Lorenzo,
I respect your adamant stance with Israel, but I am also a citizen of the US who will not blindly support Israel nor its "defensive stance" to unleash chemical air raids. These effects echo of our own military tactics of Agent Orange to the Vietnamese, and Saddam's gassing of the Kurds, effects that WILL LAST GENERATIONS.
Yes it is a strategic logistical dilemma but underlying all the defensive strikes, the terrorist suicide bombs, the Islamic fundamentalists, is an occupied Palestinian territory and people whose resources (outside of the Hamas schools, hospitals, daycares) are completely controlled by Israel:
access to water, border patrol and entry, economic licenses. So once again, this terrorism breeds into the lives of peoples' impoverished realities for the request of self-determination.
In terms of nation-building, lets also remember the formation of Israel's nation included "terrorist" activity through the
Haganah and Irgun paramilitary Israeli groups that bombed British personnel and its railroads and organized illegal immigration. There is a consensus in Israel even today, that the recent attacks in Palestine
did not go far enoughTo not even critically acknowledge the "enemy's" point of view, to the world as they see it, we will only perpetuate Bush's "with us or against us" mentality that he promoted after September 11. This only has caused more wars and there will be no common ground. It is this rhetoric that had us backing a pattern of oppressive military regimes from Saddam to Marcos to Diem.
I remember the atmosphere all over America after September 11 very deeply and our first reaction was to "bomb those sand n**gers" never an understanding of our own histories intertwined with the Iraq, Afghanistan and the Arab world.
And it is no secret Islamic fundamentalist celebrate any type of death as martyrdom for their cause especially after 9/11. Those actions I condone but at the same time I have never agreed with Bush's War----
the most privatized war in our nation's history. I spoke with people and development workers in Iraq and presence of Halliburton & Blackwater is more telling of our motives than the lack of armor they go to combat with. They come with many stories of taking "pleasure trips" to the Philippines and Southeast Asia as well, not all our soldiers are wrapped up into that but I have friends who refused to participate in those activities.
In moving forward, what would a humane solution be?
Thank you, Leo, for sharing your view on the matter.
To answer your question of "What would be the humane solution" to this undeniably persistent predicament, I think it is best to analyze the situation in the ground: 1) The goals of the Palestinian people 2) The goals of Israel 3) What can be done to solidify peace 4) what are the factors that inhibit the realization of a continued peace.
It is evident that both peoples desire to either maintain their nationhood or to establish a state. The latter regarding the establishment of a Palestinian state.
In regards to the development of a Palestinian state, Israel has always supported such an idea:
"Time after time, Israel has stated its desire to see two states - the State of Israel and a Palestinian state - living side by side in peace and security (as expressed in US President Bush's vision of 24 June 2002). Israel believes that a true resolution of the conflict will see two national states, a Palestinian state for the Palestinian people and a Jewish state for the Jewish people. Israel has no desire to rule over the Palestinians, and believes that a truly democratic Palestinian state fully at peace with Israel will promote the long-term security and well-being of Israel as a Jewish state.
Israel has no qualms regarding the establishment of a Palestinian state, per se. The only issue is what kind of Palestinian state should be established. Will it be a democratic state of law and order, which eschews terrorism, violence and incitement and therefore be a state with which Israel can live in peace? Or will it be an anarchic state that is continuing on the path of violence and terrorism, which will not only endanger Israel but the stability of the region as a whole?
Israel cannot abide the establishment of a terrorist state along its borders. Efforts towards establishing a Palestinian state must take Israel's rights and vital interests into account, especially on matters of security, so that there can be peace and stability in the region.
Israel’s goal of being a democratic Jewish state, living in harmony with its neighbors, led it to embrace the vision of two states for two peoples as resolved by the United Nations' partition plan in 1947. Israel realized that the peoples of the Middle East are neighbors whose futures are inevitably linked. No peace will last that fails to take this into account.
It has taken nearly 60 years, and far too many wars, for this vision to be recognized by Israel’s immediate neighbors, the Palestinians. Events following the Hamas takeover of Gaza suggest that the time has never been more appropriate to finally realize this vision.
The establishment of Israel answered the historic national aspirations of the Jewish people - whether those living in the Holy Land, fleeing the horrors of the Holocaust or expelled from Arab lands. The future Palestinian state must fill a similar purpose for Palestinians. It must be the embodiment of the national claims of all the Palestinian people - of those in the West Bank and Gaza, of those refugee camps in neighboring Arab states and of those living throughout the rest of the world.
Israel has a vested interest, shared by moderates throughout the region, in the creation of a stable, prosperous, and peaceful Palestinian state. As demonstrated by its disengagement from Gaza in 2005, Israel is ready to take painful steps to advance this goal. However, it must know that its partners are ready also for historic compromise that will bring lasting peace. How can peace be realized?Israel has always been willing to compromise and all Israeli governments have been willing to make major sacrifices for the sake of peace. However, peacemaking requires concessions as well as confidence-building measures on both sides. Just as Israel is willing to address the rights and interests of the Palestinians, Israel has legitimate rights and interests that need to be addressed. Peace can only be achieved through negotiations to bridge gaps and resolve all outstanding issues.
Israel believes that it can make peace with a moderate Palestinian leadership that rejects terrorism. When in the past, Israel met Arab leaders, like President Sadat of Egypt and King Hussein of Jordan, who spoke the language of peace and were willing to take concrete steps for coexistence, Israel reached agreements with them and peace was achieved. Israel is willing to stand in peace with all the moderate states of the region.
For negotiations to be possible and for them to have a chance to succeed, Palestinian terrorism and incitement, supported by countries such as Iran and Syria, must be brought to an end. Extremist Palestinian elements, such as Hamas, are unwilling to recognize Israel's very right to exist, and continue to violently act against Israel, against the moderate Palestinian leadership and against the peace process. As such, they have no place at the negotiating table.
Dismantling the terrorist infrastructure is not only the first step in the Roadmap, it is also at the foundation of any peace process. Peacemaking requires the creation of a positive atmosphere, one that is free of terrorism and incitement, and one that promotes efforts to achieve mutual understanding. Israel has on many occasions taken steps to help improve Palestinian living conditions and the rehabilitation of the Palestinian economy. Israel has made - and is willing to make in the future - goodwill gestures towards the moderate Palestinian camp - such as easing movement by removing road barriers, transferring tax revenues and releasing prisoners. Israel is ready to take many such steps provided that Israeli security is not harmed and that the Palestinians do not respond with terrorism.
Attempts by the Palestinians and the Arab countries to compel Israel to accept unreasonable Palestinian demands will not bring the parties any closer to peace. It is very important that the Arab states do not support hard-line Palestinian positions, making it ever more difficult for the Palestinians themselves to make the necessary compromises.
UN Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, which all parties in the region have accepted, provide an important outline for conducting negotiations on a permanent settlement. Israel has also supported implementation of the measures of the Roadmap. But the Roadmap will work only if the Palestinians fulfill their obligations, something they have not truly begun to do, especially when it comes to dismantling the terrorist infrastructure and ending incitement, as required in the first phase of the Roadmap.
Assessing the Factor of HamasDespite this ongoing Hamas terrorism, Israel will maintain an ongoing dialogue with Palestinian moderates, in order to send the message to the Palestinians that if the moderates are the representatives of their national aspirations, they can achieve a state of their own.
Israel's guiding principle is that of differentiating between the moderates and the extremists, between those who are willing and ready to advance the peace process and those whose ideology is based on extremism and religious fanaticism and who treat even their own people with the utmost brutality. Israel hopes that the former will prevail, yet ultimately, the choice must be made by the Palestinians themselves.
While Hamas terrorists continue to target Israelis, they have also brought tragedy to Palestinians. As events in Gaza have shown, while the terrorists may claim to be advancing Palestinian rights, they have succeeded only in undermining them.
It is self-evident that the future Palestinian state cannot be a terrorist state. For this reason, the international community has insisted that the path to Palestinian statehood goes through acceptance of the Quartet principles, including the renunciation of terrorism, the implementation of the Roadmap obligations and recognition of Israel's right to exist. These are the foundational principles for lasting peace.
The role of the Arab world in this context is critical. In the past, the involvement of constructive regional actors in assisting the process of Israeli-Palestinian peace-making was lacking. The recent landmark Arab League peace initiative presents just such an opportunity for positive regional engagement.
Nevertheless, there should be no illusions. The enemies of coexistence, led by Iran and its sponsorship of Hizbullah and Hamas, are trying to do all in their power to sabotage any prospect for peace. The Teheran regime, in its declared intention to “wipe Israel off the map,†has perverted Islam into a totalitarian political manifesto merely masquerading as a religion. It is determined to perpetuate a resolvable conflict into a future of despair. Syria, as well, is undermining Israeli-Palestinian reconciliation, through its support of terrorist groups such as Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, whose operational headquarters are located in Damascus.
There is no insurmountable conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Rather, there is a common denominator in the desire for peace, supported by all moderate states in the region that understand that the real threat to peace comes from the extremist states that support terrorism.
There are moderates in the Palestinian Authority who could be Israel’s partners for peace, who believe a future Palestinian state should be based on democracy and understanding - as opposed to the extremists, whose basic totalitarian idea is to deprive others of their rights.
While Israel will continue to defend its population against Hamas terrorism, it is ultimately the role of the moderates among the Palestinians to confront Hamas.
Source: Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs
United States Military Resource
Arab League Data
Linkback:
https://tubagbohol.mikeligalig.com/index.php?topic=17260.0
