[Peace-discuss] Mearsheimer: analysis

[Robert Naiman]

Uri Avnery responds to Mearsheimer:

http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1273337969/

On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 1:58 PM, Morton K. Brussel <brussel at illinois.edu> wrote:
>
> Could one also say: The Palestinians last hope? What other options are
> there?  Mearsheimer summarizes the present conjuncture. --mkb
>
> Israel's fated bleak future
>
> function showExtras(elm, link, text){ var obj = $(elm); var link = $(link);
> var elmTop = (obj.getHeight() + 10) * (-1); if(obj.style.display == 'none'){
> obj.style.top = elmTop + "px"; link.innerHTML = 'Hide more ' + text + ' »';
> new Effect.Parallel([ new Effect.Move(obj, { sync: true, x: link.getWidth(),
> y: (obj.getHeight() + 10) * (-1), mode: 'absolute' }), new
> Effect.AppearItems(obj, { sync: true, from: 0, to: 1}) ], { duration: 1 });
> } else { new Effect.Parallel([ new Effect.Move(obj, { sync: true, x:
> link.getWidth() * (-1), y: 0, mode: 'absoulte' }), new Effect.FadeItems(obj,
> { sync: true, from: 1, to: 0 }) ], { duration: 1 }); link.innerHTML = 'See
> more ' + text + ' »'; } } // These are customized methods b/c the
> scriptaculous ones where throwing error. These should be re-evaluated at a
> later date. Effect.FadeItems = function(element) { element = $(element); var
> oldOpacity = 0; var options = Object.extend({ from: element.getOpacity() ||
> 1.0, to: 0.0, afterFinishInternal: function(effect) { if
> (effect.options.to!=0) return; effect.element.hide().setStyle({opacity:
> oldOpacity}); } }, arguments[1] || { }); return new
> Effect.Opacity(element,options); }; Effect.AppearItems = function(element) {
> element = $(element); var options = Object.extend({ from:
> (element.getStyle('display') == 'none' ? 0.0 : element.getOpacity() || 0.0),
> to: 1.0, // force Safari to render floated elements properly
> afterFinishInternal: function(effect) { if(Prototype.Browser.WebKit) {
> effect.element.forceRerendering(); } }, beforeSetup: function(effect) {
> effect.element.setOpacity(effect.options.from).show(); }}, arguments[1] || {
> }); return new Effect.Opacity(element,options); };
> By John J. Mearsheimer
>
> May 9, 2010
>
> President Barack Obama has finally coaxed Israel and the Palestinians back
> to the negotiating table. He and most Americans hope that the talks will
> lead to the creation of a Palestinian state in Gaza and the West Bank.
> Regrettably, that is not going to happen. Instead, those territories are
> almost certain to be incorporated into a "Greater Israel," which will then
> be an apartheid state bearing a marked resemblance to white-ruled South
> Africa.
>
> There are four possible futures regarding Israel and the occupied
> territories. The outcome that gets the most attention is the two-state
> solution, where a Palestinian state would control 95 percent or more of the
> West Bank and all of Gaza, and territorial swaps would compensate the
> Palestinians for those small pieces of the West Bank that Israel would keep.
> East Jerusalem would be its capital.
>
> The alternatives to a two-state solution all involve creating a Greater
> Israel — an Israel that effectively controls Gaza and the West Bank. In the
> first scenario, it would become a democratic binational state in which
> Palestinians and Jews enjoy equal political rights. This solution would mean
> abandoning the original Zionist vision of a Jewish state, since Palestinians
> would eventually outnumber Jews.
>
> Israel could also expel most of the Palestinians from Greater Israel,
> preserving its Jewish character through ethnic cleansing. Something similar
> happened in 1948, when the Zionists drove 700,000 Palestinians out of the
> territory that became Israel. The final alternative is some form of
> apartheid, whereby Israel increases its control over the occupied
> territories, but allows the Palestinians to exercise limited autonomy in a
> set of disconnected and economically crippled enclaves.
>
> The two-state solution is the best of these alternatives, but most Israelis
> are opposed to making the sacrifices that would be necessary to create a
> viable Palestinian state. There are about 480,000 settlers in the occupied
> territories and an extensive infrastructure of connector and bypass roads,
> not to mention the settlements themselves. A Hebrew University Truman
> Institute poll in March of West Bank settlers found that 21 percent believe
> that "all means must be employed to resist the evacuation of most West Bank
> settlements, including the use of arms." They needn't worry, however,
> because Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is committed to expanding
> the settlements throughout the occupied territories.
>
> Of course, there are prominent Israelis like former Foreign Minister Tzipi
> Livni and former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert who do favor a two-state
> solution. But that does not mean that they would be willing or able to make
> the concessions necessary to create a legitimate Palestinian state. Olmert
> did not do so when he was prime minister, and it is unlikely that he or
> Livni could get enough of their fellow citizens to back a genuine two-state
> solution. The political center of gravity in Israel has shifted sharply to
> the right over the past decade, and there is no sizable pro-peace political
> party or movement they could turn to for help.
>
> Some advocates of a two-state solution believe the Obama administration can
> compel Israel to accept a two-state outcome. The United States, after all,
> is the most powerful country in the world and should have great leverage
> over Israel, because it gives the Jewish state so much diplomatic and
> material support.
>
> But no American president can pressure Israel to change its policies toward
> the Palestinians. The main reason is the Israel lobby, a powerful coalition
> of American Jews and Christian evangelicals that has a profound influence on
> U.S. Middle East policy. Alan Dershowitz was spot on when he said, "My
> generation of Jews … became part of what is perhaps the most effective
> lobbying and fundraising effort in the history of democracy."
>
> Consider that every American president since 1967 has opposed settlement
> building, yet none has been able to get Israel to stop building them. There
> is little evidence that Obama is different from his predecessors. Shortly
> after taking office, he demanded that Israel stop all settlement building in
> the occupied territories. Netanyahu refused and Obama caved in to him. The
> president recently made it clear that he wants Israel to stop building in
> East Jerusalem. In response, Netanyahu said that Israel would never stop
> building there, because it is an integral part of the Jewish state. Obama,
> under pressure from the lobby, has remained silent and certainly has not
> threatened to punish Israel.
>
> The best Obama can hope for is to push forward the so-called peace process,
> but most people understand that these negotiations are a charade. The two
> sides will engage in endless talks while Israel continues to colonize
> Palestinian lands. The likely result, therefore, will be a Greater Israel
> between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.
>
> But who will live there and what kind of political system will it have?
>
> It will not be a democratic binational state, at least not in the near
> future. The vast majority of Israel's Jews have no interest in living in a
> state dominated by Palestinians. Ethnic cleansing would guarantee that
> Greater Israel retains a Jewish majority, but that murderous strategy would
> do enormous damage to Israel's moral fabric, to its relationship with Jews
> in the Diaspora, and to its international standing. No genuine friend of
> Israel could support this crime against humanity.
>
> The most likely outcome is that Greater Israel will become a full-fledged
> apartheid state. There are already separate laws, separate roads and
> separate housing in the occupied territories, and the Palestinians are
> essentially confined to impoverished enclaves. Indeed, two former Israeli
> prime ministers — Ehud Barak and Olmert — have made just this point. Olmert
> said that if the two-state solution collapses, Israel will face a "South
> African-style struggle." He went so far as to argue, "as soon as that
> happens, the state of Israel is finished."
>
> Olmert is correct. A Jewish apartheid state is not sustainable over the long
> term. The discrimination and repression that underpin apartheid are
> antithetical to core Western values. How could anyone make a moral case for
> it in the United States, where democracy is venerated and segregation and
> racism are routinely condemned? It is equally hard to imagine the United
> States having a "special relationship" with an apartheid state. It is much
> easier to imagine Americans strongly opposing that racist state's political
> system and working hard to change it. An apartheid Israel would also be a
> strategic liability for the United States.
>
> This is why, in the end, Greater Israel will become a democratic binational
> state, whose politics will be dominated by its Palestinian citizens. This
> will mean the end of the Zionist dream.
>
> What is truly remarkable about this situation is that the lobby is
> effectively helping Israel destroy its own future as a Jewish state. On top
> of that, there is an alternative outcome that would be relatively easy to
> achieve and is clearly in Israel's best interests: the two-state solution.
> It is hard to understand why Israel and its American supporters are not
> working overtime to create a viable Palestinian state and why instead they
> are moving full-speed ahead to build an apartheid state. It makes no sense
> from either a moral or a strategic perspective.
>
> John J. Mearsheimer teaches political science at the University of Chicago
> and is the co-author of "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy."
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>



-- 
Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org

Urge Congress to Support a Timetable for Military Withdrawal from Afghanistan
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/feingold-mcgovern

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.