understandable reasons.
If the Palestinian cause is to achieve its goal of a viable
state, it must take control of a narrative that focuses on the
illegal and oppressive occupation of its lands by an Israeli state
wedded to the defense of Jewish settlements. Indiscriminate
(and ineffective) use of weaponry plays into Israel’s hands by
providing justification for a response in which the dominant
power sets the terms of engagement. If Sharon has hijacked
George Bush's War on Terrorism, the Palestinian national
movement has been lost to extremist Islamists and suicide
bombers adamantly opposed to Israel's existence and to any
negotiations with the Jewish state.
In tactical terms, the Palestinian resistance must
abandon attacks on Israeli civilians, even in the settlements,
and focus on the unjust Occupation through a people’s mass
movement relying on nonviolent protest. Only then can the
powerful United States be forced to honor its commitments to
universal human rights and self-determination by persuading its
Israeli ally and benefactor to serve regional stability by recogniz
ing a Palestinian state committed to secure and safe borders
with its neighbor.
David Horowitz is a professor of U.S. Cultural & 20th
Century History at Portland State University and a frequent
commentator on the U.S. role in the Middle East. He is also
a professor of the jazz piano.
AT WAR WITH OURSELVES
When President Bush gave the order to attack Iraq
in 1991, many of us suffered. I was at Plum Village giving
a lecture, and in the middle of a sentence I suddenly said,
“I don’t think I will go to America this spring. I really don’t want
to go there now.’’ That afternoon, a number of students from
North America told me that because I felt that way, I should
go. They reminded me that many Americans also suffered
when the President gave the order to attack.
I understood that President Bush was trying in his
way to serve his people Early in the conflict he instituted an
embargo but he became impatient and suddenly was inevitable.
When he ordered the ground attack and said, “God Bless
America," I knew he needed our help.
We have to find a way to tell the President that God
cannot bless one country against another. He must learn to pray
better than that But we should not think that by electing another
President, the situation will be transformed. If we want a better
government, we have to begin by transforming the greed and
violence in ourselves and working to transform society
Look at the 500,000 men and women from America
and the West and the one million Iraqi soldiers who spent
months waiting for the land offensive to begin They had to
practice killing day and night in order to prepare They wore
helmets, jumped and yelled, and plunged their bayonets into
sandbags representing enemy soldiers. They had to become
inhuman to learn to kill During the night they did the same in
their dreams. This is the practice of war — one and a half million
men and women practicing fear and violence for many months.
Then the war came The actual killing was massive, and
we called it a victory When the 500,000 troops returned home,
they were deeply wounded from practicing so much violence.
For several generations, millions of their children and grand
children will inherit those seeds of suffering. How can we call
that a victory?
Eighty percent of the American people supported the
Gulf War and called it clean and moral They do not understand
the true nature of war The Gulf War was not clean or moral for
the people of Iraq, nor for the people of the United States After
a war many people, especially young people, see violence as
the way to solve problems The next time there is a conflict
somewhere in the world they will be tempted to support another
military solution, another quick war.
The death of one Iraqi soldier means that one family is
suffering — and more than 100,000 Iraqi soldiers and civilians
were killed. After any war the suffering continues on both sides
for several generations. Look at the suffering of the Vietnam
veterans in America and the suffering of the Vietnamese people
We need to be there for those who need us, to let them know
that we share their suffering When someone feels understood,
his/her suffering is diminished. Please don't forget this.
We who have touched war have a duty to bring the truth
about war to those who have not had a direct experience of it.
We are the light at the tip of the candle. It is very hot, but it has
the power to illuminate. We who were bom from the war know
what it is. The war is in us; but it is also in everyone
Violence has become the substance of our lives. The
Vietnam veterans, the Gulf War veterans, and the millions who
absorb violence every day are being trained to be exactly like
those who manifest the hatred and violence that pervade our
society We water the seeds of violence in ourselves by watch
ing violent television programs and movies that are poisoning
us If we do not trans-form all of this violence and misunder
standing, one day it will be our own child who is beaten or killed,
or who does the beating This is very much our affair.
-Thich Nhat Hahn
Martin Luther King said Thich Nhat Hahn should
receive the Nobel Peace Prize. A Vietnamese Buddhist monk
whose brother was a member of the Viet Cong and killed by
U.S. troops, Nhat Hahn led the Buddhist Peace Delegation
to the Paris Peace Talks in 1969 He has spent his long life
devoted to peace, often touring the USA speaking out against
war and violence Exiled from Vietnam for his antiwar activities,
he lives at Plum Village, a French community near Bordeaux.
Among his activities on behalf of peace, he was chaplain of the
Vietnam Veterans Against the War. At War With Ourselves’
has been excerpted from his book, Touching Peace: Practicing
the Art of Mindful Living, which was published in 1992