Tuesday Sep 15, 2009

Window on Israel: Simple solutions and other sewage

Posted by Ira Sharkansky
Comments: 2
BOOKMARK or SHARE: technorati digg del.icio.us reddit newsvine facebook What's this?
Print  |  
Decrease text sizeDecrease text size
Increase text sizeIncrease text size

A recent op-ed piece in the New York Times argues against any concessions by Arab governments to Israel in exchange for an Israeli gesture on settlements. The author, a member of the Saudi elite, demands more than a settlement freeze. He wants a complete withdrawal of settlements from what he calls the West Bank. (By some interpretations, that geographical label means all of Israel.) He bases his argument on the notion of Arab land - It was ours. Israel took it. Israel must give it back before Arabs make any concessions to Israel.
  
The argument may resonate with the European and North American left, and perhaps even in the Obama White House. The weight of the argument is political (there are more Arabs than Jews, and the Arabs have all that oil and gas), dressed up in legal and historical language. It is no more convincing than the cry of religious settlers: God gave it to us.
 
The factual record is inconclusive.
 
Maybe God did give it to Jews. However, He defined the land poorly, with at least three different descriptions in His Torah. He said something about sharing it with others, and being strangers in another land.
 
The Arab argument is not much better. There never was a Palestine to serve as the basis of a claim. The Ottoman Empire lost control in World War I. Jordan took possession in 1948, but its claim was shaky at best. Israel took possession in 1967 pretty much the way the Jordanians did 19 years earlier. It conceded part of it to the Palestine National Authority in 1993, but has entered and left as security demanded.
 
There remain Jewish settlements sprinkled throughout the West Bank. Some are on land privately owned by individual Palestinians, and they represent a problem for Israel. Others sit on land that Palestinians claim, based on nothing more than "Grandpa told me it was his."
 
It is more accurate to describe the area as "disputed" rather than "occupied."
 
No doubt the International Court of Justice and the United Nations General Assembly would decide that it belongs to Palestinians. No sane Israeli would turn to those bodies for a decision, given their well documented bias against Israel.
 
So at least for the time being, we are left with possession being nine-tenths of the law. There are efforts from the highest places to persuade Israel to make concessions, but they will have to make more sense than the op-ed piece by the Saudi prince.
 
Involved in Israelis' calculations are the responses of Lebanese and Palestinians to earlier withdrawals from Southern Lebanon and Gaza. Justice is a murky and mostly irrelevant element in politics. How the Arabs responded to those actions influences Israeli willingness to be forthcoming without a substantial quid pro quo. Adding to this are Arafat's rejection of the Barack-Clinton deal in 2000, and Abbas' rejection of Olmert's proposal in 2008.
 
Against these experiences, why should Israel bother? Peace would be ideal, but first steps have produced rejection, rockets and suicide bombings.
 
Americans and Europeans do not like Israeli stubbornness, but their rhetoric is not sufficient inducement.
 
With no serious talk of sanctions, much less troop movements against Israel, it appears that policymakers in Europe and North America accept at least part of the Israeli narrative.
 
On the other side of the country is an emerging problem that may bubble up into something substantial. In the misery that is Gaza there is no capacity or incentive to process the sewage. So it lies in pools on land or flows to the sea. The pools have broken, adding to the discomfort of near neighbors. Israel is worried that sea-borne sewage will drift north to foul the desalinization plant at Ashkelon. The brown stain may also bother Egyptians and other decent people who worry about pollution wherever it occurs.
 
Will the sewage serve as a Palestinian weapon to extract concessions from Israel? Are there international bodies willing to help the Gazans with its treatment, if only the Israelis will let in the construction supplies?
 
Some might be tempted to ponder Jonathan Swift's tongue in cheek Modest Proposal for dealing with the Irish problem. Could Israel stop the flow of Gaza's sewage by closing off the supply of food?
 
It is time to wish you all the appropriate blessings for the New Year. In God's language, Shana Tova.

BOOKMARK or SHARE: technorati digg del.icio.us reddit newsvine facebook What's this?
Print  |  
Comments: Post your own comment
1  |   captain grumpy Millicent Australia, Friday Sep 18, 2009
I agree with your articlenad think that most Australians would as well. From what I have seen,Australia is like America whereas most are very conservative and do not usually speak out,UNTIL they think they are being pushed to the wall and made to do things they do not wish to. I am not Jewish but happy whatever you have.
2  |   Dvora in Tel Aviv, Monday Sep 28, 2009
I hope that G"d will forgive you for writing lies, twisting the truth, etc. It is an occupation, and Palestinians are treated differently from us. Our Jewish / Israeli society is also falling apart, because of the right-winged hate politics. Did you every live in Israel? Why twist the story???
Add your comment remaining characters
Name and Location *

NOTE: Comments are moderated and will not appear on this blog, until they have been reviewed and deemed appropriate for posting.

For more information, please see our
Readers' Submission Policy.

E-mail * (will NOT be published)
Your Blog/Website
--------------------------------
* All fields are required

About this blog

Window on Israel Hebrew University Political Science professor evaluates the latest happenings in Israel.

Search this blog

Archives
Combined feed for all JPost.com blogs

Most Popular

  1. World opinion: who cares?
    Posted in Guest Blog by Glen A. Fritz
    Tuesday Nov 17, 2009
  2. Mr. President, bring the troops home
    Posted in Koch's Comments by Ed Koch
    Thursday Nov 19, 2009
  3. Interfaith dialogue - naïve or necessary?
    Posted in Guest Blog by Ruth Wasserman
    Sunday Nov 22, 2009
  4. Who will take care of my fruit trees?
    Posted in Making Aliyah by Jonathan Feldstein
    Sunday Nov 22, 2009
  5. Our base is broader
    Posted in Green-Lined by Yisrael Medad
    Sunday Nov 22, 2009

Top Rated Posts

Recent Comments

Laine Frajberg Montreal: Response to John R #10, Why not set an example John and return the southwest to Mexico which Pres. Polk STOLE fron Mexico in 1847?You Americans called it "manifest destiny".The rest of the world called it THEFT. Till then you have no right to criticize Israel for taking-and keeping- land in a DEFENSIVE WAR.Now go away!
Laine Frajberg Montreal: Response to EdB #1, Hey Ed,didn't your country steal northern Georgia from the Cherokee in 1838?You did this even though the Cherokee were at peace with you and your own Supreme Court declared that the Cherokee had a right to retain their land.Didn't make any difference.General Winfield Scott expelled them anyway-and over a quarter died on the way to their new homes.Contrast this with Israel,which took east Jerusalem after being attacked by Jordan on June 5,1967-so indeed Israel's Jews have every right to build anywhere they want in Jerusalem.
David USA: Just when did Gilo become part of Jerusalem? Surely not at the time of David hamelech. When and by whose idea was Gilo "Jerusalemized "? Pretty soon Maale Adumin will also be Jerusalem. And why not Ariel ?? The sky is the limit when it comes to gerrymandering. (For instance, Montreal could become New York just at some poltician's say-so, even if Canada objects).