Israeli-Palestinian Enmity Remains upon Death of Sharon: US-Russian Interference Hinders Peace Effort

Published in Ming Pao
(Hong Kong) on 19 January 2014
by Editorial (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Nathan Hsu. Edited by Amanda Dunker.
After eight years in a coma, former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has died. Among other stories surrounding his posthumous evaluation, much global commentary has focused upon his leadership as defense minister during the 1982 invasion of Lebanon, when he permitted the massacre of some 700 to 2,000 Palestinians by a Christian militia. While the actual count remains in dispute, the slaughter of even one person is still a slaughter, much less hundreds of unarmed Palestinians. Even Israelis find it difficult to rationalize Sharon's actions; the accompanying stigma for war crimes may be hard to shake.

Sharon Should Face Trial for Sanction of Massacre during Lebanon Invasion

While alive, Sharon escaped the judgment of international war crimes tribunals, but his passing has created a certain expectation for Middle Eastern peace. Israel's position is that its survival was ultimately contingent upon fighting the five Arab-Israeli wars. From the first war in 1948 until the fifth in 1982, Israel and its Arab opponents have used every form of modern armament short of nuclear weapons across the vast sands of the Middle East. In the opening stages of the fourth war in 1973, Israel was very nearly annihilated. If not for the strength of U.S. military aid, circumstances in the Middle East today might be entirely different. Sharon was the last Israeli prime minister to have played a part in all five wars. Current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was born in 1949. From a historical perspective, the burden on Israeli-Palestinian relations caused by the wars should be lessened for the Israeli government and, in its place, allow for more peaceful thinking.

But indeed, not having participated in war is not a clear indication of an anti-war stance, and both Israelis and Palestinians have had their right to exist challenged within an atmosphere thick with mutual distrust. With the addition of the Middle Eastern geopolitical strategies of the U.S. and Soviet Union (now Russia) during the Cold War and post-Cold War eras in supporting Israel and the Palestinians with a constant flow of military aid, it was inevitable that war became the only solution to their problems. Though there have been no major Arab-Israeli wars for the past 30 years, there is still the occasional Israeli fighter strike on a Palestinian base and the Middle East remains a powder keg ready to blow. At one time 20 years ago, Israel adopted a peaceful demeanor, but this was done with an ulterior motive. When Sharon became prime minister in 2001 and then unilaterally disengaged from Gaza, it was widely regarded as an Israeli attempt to fetter Palestinians and forestall any plans to establish a Palestinian state. With the proliferation of such theories, the peace process was put on hold indefinitely.

The Middle Eastern landscape is a complex tapestry woven from situational, historical and religious factors, as well as the influence of external powers. Having personally experienced this [landscape], the last generation of Israelis and Palestinians were unable to put their differences aside. With both Sharon and Yasser Arafat now having returned to dust, however, a new way of thinking should be cultivated, lest the conflict be passed down to later generations. When even South Africa's apartheid policies can become history, why can't the Israelis and Palestinians, with their abundant wisdom, accomplish the same?

A key factor here is the presence of external powers. As all are aware, the true puppet masters behind the successive Arab-Israeli wars were the U.S. and the former Soviet Union. They took hold of Israel and Palestine respectively and wielded their veto powers with abandon in the U.N. Security Council, with at least 48 U.S. vetoes coming on resolutions pertaining to the Middle East, Palestine or Israel. The United States’ sheltering of Israel in this way is linked to its Middle Eastern strategy. Maintaining a foothold in the Middle East; balancing affairs in Africa, the Mediterranean and the Middle East; and supporting Israel are common goals that straddle party lines within the U.S., with the only differences in the choice of tactics. When the U.S. requires the aid of Arab states, Israel temporarily becomes of secondary importance, such as during the first Gulf War when the U.S. used every method at its disposal to restrain Israel for fear that the Arab coalition against Iraq would fracture. But when the Israeli military surrounded PLO leader Arafat's headquarters, the U.S. did little beyond feign a token objection.

A Third Option Outside of the U.S. and Russia: Beijing May Be of Aid in Peace Talks

After more than half a century, circumstances in the Middle East remain dire. Israel's present inability to find a suitable opening for peace remains a contributing factor, but the overt and clandestine struggles in the region between external powers are the primary culprits in the prolonged conflict. Although the Middle East maintains close ties with the U.S. and Russia, China should be capable of serving as a nonpartisan force to mediate within the deadlock, given the burgeoning strength of its economy in recent years and its impartial diplomacy toward both Israel and the Palestinians, as past reliance on the dueling U.S. and Russia has only ever won a short-lived peace. The passing of the battle-scarred Sharon has paved the way for a new way of thinking. Years of strife will not be forgotten in a day, but if the Israelis and Palestinians hesitate and miss this fleeting opportunity for peace, the next disaster may soon come knocking at the door.


以色列前總理沙龍昏迷8年後去世,對他的蓋棺定論,國際間的評說重點之一,都集中在他於1982年擔任國防部長期間揮軍入侵黎巴隥,容讓基督徒民兵屠殺巴勒斯坦人,死亡人數的說法由七百餘到二千不等。然而,不論人數多少,就算屠殺一個人仍然是屠殺,更何是數以百計手無寸鐵的巴人。這一點,即使是以色列人也難以替沙龍辯說,戰犯之罪難以推卸。

入侵黎國默許大屠殺

沙龍應面對戰犯審判

沙龍生前逃過國際戰爭法庭的審判,但他的去世,卻令人對中東和平有覑某種期待。以色列的說法,該國的生存主觀上是靠五次中東戰爭打出來的,由1948年的第一次中東戰爭迄至1982年的第五次中東戰爭,以阿雙方在中東大漠除了沒有使用核武,所有當代最新型的武器都用上。尤其是1973年的第四次中東戰爭,以色列在開初階段幾乎被殲滅,若不是美國傾一國之力軍援,今天中東局勢也許很不一樣。沙龍是五次中東戰爭都有參加的以色列總理,也是最後一個五戰都參與的總理,現今以色列總理內塔尼亞胡生於1949年,從歷史層次而言,以色列政府理應對以巴關係少了一重戰爭包袱,多一重和平思維。

誠然,沒有參加過戰爭不代表揚棄戰爭,以色列的生存權和巴勒斯坦人的生存權在互不信任的氛圍受到挑戰,加之冷戰和後冷戰年代美蘇(俄)的中東地緣政治,各自支持以巴一方,軍援不絕,戰爭就成為解決問題的唯一手段。儘管近30年中東沒有大戰,然而隔三差五以色列戰機就空襲巴人據點,中東仍然是一個蓄勢待發的火藥庫。過去20年,以色列方面一度有過和平姿態,可是這些都是夾帶覑另類考量的動作,沙龍2001年擔任總理後,實施撤出加沙的單邊行動,被視為以色列欲以此套牢巴人,阻止其立國的計謀,類似的猜忌不一而足,中東和平延宕無期。

中東局勢是一隻手掌打不響的複雜情勢,歷史、宗教以及大國因素夾纏其中。以巴上一代因覑各自的親身經歷難以放下一切,隨覑沙龍去世,阿拉法亦已歸塵土,一種新的思維理應培育而出,否則鬥爭延續後代,當連南非的種族政策都可以成為歷史,充滿智慧的以色列及巴勒斯坦人為何不可?

此一另一關鍵,是大國因素的存在。眾所周知,中東歷次戰爭的後台老闆其實是昔日的美蘇和今日的美俄,兩國各擁以巴一方,在聯合國安理會動輒使用否決權,其中,美國至少有48次否決權是與中東、巴勒斯坦、以色列有關,毫不手軟。美國如此維護以色列,實與其中東戰略有關,在中東留下一塊立足點,在非洲、地中海以及中東盱衡全局,支持以色列是美國跨黨派共識,只是間中手段有異,當美國需要拉攏阿拉伯國家,以色列會暫時成為次要,如第一次波斯灣戰爭,美國為免阿拉伯反伊拉克聯盟分裂,就再三軟硬兼施遏住以色列。可是當以軍包圍巴解領袖阿拉法大本營,美國卻裝模作樣輕輕放過。

美俄之外第三條路

北京或可助和談

中東的情勢歷經大半世紀仍然緊張,以巴一時難以找到和平出路固然是其中之一原因,大國在區內的明爭暗鬥,則是戰爭不止最主要因素。儘管中東緊扣美俄,然而中國隨覑近年經濟實力的增強,加上對以巴的等距外交,應可作為一股中立勢力調解中東僵局,以往靠美俄犄角之鬥而獲得的只是短暫和平。歷盡殺戮的沙龍去世,為新思維抬頭創造良好條件,千秋之戰難在朝夕之間得到解決,若仍然遲疑不決,和平時機稍縱即逝,另一場災難或者又再臨門。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Germany: Europe Bending the Knee to Trump

Austria: Trump, the Bulldozer of NATO

     

Australia: Donald Trump Just Won the Fight To Remake America in 3 Big Ways

Spain: A NATO Tailor-Made for Trump

OPD 26th June 2025, edited by Michelle Bisson Proofer: See...

Palestine: Ceasefire Not Peace: How Netanyahu and AIPAC Outsourced Israel’s War To Trump

Topics

Australia: Donald Trump Is Not the Only Moving Part When It Comes to Global Trade

Ireland: As Genocide Proceeds, Netanyahu Is Yet Again Being Feted in Washington

Canada: Canada’s Retaliatory Tariffs Hurt Canadians

Spain: A NATO Tailor-Made for Trump

OPD 26th June 2025, edited by Michelle Bisson Proofer: See...

Germany: Trump’s Words and Putin’s Calculus

Palestine: Ceasefire Not Peace: How Netanyahu and AIPAC Outsourced Israel’s War To Trump

Mauritius: The US-Israel-Iran Triangle: from Obliteration to Mediation

Related Articles

Hong Kong: Foreign Media Warn US Brand Reputation Veering toward ‘Collapse’ under Trump Policy Impact

Hong Kong: The Lessons of World War II: The Real World Importance of Resisting Hegemony

Hong Kong: Can US Tariffs Targeting Hong Kong’s ‘Very Survival’ Really Choke the Life out of It?

Hong Kong: What Makes US Trade War More Dangerous than 2008 Crisis: Trump

Hong Kong: China, Japan, South Korea Pave Way for Summit Talks; Liu Teng-Chung: Responding to Trump