Kerry: Painkillers While the Cancer Spreads
Published in Al-Ghad
(Jordan) on 11 April 2013
by Dr. Ahmed Azem (link to original)
After meeting with Israelis and Palestinians during his three-day visit, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry remarked: "[W]e are open to negotiation, but it is not an open-ended, endless negotiation. It cannot be used as an excuse for other efforts ..."
It shouldn't be believed that Kerry is talking about the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations he'd called for or that the other efforts might be a cover for Zionist settlement. No. The discussion is about negotiations with Iran, under the condition that they will not be a cover for advancing its nuclear plans. In his statement at Ben Gurion International Airport, he reassured Israelis that Iran will not be permitted to have nuclear weapons. Kerry reportedly listened to the different parties on the Israeli-Palestinian issue — in order to feel out how to disengage the political process — such as those that have continued over the last 20 years without success.
All the ideas put forward seem to be the same ones used in the past, such as the Arab peace initiative and economic development in the West Bank. It appears that what Kerry wants is completion and added details for what is already on the table.
According to the Washington Post, Kerry was angered by leaks from the Palestinian side about additional details; for example, he wants Arab states to be added to the peace initiative on the grounds that the initiative, announced in 2002 and renewed in 2007, does not include enough detail about what Israel would get if a settlement deal were to be reached. According to the newspaper, Kerry was irritated by leaks on both sides. Kerry continues to look for a compromise that will bring the two sides back to the negotiating table and in front of the cameras.
He is seeking Arab initiatives, talking about economic development in the West Bank and listening to the outmoded demands of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Traditional American reasoning has been unproductive over the last decades, attempting to solve the same dilemma with the same tools that have failed for 20 years.
It appears that Kerry's advisers didn't inform him that discussing economic development plans could be a particularly sensitive subject for the Palestinian people, despite their difficult economic status. The Israeli Prime Minister spoke earlier on economically peaceful alternatives to political and geographical compromise, which were rejected by the Palestinians. They feel that the occupational state-building programs and their arrangements, which the Palestinians adopted, have reached their upper limit and have failed to bring about political or economic independence.
Talking about economic development — as Kerry says, it isn't an alternative to the political process — is like saying that, objectively, the Palestinian situation is ripe for an explosion due to the economic crisis, the settlements, hopelessness, high unemployment, low morale and weakened, bankrupt instruments of power and social institutions. All of these are part of a recipe for revolution. There has to be some kind of truce.
Since settlement and occupation are the core diseases, Kerry decided to deal with the symptoms and pain relief to prevent an explosion. He is waiting for something to materialize that might address the underlying cause, which is as yet untreated.
The situation is like giving a cancer patient painkillers, with promises of looking into an available and known cure — and yet their use is prevented. What Kerry is asking for, and what the Israelis are asking him, is how to return to negotiations, not how to solve the problem. The Israelis rejected the Palestinian president's request that Netanyahu provide a map outlining a two-state partition for Palestine; the U.S. also found this unacceptable. All this is on top of talk about the conditions for the two parties to begin negotiations.
As for what Israel wants, the Palestinians have pledged to back down from making their case global and going to the U.N. and international organizations throughout the duration of negotiations, not even for two months, as they had already promised. This means that the Palestinians have decided not to try any treatment for their case. Likewise, the role of regional countries will be renewed in the political process. Instead of containing regional tension or controversy with Israel, it obstructs the regional arrangement involving other countries like Syria and Iran.
It shouldn't be believed that Kerry is talking about the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations he'd called for or that the other efforts might be a cover for Zionist settlement. No. The discussion is about negotiations with Iran, under the condition that they will not be a cover for advancing its nuclear plans. In his statement at Ben Gurion International Airport, he reassured Israelis that Iran will not be permitted to have nuclear weapons. Kerry reportedly listened to the different parties on the Israeli-Palestinian issue — in order to feel out how to disengage the political process — such as those that have continued over the last 20 years without success.
All the ideas put forward seem to be the same ones used in the past, such as the Arab peace initiative and economic development in the West Bank. It appears that what Kerry wants is completion and added details for what is already on the table.
According to the Washington Post, Kerry was angered by leaks from the Palestinian side about additional details; for example, he wants Arab states to be added to the peace initiative on the grounds that the initiative, announced in 2002 and renewed in 2007, does not include enough detail about what Israel would get if a settlement deal were to be reached. According to the newspaper, Kerry was irritated by leaks on both sides. Kerry continues to look for a compromise that will bring the two sides back to the negotiating table and in front of the cameras.
He is seeking Arab initiatives, talking about economic development in the West Bank and listening to the outmoded demands of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Traditional American reasoning has been unproductive over the last decades, attempting to solve the same dilemma with the same tools that have failed for 20 years.
It appears that Kerry's advisers didn't inform him that discussing economic development plans could be a particularly sensitive subject for the Palestinian people, despite their difficult economic status. The Israeli Prime Minister spoke earlier on economically peaceful alternatives to political and geographical compromise, which were rejected by the Palestinians. They feel that the occupational state-building programs and their arrangements, which the Palestinians adopted, have reached their upper limit and have failed to bring about political or economic independence.
Talking about economic development — as Kerry says, it isn't an alternative to the political process — is like saying that, objectively, the Palestinian situation is ripe for an explosion due to the economic crisis, the settlements, hopelessness, high unemployment, low morale and weakened, bankrupt instruments of power and social institutions. All of these are part of a recipe for revolution. There has to be some kind of truce.
Since settlement and occupation are the core diseases, Kerry decided to deal with the symptoms and pain relief to prevent an explosion. He is waiting for something to materialize that might address the underlying cause, which is as yet untreated.
The situation is like giving a cancer patient painkillers, with promises of looking into an available and known cure — and yet their use is prevented. What Kerry is asking for, and what the Israelis are asking him, is how to return to negotiations, not how to solve the problem. The Israelis rejected the Palestinian president's request that Netanyahu provide a map outlining a two-state partition for Palestine; the U.S. also found this unacceptable. All this is on top of talk about the conditions for the two parties to begin negotiations.
As for what Israel wants, the Palestinians have pledged to back down from making their case global and going to the U.N. and international organizations throughout the duration of negotiations, not even for two months, as they had already promised. This means that the Palestinians have decided not to try any treatment for their case. Likewise, the role of regional countries will be renewed in the political process. Instead of containing regional tension or controversy with Israel, it obstructs the regional arrangement involving other countries like Syria and Iran.