Huge disappointment
by
Javed Hafiz |
Missed opportunities show opposition to Palestinian state
I normally confine this column to developments within and around Pakistan. However, an issue that has consistently claimed emotional attachment of Pakistanis is the problem in Palestine. To Muslims around the globe, Al Aqsa mosque and the land of Palestine have a special relevance. In my various Middle East postings in Cairo, Damascus, Amman, Jeddah, Riyadh and Muscat, I was able to witness various Arab official positions and popular sentiments about Palestine from a close quarter. As expected, Pakistan has been a consistent supporter of Palestinian rights.
The Middle East problem was, in a sense, my bread and butter, since I used to regularly send official dispatches about it. Even from a secular angle, Palestine and its people deserved our support. After all, they had been subjected to an enormous historical wrong.
They were paying the price of Nazi brutalities against the Jews. Yes, at the end of World War II the Jews deserved sympathy. However, to compensate a persecuted people by expelling millions of Palestinians from their homes was patently wrong. My commitment to the Palestinian cause was, in that sense, personal as well. Palestinian issue had supporters around the globe, of all colour and creeds.
When President Obama said the day on the floor of UN General Assembly that the Palestinian State could not win international recognition through UN resolutions, it pained me enormously. After all, the state of Israel was created in 1948 after a UN resolution. This exposes the double standards of the sole super power. The leadership of a nation once symbolised by George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Woodrow Wilson is today shorn of its noble historical legacy. Woodrow Wilson is remembered to this day for enunciating the principles of self determination. President Obama has denied those very rights to the Palestinians from a forum that symbolises international legality.
President Obama says the Palestinians should pursue their statehood through negotiations with Israel. Palestinians took that road in the 1980’s and feel totally frustrated today. In 1993, when the Oslo Accords were signed, the number of Israeli settlers living on the West Bank was 100,000. It has tripled since then. After the PLO was recognised by all Arab leaders in early 1980’s as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinians, Yasser Arafat took the historic decision to renounce militancy and seek a negotiated solution. That was a historic opportunity that the Israeli leadership did not avail and the result was growth of more militant organisations in Palestine.
A widely Arab supported proposal given by Saudi Arabia for a Middle East solution was yet another opportunity offered to Israel. You give up our lands occupied in 1967 and we will recognise you, was the Arab message. Two independent sovereign states could co-exist as neighbours. Israelis failed to cash in on that eminently reasonable proposal as well. By now it is abundantly clear that Israel does not want an independent sovereign Palestinian state as its neighbour.
So what kind of a Palestinian State would be acceptable to Israel? First and foremost, this state will not include the entire West Bank nor would it have East Jerusalem. It would have no armed forces of its own. Some of the Jewish settlements on the West Bank would stay. The border check points would be controlled by Israel. Palestinian refugees living in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria would have no right to return to their homes and hearths in Israel.
Of late, Israel has also added the demand that it should be recognised as a Jewish state by the Palestinians. This has long time implications for 20 per cent Muslim and Christian Arabs still living in Israel. Moreover, the Palestinian state envisaged by Israelis would be a collection of cantons with hostile territories of Jewish settlements in between. What kind of a “state” would that be?
It would appear that the US support for the Arab Spring was merely lip service. It’s espousal of democracy and human rights in Libya was a cover for regime change. I am no fan of the ousted regime in Tripoli but the way resolution No. 1973 has been manipulated is also instructive. US leadership should focus on the recent scenes outside the Israeli embassy in Cairo. By blindly supporting the intransigent Israeli leadership, it may neutralise the fruits of its past efforts in the Middle East. A recent poll in the US Jewish community shows that even their majority now supports two state-solution in Palestine.
As much as Obama’s Cairo speech was a whiff of fresh air, his recent address before the UN General Assembly was a big disappointment. |
Other comment for Javed Hafiz
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| NEWS UPDATES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
