| |
Debate
Media funding in Afghanistan should assist reconstruction
Comment: Israel’s crucial front
Yet more fragile states
10/2006 |
|
Israel’s crucial front
Israel responded to the Hezbollah attack in July with violence. Doing so was justifiable – but not wise. The level of violence, moreover, was exaggerated. Israel must now show leadership in the Middle East and make peace proposals to the Palestinians. If that succeeds, Israel’s enemies, who want to destroy the country, would lose ground. Israel deserves the solidarity of the West.
[ By Tillmann Elliesen ]
What would have happened had Israel not reacted to the Hezbollah attack with counter-violence, instead focusing its attention convincingly on Gaza? In the weeks before, the Hamas government had cautiously approached the Fatah of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, signalling its willingness to make concessions towards Israel. That plan was frustrated when Hamas’ radical military leader, Khaled Mashal, who lives in exile in Damascus, ordered the capture of an Israeli soldier, Gilad Schalit. Three weeks later, Hezbollah struck, killing eight Israeli soldiers and taking two more captive. Middle East experts say that the Shiite militia was also trying, among other things, to do Mashal a favour. He was, after all, under growing pressure from moderate Palestinians.
Had Israel turned to the Palestinians at the time, Fatah and Hamas would possibly have tried earlier to form a unity government. Israel depends on their cooperation in order to be able to negotiate. Reconfirming the nation’s militarist image among Arabs is no way to further that cause. Israel should instead have signalled preparedness to escape from the Middle Eastern spiral of violence and counter-violence. It would also have demonstrated that it has understood the nature of its most important task: to cooperate with the Palestinians in finding a compromise acceptable to both sides. Moreover, Lebanon would not today be mourning more than one thousand victims of war, and Israel would not be mourning 160 dead civilians and soldiers.
Jerusalem, however, decided otherwise, and that was conceivable. Hezbollah’s incursion was a reckless provocation by those forces in the region who do not want to negotiate with Israel, but want to wipe the country off the map. The Shiite militia and its backers in Teheran only make use of the Palestinians’ fate to further their own interests. Lebanon’s most recent war has made clear what challenges lie ahead for the Middle East in terms of containing Iran. Ironically, it was the US-caused disaster in Iraq that made Iran as strong as it is today.
According to Christian Tomuschat, a professor of international law, Israel had the right to use self-defence against Hezbollah’s attack. But was it also wise for Israel to use violence? Reports from the Lebanon tell us that Hezbollah has lost support. But Israel has lost too – particularly because it over-reacted beyond all measure. The bombing was soon completely out of proportion. It neither matched the cause of the war, nor did it achieve the stated goals. That has not only damaged Israel’s military halo of invincibility, but has also cost Israel much sympathy. Jan Egeland, the UN coordinator for humanitarian aid, condemned Israel’s heavy use of cluster bombs as “completely immoral” – and rightly so. These bombs were dropped when the war’s end was already imminent.
Israel wanted to display its overwhelming fire power, and, from its perspective, that is understandable. For historical reasons and out of solidarity with the Middle East’s only democracy, the West must stand by Israel, irrespective of justified criticism. An Israel able to rely on that solidarity, in turn, must assume responsibility and prepare measures towards resolving its core conflict, the one with the Palestinians. For example, Israel should immediately lift its economic sanctions and allow Palestinians to live decent lives, achieved through their own efforts. In the long run, Israel should promise to withdraw from the occupied territories.
Israel must take the first steps. Given the quarrelsomeness of the Palestinian elite and the lack of credible and legitimate governments in the Arab world, no-one else in the region can assume leadership. It is in Israel’s own interest to reach an agreement with the Palestinians and thus to make peace on its first front. Doing so would weaken the propaganda machine of its enemies on all the other fronts.
Tillmann Elliesen
is managing editor of D+C/E+Z.
euz.editor@fsd.de
|
