Taking the ‘peace’ out of the process
The Israeli-Palestinian peace process has been dead for years, but a revival of talks between the two sides this week in Amman proved that ‘the process’ still serves a purpose. For Israel, even topical engagement in the process is necessary to maintain its aura of righteousness – that the Palestinians are to blame for a perpetual state of conflict – thereby allowing it to continue presenting the status quo as the only viable option. For the Palestinians, returning to the table justifies the revitalization of a stalled push for statehood by pointing to the futility of negotiations, and in a way, also helps maintain the status quo that serves the Ramallah political elite.
Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak took to the Israeli airwaves to discuss the upcoming talks a day before the two sides met in Amman this week. He discussed the various strategic advantages for Israel in resuming contacts with the Palestinians and at the same time made clear he had no expectations from them. But most notably, never in the 15-minute interview did he once say the word “peace.”
Perhaps feeling the need to justify to a domestic audience the simple act of sitting at the same table with a Palestinian, Barak explained that resuming talks would “act to reduce tensions with the Palestinians, reduce tensions with Turkey and reduce possible tensions with Egypt.”
Addressing the so-called “deligitimization” of Israel fueled by the ongoing occupation of Palestinians, he argued that the appearance of bona fide Israeli engagement in ‘the process’ serves to “hinder the effectiveness of attempts to isolate us internationally.”
Attempts to isolate Israel are of course real. For good reason, the international community is “concerned,” as European diplomats regularly put it, by the ongoing occupation and the lack of any effort to end it. Barak, along with most mainstream Israeli leaders, believes that by maintaining the semblance of a peace process Israel can stave off more serious international pressure and perhaps sanctions aimed at ending Israel’s military rule over Palestinians.
For Israel, negotiation as a means has taken on its own ends, which seem to be completely disconnected from the stated goal: peace.
The Palestinian Authority too has disingenuous motives for pretending to restart good-faith negotiations with Israel, although some are the polar opposites of Israel’s motivations. In order to continue his plan to seek recognition in statehouses and international institutions, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas needs to continue painting Israel as the stubborn belligerent with whom a two-state solution cannot be negotiated.
It is the inevitable failure of talks with Israel, ensured by conditions imposed by both sides, that Abbas will likely point to in the near future when explaining the next push for statehood in the United Nations and other steps outside ‘the process’ designed to usher in independence and liberation.
Also speaking on the eve of the latest meeting in Jordan, Abbas repeated his clichéd threat that “all options will be on the table” if the current round of talks do not bear fruit. “If there is no peace,” he said, “the entire world will bear the consequences of the failure of the peace process.” He knows, however, exactly what the results the talks will produce.
Perhaps more importantly, as popular unarmed struggle against the occupation experiences a resurgence in Palestine, the Palestinian president, who is about to enter the seventh year of a four-year term, needs ‘the process’ to hold onto his legitimacy in the Palestinian street.
Asked what they think of Abbas, Palestinians in barber shops, cafes, bars, living rooms and city squares have all repeated to me a variation of the same answer, describing him somewhere in between Israel’s stooge and its paid agent.
Lending credence to the notion that Abbas is in power to serve Israel, Barak described how it is a top Israeli interest to promote stability in Palestine by entering into talks with the Palestinian Authority. “Today we have quiet in [the West Bank],” the defense minister said. That quiet is “an accomplishment of the Shabaq (Israel Security Agency) and the IDF, but also not insignificantly, it is a result of coordinated actions with the Palestinian security services.”
In 2012, the peace process exists only because foreign powers insist on perpetuating it with the cognitively dissonant hope that one day it will bear fruit. But despite having dropped “peace” from the process, both Israelis and Palestinians still have significant interests in playing along.
“From our perspective,” Barak said, it is important to hold negotiations “even if it’s written in the stars that there won’t be results.”
So there won’t be peace. At least we still have the process.
|Print article||This entry was posted by Michael Omer-Man on January 5, 2012 at 4:55 am, and is filed under Israeli Politics, Palestinian Politics, Peace. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.|
No comments yet.
No trackbacks yet.
about 2 months ago - No comments
Tzipi Livni, the only person in the soon-to-be-formed Israeli government who genuinely believes in the importance of the two-state peace process, splashed cold water on the prospect of it ever happening Tuesday. It’s time to start looking at alternative plans in case a two-state solution with the Palestinians proves impossible, she said. Speaking at the
about 2 months ago - No comments
At face value, the European Union heads of mission report on the Israeli settlement enterprise is a scathing indictment and call to action against Israel’s illegal settlement activities. In between the lines, however, the report reflects a frustration by European diplomats and bureaucrats at their own governments’ inaction. They are not implementing the existing legislation,
about 3 months ago - No comments
This piece was first published on +972 Magazine. As details about the life, work and untimely demise of ‘Prisoner X’ unravel, the most intriguing unanswered questions remain: why did Israel secretly imprisoned him and why he is dead? But the details of the story appear to be making one thing clear; Israel’s security services likely
about 4 months ago - 1 comment
The following is an excerpt from a documentary detailing the tactics employed by Jewish settlers in Palestine: “When a new settlement is established, it must withstand attack from the very first day of occupation. A system of defense has been evolved, in which these experienced settlers play an important part. “When the proposed site has
about 5 months ago - No comments
One big problem with democracy — in most of its forms — is that leaders can be tempted to put their own re-election above the state’s civic and diplomatic interests. Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s decision-making in recent days may be one of the finest examples of the phenomenon. Every Israeli government for the past
about 5 months ago - 1 comment
One of the responsibilities of the news media is to set the parameters of acceptable discourse in society. But while media outlets have the unique ability to demarcate what is and isn’t acceptable to print, in doing so, they walk a fine line and risk masking the ugliest – but real – faces of society.
about 6 months ago - 1 comment
There’s something different about the most recent flare-up between Israel and Palestinian groups in the Gaza Strip. The Palestinians’ modus operandi appears to have changed, and Israel seems to be unsure of how to respond. In the past month, armed Palestinian groups in Gaza launched a string of three, seemingly well planned and ultimately successful
about 8 months ago - 1 comment
The story of how Israel reached the – real or perceived – brink of war with Iran is not exactly what it appears to be. At some point in recent years, Israeli decision-makers decided to play a game. Through a fairly innocuous and innocent lens, the game can be described as “good cop, bad cop.”
about 10 months ago - No comments
Nearly two decades have passed since the Oslo Accords first gave the world hope for Mideast peace and an end to Israeli rule over the Palestinian territories; in the West Bank, the failed framework for peace talks has become directly associated with the occupation itself. When hundreds of Palestinians took to the streets last week
about 1 year ago - No comments
This is the third and final part of a three-part series exploring alternatives to the two-state solution in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Part one examined attitudes and approaches to the one-state solution. Part two looked at the option of an Israeli-Palestinian federation. Prospects for a two-state resolution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict have dimmed in recent months