Friday, July 06, 2007

A Flicker of Hope For Palesitne


I have said that Palestine can not come into being as long as it is cut off from both the Israeli and the Jordanian economies. Now, the idea of a role for the Hashemite ruled region of the ancient Roman "Phillistia" is being revived.

For those out of the loop, the historic "Palestine," under Romans, Arabs, and Turks, was an administrative region of Syria. Jordan and Israel, along with the idea for a separate West Bank Arab state, are all quite modern .. since the 1800s. In 48 Jordan invaded the putative Arab State and the idea of a Palestine including Jordan was attempted. It failed, in part, because it offered an alternative t Palestinian irredentism.

Dr. Robert Satloff,
of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, wrote that the "pursuit of an Israeli-Palestinian political horizon may in fact run counter to the interests and preferences of both sides. Instead, investing in an Arab-Palestinian political horizon - including early negotiations on the outline of an eventual Jordanian-Palestinian confederation - may be more realistic, valuable and effective."

As a possible model, may I suggest the situation in Northern Irelan. Peace may be breaking out because of a long period of Brit imposed rule BUT more because of the prosperity coming across the border wth Eire.

The issues is perhaps similar to the one facing the British in naotrher way. The new Brown government's effort to calm things down by using euphemisms for Muslim, is, naive (if well meant) to the point of absurdity.

With he risk of setting off flames, let me suggest that its arrogant to assume that "our" shared European culture is so superior to Islam that "we" can absorb them, melt them down to Brit or Merican culture, as it were. Many of the tenets of Islam are fundamentally different form anything Euro-Ameri-CDhristendom have absorbed in the past. The nearest example I can think of is Orthodox Judiasm. OJ. lke Islam, claims to have its own laws that supercede the laws of "our" society. Even today, many (growing) OJ communtiies libe apart and have their own limtied judicial systems. "We" can tolerate this for three reasons:

1. OJ, unlike Islam, makes no claim to the right to govern non-Jews.
2. OJ is not evangelical.
3. OJ is balanced by Reform Judaism that provides a very easy adapatation some call "Judeo-Christianity."
4. There is no economicd disparity between the OJ and the majority.
5. OJ are small part of the US or Europe.

It may be worth pointing out that RJ evolved over a millennium of Jews and Xtians living together. Moreover, that evolution was driven by a period of enlightenment and tolerance in the Christian majority. In contrast, Islam has lived within Christendom for less than a century and the Muslims in Europe have been brought there as an underclass to labor at low wages.

How does this apply to Palestine? I am unconvinced that the major stumbling block to peace is religion. As nutty as the islamofascisti are, my impression is that a "reform Islam," with intolerances and flexibility , can arise if the Palestinians have a way to develop an economy.
Reza Aslan paints a frightening picture of an Islamic world where ONLY Hezbollah and Hamas offer a vision of discipline and economic development that a poor person can understand. If the only sources of education and food is the Islamofascist run Mosque, the consequences are clear.
I urge folks to read Reza Aslan.

span.fullpost {display:inline;}

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

The Jordanian option, an old dream that Israel missed a long time ago, is today a nightmare for the Jordanian Kingdom that will be refused. For Jordanian dinasty the Palestians are armed and experienced troublemakers and in Black September the king Hussein killed 6-7000 rebels Palestinians in order to keep his rule.

SM Schwartz said...

Mirel ... good to see you here!

Obviously you know more than I do but .. I can hope, no?

Jordan may not have that choice. Abdullah is smart and looks long into his future. A successful Hamas regime on the rump of a Palestinian state would inevitably lead to an overthrow of the Hashemites.

The original idea of a Greater Jordan is not doable, BUT, someone other than Israel needs to help impose a peace for long enough that an economic mechanism can offer an alternative to permanent war.

So, mu idealistic scenario goes something like this:

a. Arab states plus European Union and US (and maybe even China) need to pacify this mess or risk global economic chaos.

b. Palestinians can never build a meaningful economy on their own. So, the "allies" unite to create an economic zone in Jordan that is available to Palestinian workers. This is NOT a state but an economic engine that can offer jobs to Jordanians and Palestinians.

c. Israel, along with the allies offer incentives for refugee camp disestablishment over a period of five years.

I know it is just a dream but what is the alternative?

SM Schwartz said...

BTW ..

have you read Reza Aslan's book? I mention it in a post below.

SM Schwartz said...

You might also look at this link:

http://seattlejew.blogspot.com/2007/04/racism-as-anthropology.html

Anonymous said...

Here in Israel the pesimists are waiting for awar with Syria, due to the fact that we are starting peace talks,but we will not give the Golan. The Palestinians are an issue, but a dead-end issue even for the left.

SM Schwartz said...

Why is the Golan such an issue? I know the history but in a missle era th strategic issues seem less urgent.

It seems to me that if Abdullah does not exert leadership, his legacy will be to bhe the father of another Lebanon.

Anonymous said...

Peace is a question of trust; after Ghaza evacuation, the next land agreement will be done by plebiscite and for the time being the majority of Jews will vote against. If you start peace talks and the peace talks will be end by our refuse, the ennemy government that needs a war to continue his rule in Syria and Leban, will consider our answer a casus belli.
As in 6 days war, we will win if we may give the first strike.
...so the first steps to awar are peace talks that from their start we know that will blow sky up.

SM Schwartz said...

I fully understand. But, your despair implies that Israel is not going to survive. Obe cast the dice only so many times and the inevitable advent of asymmetric weapons makes this much worse.

I feel guilty living here while you need to live under this threat. At the same time I keep trying to see a way out. The uncredible stuoidity of it all is that an Israeli-Pakestinain conco0minium could be a very powerful force.

I have hopes that Prtesident Obama will do a better job.

Anonymous said...

No, Israel may loose for the FIRST time a war(Yom Kippur was a great victory and Lebanon II was a batlle with wrong weapons: super modern planes against deep underground guerilla)but it will stay as a state for a long time as nobody will be so crazy to attack when Israel has the means to blow up the whole ship with a barrell of atomic and unconventional (?) weapons...however someone has to presume that some Iranian president is ready to sacrifice and purify the whole region.
Also we have to take in consideration that our Israeli leaders are very mediocres and in combination with the stupidity of other leaders, ennemies and allies, Israel may arrive at a very tight situation.
About the Palestinian- Jewish entity, even myself, a Meretz voter, can not see in the [my;-)] future. Separation, evacuation of Jews and Arabs, land exchanges...maybe. Some great Egyptian concessions of land under American pressure may give hope to "peace of no agression", but not more.
Also the Israeli peace concessions were seen by all the Palestinian Arabs as a sign of victory and that Israel lost his strength and DETERMINATION. In the street language , the Palestinians are no more afraid of IDF and Israel. The Palestinian rockets attacks go unpunished by Israeli government and in short time we will be witness to a change of politics ,maybe together with a change of [the form of] Israeli government.
Teeth for teeth in the best soviet tradition: manifests from the air to evacuate, bombardments.
As in Beyruth but on a large scale.

SM Schwartz said...

I am less convinced that Israel can survive. It si a small country, physically. A devastating modern attack would pre-empt a nuclear response.

I am intrigued by your comments about Egypt. Can you expand?

Shabat shalom

Anonymous said...

...due to the land and real estate penury in the discordy Palestine region(Israel and Palestine), the only practical solution is to "buy" land from Egypt for palestinians; this "good will" concession may be obtained by US $ and political pressure. So a Palestine with enough land for the millions of refugees may be obtained by Egyptian land and will.
About Israel: when you are with the back to the sea, you will fight to the end.
Israel may be lost by demoralisation and continuos war, but not by a major attack by Iran and Syria; Egypt has to participate and in next future I don't think that is logical. But the conflict is not logical, but existential.

Anonymous said...

The survival of Israel will be decided by the determination, the will , the ingenuosity of the people. Athens, Sparta, Macedonia, Holland were small republican/advanced countries that won wars against empires; a determinated small country has now and in the future weapons of mass destruction maned by few people: atomic and biologic weapons are only an example. BTW also the terrorists have now same advantages.
My fear for the future of Israel is coming from the fact that I see that after so many years of war and politics we are governed by un-gifted, mediocres personalities and we don't have a leader in any of our political parties; I am afraid that the Israeli Right, that I "fought" all my 35 years in Israel was right, saying that the Arabs can't be trusted (in making peace) and when teritories will given back to the Palestinians, we will not be able to punish them if they continue the terror/fight/guerilla. Ghaza and Leban are the best examples...I remember myself in Ghaza, in a patrool on the damned streets of El Bouredji, 17-20 years ago, speaking politics with other soldier from our jeep (Jews together speak about politics all the time ;-)); the comander and the driver were Likud, the second soldier Maarakh-Labour, myself Meretz-Peace NOW. The arguments of the "right" wing of our jeep were that if we get out from Ghaza, the Palestinians will shoot against our towns with rockets; the arguments of "left" were that in the moment when we will go out from Ghaza and the Arabs will have a government, we will punish them to the bloody end. I remember myself saying that even one rocket will be lanced against an Israeli town, "Ghaza will become a parking", will be leveled.
At least in this "jeep parlament", the "right" was right.