[NYTr] Avnery: A Trap for Fools

[nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com]

Media Monitors Network - July 21, 2007
http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/45101

A Trap for Fools

"The Palestinians, too, will not get their state without struggle, not 
as baksheesh from Bush nor as a '"gesture" from Olmert. Nations achieve 
their freedom by political or military struggle. Every struggle,
violent or non-violent, is a matter of power. And power means first of
all: Unity."

by Uri Avnery

In a classical American Western, the difference is as glaring as the 
midday sun in Colorado: there are Good Guys and Bad Guys. The good ones 
are the settlers, who are making the prairie bloom. The bad ones are
the Indians, who are bloodthirsty savages. The ultimate hero is the
cowboy, tough, humane, with a big revolver or two, ready to defend
himself at all times.

George Bush, who grew up on this myth, sticks to it even now, when he
is the leader of the world's only superpower. This week he presented
the world with an up-to-date Western.

In this Western  or, rather, Middle Eastern  there are also Good Guys 
and Bad Guys. The good ones are the "moderates," who are the allies of 
the U.S. in the Middle East  Israel, Mahmoud Abbas, and the 
pro-American Arab regimes. The bad ones are Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, 
Syria, and al-Qaeda.

It is a simple script. So simple, indeed, that an 8-year-old can 
understand it. The conclusions are also simple: the good guys have to
be supported, the bad guys have to bite the dust. At the end, the hero  
George himself  will ride off into the sunset on his noble steed, while 
the music reaches a crescendo.

The classical Western, of course, does not show us the heroic pioneers 
stealing the land from the Indians. Or the United States Cavalry 
attacking the camps of the Indians, burning down the tents and killing 
their inhabitants, men, women, and children. How the U.S. government, 
after signing formal treaties with the Indian nations, breaks them one 
after another. And how it drives the remnants into desolate regions, 
long before the term "ethnic cleansing" was first used.

Denial runs through the classical Western like a purple thread, as it 
does through this speech of Bush's. This finds its main expression in a 
simple fact: the occupation is hardly mentioned at all.

In the Palestinian community, for example, there is a struggle between 
the "moderates" and the "extremists." The extremists are killers. Why 
are they killers? There is no why. They are killers because they are 
killers. It's in their nature. They were just born that way. The 
moderates are moderates because they are moderates. Some people are
just born good.

So the whole problem is a Palestinian problem. They must decide. They 
must choose between moderates and extremists. If they choose the 
moderates, they will get everything they can imagine: colorful glass 
beads and gallons of whisky. If they choose the extremists, their end 
will be bitter.

The Jewish Israelis do not have to choose between good and bad. Why? 
Simply because there are no Bad Guys among them. They are just good. 
They must help the good Palestinians. "Release" the Palestinian tax 
moneys and give them to "Prime Minister [Salem] Fayad." Not to the 
Palestinian government, but to one specific, named person, the darling 
of Bush.

What else is required from the Israelis? They must understand that
their "future lies in developing areas like the Negev and Galilee  not
in continuing occupation of the West Bank." (That's the only time the 
occupation is mentioned at all.) They should remove unauthorized 
outposts and end settlement expansion. Also, they may "find other 
practical ways to reduce their footprint [in the West Bank] without 
reducing their security." Meaning: the occupation can continue, but it 
would be nice if we take some steps to make it less visible.

A long time ago, the United States viewed all settlements as illegal. 
When the Israeli government continued to expand them, James Baker, the 
secretary of state under Bush the father, imposed financial sanctions 
upon Israel. Bush the son at first demanded that all settlements 
established after January 2001 be dismantled. Later he withdrew all 
opposition to the settlement blocs ("centers of population"). In the 
"Road Map," he decreed that Israel must immediately freeze the 
enlargement of the settlements. Now he is satisfied with a
sanctimonious request to "remove unauthorized outposts" (with no
article)  that's to say, some of those put up without the official
authorization of the Israeli government itself. All this without "or
else" or any mention of sanctions.

In the last few years, only one such outpost, Amona, has been 
dismantled, and this week Ehud Olmert decided to pardon all the
fanatics accused of attacking the police during that event. The Israeli 
government knows that Bush is only paying lip service, and it does not 
take him seriously.

In many classical Westerns there appears a crook selling a patent 
medicine to heal all ills: headaches and hemorrhoids, tuberculosis and 
syphilis. George Bush has his own patent medicine, which appears in the 
speech again and again. It will heal all diseases and ensure the final 
victory of the Sons of Light over the Sons of Darkness.

The label on the bottle says "Building Palestinian Institutions."

How come we didn't think of this until now? Why did we go chasing off 
after all kinds of solutions and not find this one, so simple, lying in 
front of us for all to see?

It is an egg of Columbus, with a whiff of Alexander the Great's sword 
cutting the Gordian knot. The Palestinians have no institutions. The
two good people, "President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayad  are
striving to build the institutions of a modern democracy." This means:
"security services  ministries that deliver services without
corruption  steps that unleash the natural enterprise of the
Palestinian people  the rule of law"

All this under occupation, behind roadblocks, walls, and fences, while 
the main roads are barred to Palestinians, while the West Bank is 
chopped into pieces and cut off from the rest of the world. By the way, 
in this matter Bush has another patent medicine: all Palestinian
exports will in future go through Jordan and Egypt, not Israel.

In order to realize the vision of "building Palestinian institutions," 
Bush is sending along his poodle. According to Bush, the sole task of 
Tony Blair is indeed this: "to coordinate international efforts to help 
the Palestinians establish the institutions of a strong and lasting
free society." (Like which example? Egypt? Saudi Arabia? Jordan?
Pakistan? Morocco? Or perhaps even Iraq?)

Let's hope no one is rude enough to mention the fact that the 
Palestinians held democratic elections for their parliament, not so
long ago, under the strict supervision of ex-president Jimmy Carter. As
far as Bush is concerned, that just did not happen, since the majority
of the people voted for Hamas. Therefore, Bush mentions only the
elections held before that, when Mahmoud Abbas was elected president,
practically without opposition. Everything else has been wiped off the
slate.

So this is the up-to-date vision: "democratic Palestinian institutions" 
will be in place, free of corruption (as in the U.S. and Israel), and 
"capable security forces" will be functioning, and Hamas will be 
eliminated, and the armed factions will be dismantled, and all attacks 
on Israel will be stopped, and the security of Israel will be ensured, 
and the incitement against Israel will end, and everybody will
recognize Israel's right to exist as "a Jewish state and a homeland for
the Jewish people," and all the agreements that were signed in the past
will be accepted  then "we can soon begin serious negotiations towards
the creation of a Palestinian state." Wow!

What a wonderful sentence! "Soon"  without a timetable. "Serious 
negotiations"  without fixing a date for their conclusion. "A 
Palestinian state" (again, without the definite article, which Bush 
seems to detest)  without specific borders. But a hint is given: 
"mutually agreed borders reflecting previous lines and current 
realities, and mutually agreed adjustments." Meaning: the settlement 
blocs and much else will be annexed by Israel.

IT SEEMS as if the speechwriters, after finishing the product, noticed 
that it was pitifully devoid of content. Nothing new, nothing that
could cause a self-respecting newspaper to give it a headline.

I imagine the media adviser saying: "Mister President, we must add 
something that will look new." Thus the "international meeting" was
born.

"So I will call together an international meeting this fall of 
representatives from nations that support a two-state solution, reject 
violence, recognize Israel's right to exist, and commit to all previous 
agreements between the parties. The key participants in this meeting 
will be the Israelis, the Palestinians, and their neighbors in the 
region. Secretary Rice will chair the meeting."

Wonderful. A meeting that has no date yet, but has a season of the
year. And for which no location has yet been fixed. And no list of 
participants. And no planned conclusions, except the general statement: 
"She [Condoleezza] and her counterparts will review the progress that 
has been made towards building Palestinian institutions. They will look 
for innovative and effective ways to support further reform. And they 
will provide diplomatic support for the parties in their bilateral 
discussions and negotiations, so that we can move forward on a 
successful path to a Palestinian state." The meeting will not review
the progress made toward the removal of the outposts, for example.

It is not by accident that Bush omitted to identify the governments he 
intends to invite. Clearly, he will try to fulfill one of the most 
cherished dreams of Olmert: to meet publicly with a top representative 
of Saudi Arabia. For Olmert this would be an immense achievement: an 
official meeting with the most important Arab country which has no
peace agreement with Israel. A meeting for which he will not have to
pay any price. A free lunch.

It is dubious whether this wish will be fulfilled. The Saudis are very 
cautious. They do not want to quarrel with any party in the region  not 
with Syria (which will not be invited, though it is a "neighbor" of the 
Israelis and the Palestinians) and not with Hamas. Unlike Egypt,
Jordan, and the Palestinian Authority, Saudi Arabia cannot be bribed
with money. It has enough of its own.

The final objective is a "Palestinian state," the "two-state solution." 
That is a far-far-off aim. Not for nothing is it called a "political 
horizon," since a horizon, as is well-known, recedes in the distance as 
one tries to approach it.

In his poem "If," Rudyard Kipling describes all the tests an Englishman 
has to endure in order to be considered a "man." One of them is: "If
you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken/Twisted by knaves to make
a trap for fools."

We, the small group of Israelis who raised the banner of the "two-state 
solution" more than 50 years ago, now have to endure George Bush
turning it into a rag to cover his nakedness. In his mouth, it is an
empty, deceitful, and mendacious slogan. Only a fool will fall into
this trap.

As Chaim Weizmann, the prominent Zionist leader and first president of 
Israel, once said: "No state is given to a people on a silver platter." 
The Palestinians, too, will not get their state without struggle, not
as baksheesh from Bush nor as a '"gesture" from Olmert. Nations achieve 
their freedom by political or military struggle. Every struggle,
violent or nonviolent, is a matter of power.

And power means first of all: Unity.