The U.S.’ Role Is the Problem

King Abdullah II informed George Mitchell — the U.S. special envoy to the Middle East — that Jordan fully supports the Palestinian stance of refusing to continue peace talks in light of Israel’s continued settlement program. The Palestinian leadership adopted this stance after Netanyahu’s decision to lift the freeze on settlement operations. The decision — i.e. the decision of the Palestinian leadership — has met with continued support from national forces in the West Bank.

Support echoing Jordan is expected to come out of the emergency meeting of the Arab League (being held in Sirte, Libya). Members are expected to be supportive of the Palestinian decision and continue their encouragement of the Palestinian leadership to refuse talks in order to stop the settlements in their entirety — not just in the West Bank, but also in Jerusalem.

In the past, the Arabs have already gone to great lengths to comply with U.S. pressure in order to resume direct negotiations. This has included indulging the Netanyahu government’s provocations and incitements, from their political impositions on the Palestinian negotiators to Israel’s continued settlements and Judaization operations. This has transformed the issue from occupation to mere decisions of the Israeli government, which has lifted the freeze on settlements for a month or more in order to hold negotiations under the scourge of settlements and time-wasting. This makes Obama’s statements and those of other optimists regarding establishing a Palestinian state this year mere fantasies.

The truth that Palestinians and Arab officials refuse to face is that the real crisis is not just the arrogance and pigheadedness of Netanyahu and his settlement plans, but the U.S.’ position that sells Israeli politics to Arabs and Palestinians in circumspect ways, with dialogue that does not appear to have any noticeable effect or influence on Israel.

By reviewing past and present U.S. administrations’ plans in the Israel-Palestine negotiations, it is possible to conclude the following:

1. Israel has been successful under the protection of U.S. influence — both internationally and within the Arab world — in reducing the main issue of occupation to fragmented cases: settlements, making Jerusalem a solely Jewish area and Judaizing Israel as a whole. This has, in reality, led to a lack of respect for Israel’s occupation force as less than a force, but rather just one faction struggling over the West Bank and Jerusalem, and relentlessly trying to bury the right for refugees to return.

2. Israel has been successful — with the backing of U.S. influence and support — in its plan to try to eliminate the Palestinian issue. It has removed the issue of occupation from the sphere of decision and influence in the international community, beginning with the U.N. Security Council and ending with ignoring the roles of Russia and Europe, to the extent that at the latest meeting in Washington that a single Palestinian negotiator attended, he was subjected to Israeli and U.S. calls for surrender, not for peace.

3. All this Israeli success would not have been achieved if not for the guarantees and assurances the U.S. has given Tel Aviv under the pretext of negotiations and a two-state solution. The first of these guarantees was Bush’s letter to Sharon, which was described at the time as similar to the Balfour Declaration. The last of these recent assurances were those that Mitchell presented to Netanyahu, allowing the lifting of the freeze on settlements for a month or more. These assurances demolish the rights of the Palestinian people.

In fact, judging by how negotiations have developed over the last six years, the Arab and Palestinian exit was a considerable risk, but they needed to end their reliance on the U.S. They cannot rely on the U.S. to manufacture a peace or take their case to the U.N. Security Council, international courts or other civil society organizations in order to put Israel in its rightful place as a racist, repressive state, an occupier, and a state that operates wars, invasions and destruction.

These are the roadblocks when facing a U.S.-Israel partnership. The U.S. appears to covet a peaceful solution, but there is an internal understanding of a Zionist solution. This will never solve the issue, but will only add further reasons for instability in the region for decades to come. If the Arabs do not confront their friend, the U.S., during the Sirte meeting over its bias and the failure of its role in the issue, the U.S. will remain as it is, complying with the objectives of Israel: racism and occupation.