Picture
There have been quite a few articles flying around lately on the future of  Palestinian politics. Thomas Friedman recently praised Prime Minister Salam Fayyad’s work in the West Bank, while Nathan Brown poured cold water on international enthusiasm for Fayyadism and Michele Dunne reminded everyone how bad America’s record of picking Palestinian leaders is.

The Norway-based Fafo Institute for Applied International Studies recently published the 2010 edition of its annual survey of Palestinians opinions. Fafo’s data provides some interesting fodder for the ongoing debate on Palestinian reconciliation, the Gaza tunnels and a host of other topics.

Over the next couple of days, I will unpack some of Fafo’s findings. Today, we’ll look at who Palestinians really trust.  The short answer is no one. The longer answer:

When asked to report their level of confidence in a variety of institutions and leaders, the majority of Palestinians surveyed reported having only “A little” or “none at all” for every Palestinian entity listed in the survey. This includes Abbas, Fayyad, Haniyeh and their respective governments, the security services in both the West Bank and Gaza, the Palestinian Legislative Council, and Islamic charities. The numbers are even lower when you look at the 40% of the respondents who report that they don't plan to participate in upcoming elections or don’t have a party preference.

The sole organization that received a vote of confidence from a majority of Palestinian was the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) which received particularly strong numbers in the Gaza Strip (42% of Gazans report “A great deal” of confidence and 35% report “Quite a lot”) where many Palestinians rely on the UNRWA for income.

Read more after the jump ---->
 
 
Picture
Thinking about the Israeli-Palestinian issue over the past week has reminded me of that famous (but possibly apocryphal) Henry Kissinger quote about European disunity. Israel's detractors don't want to hear this, but Arab disunity is one of the biggest impediments to making peace in the region. Whom should Netanyahu call if/when he wants to make peace?

Based on the vitriol in the press, you could be forgiven for forgetting that Israel has withdrawn twice in the past 10 years from occupied territories, and formed a new party 5 years ago (Kadima) based on a platform of withdrawing from the remaining territories. Kadima was the ruling party in Israel until Netanyahu took over last year. 

Unilateral withdrawal was supposed to address the problem of not being able to dial up the leader of the Arab world. But it didn't--without Arab leadership, the most extreme voices prevailed in response. After Israel pulled out of South Lebanon, there was no peace-- only rockets and kidnappings from a de-facto Hizbullah state. Replacing one "party of God" for another, the withdrawal from Gaza has had the same result.

So the withdrawals from South Lebanon and Gaza, which were supposed to be the templates for withdrawal from the Golan Heights and the West Bank, have instead become fierce arguments for continuing to occupy the West Bank (and keep Gaza under lockdown). 

With rejectionists in control of Gaza, the linchpin of the piece process is now the West Bank. Withdrawing from the West Bank and establishing a Palestinian state under Mahmoud Abbas's leadership could be a masterstroke-- sucking air out of the rejectionist Hamas-Hizbullah-Iran-Syria terror caucus, and putting power back into the hands of pragmatic realists. It could also be a debacle-- opening the population centers around Tel Aviv to insufferable rocket attacks, making Israel's only international airport inoperable, and emboldening the rejectionists to focus on de-legitimizing pre-1967 Israel.

Unfortunately, all recent history points to the latter outcome. Considering the immense political capital involved in withdrawing from the West Bank, Israel's last bargaining chip, and the unprecedented fight with the settler movement necessary to make it happen, it is impossible for any Israeli leader to countenance withdrawal at this point. Sadly, that makes it impossible to see a viable peace in the future. And every day that the status quo endures, the stronger the rejectionist camp becomes.
 
Hamas is an Idea 06/02/2010
 
Amos Oz:

…Hamas is not just a terrorist organization. Hamas is an idea, a desperate and fanatical idea that grew out of the desolation and frustration of many Palestinians. No idea has ever been defeated by force — not by siege, not by bombardment, not by being flattened with tank treads and not by marine commandos. To defeat an idea, you have to offer a better idea, a more attractive and acceptable one.

Thus, the only way for Israel to edge out Hamas would be to quickly reach an agreement with the Palestinians on the establishment of an independent state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip as defined by the 1967 borders, with its capital in East Jerusalem. 

During my travels in South America, and seeing the worship of Che Guevara, I recognized the same phenomenon. Who Guevara actually was, or what he actually did, is immaterial. It's Guevara the idea, the idea of sacrificing for something greater than yourself, the idea of freedom-- this is what draws people to him.

Oz goes on to say that Israel should get ahead of events and hand over the West Bank to Fatah. From there, it can put pressure on Hamas to sign an agreement for Gaza. That'd be some strategic thinking, wouldn't it? 

But then there are the settlers....
 
 
Picture
On Bibi's Summer Reading List?
My disagreements with Israel’s actions on Monday will seem reasonable to most people. But to some people, especially to my Jewish friends, my comments might seem treasonous, especially on the wrongfulness of the Gaza blockade. To counter me, they will likely deploy some variation of the following three arguments: Israel is simply defending itself, Israel needs to blockade Gaza to prevent Iran from arming Hamas, and Israel is unfairly being held to double standards. I will try to refute these three arguments below.

In my case, these arguments will also be backed by the emotional idea that Israel is so besieged, and anti-Semitism so rampant, that I as a Jew must defend everything Israel does, even if its policies are counterproductive. I understand the idea of my people, right or wrong, but as a liberal I cannot accept it.

Anyway, here are the arguments:

Click "Read More" to Continue------------->
 
 
I wish I had more sources and links, but from what I've gathered, the reports by the Israeli government that the Turkish group on the ship (IHH) may have links to Islamic terrorist groups is not far-fetched.

According to one Turkish friend, IHH is a radical Islamist group in Turkey that was branded as "first degree dangerous" by Turkish intelligence. It supports Milli Görüş, the political platform of Necmettin Erbakan, a former Turkish PM who was removed from power by the military in 1997 for attempting to overthrow the secular state. Erbakan is the former political tutor of both current Turkish PM Tayyip Erdogan and President Abdullah Gül.

Reportedly, in Turkish interviews with members of IHH, the protesters were eager for martyrdom and so were happy to have the chance to be attacked by Israel. It helps to explain why 30 or so of the activists decided to stay on deck and attack the commandos, while the other 500+ went inside to avoid conflict. Like Joe said, these guys are not your run-of-the-mill peace activists.
 
A Few Loose Ends 06/01/2010
 
Picture
The Mavi Marmara, with an Israeli warship in the distance. Quite a ship for $1.5 mil.
The ship that will go down in history from the Gaza flotilla, the Mavi Marmara, looked a bit familiar to Evan and me... 

Turns out, the Mavi Marmara, until last year, ferried passengers from Istanbul's Sarayburnu (Topkapi Palace area) to Marmara and Avşa Adası - islands in the Sea of Marmara (the Sea of Marmara, via the Turkish Straits, connects the Mediterranean and Black Seas). 

The ship was owned and operated by IDO-- Istanbul's municipal "sea boat" company until it was recently sold to IHH Insan Yardım Vakfi (İnsan Halkarı Hürriyet - İnsan Yardım Vakfi/Human Rights Freedom - Human Aid Association). The price was a reported bargain-buster $1.5 million - not much for a ship designed to carry up to 1080 people. 

Although some Turkish NGOs are able to amass lots of money from Islamic networks on their own - Deniz Feneri, for instance-- the low price for the ship, the scale and obviously provocative nature of its mission, leads some to wonder if the move wasn't backed by the Turkish government. Turkey controversially hosted Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal in Ankara in 2006, and Erdogan has long wished to end Turkey's close relationship with Israel and reestablish close relations with the Islamic world. Ending the blockade would be a huge coup for Turkey's standing in the region.

I wish I had more information about IHH, but reliable reports are hard to find, and the NGO's website is curiously password-protected.

Update: IHH's website is now open but provides few details about the group's previous work and motivations.
 
 
Gideon Levy writes a powerful article in Ha'aretz on how Israel's leadership has gone off the deep end. I agree with everything he says, and it echoes Peter Beinart's fear that liberal Zionism exists "only in memories." I really think that years of playing God in the occupied territories has given the Israeli military a false sense of what will fly in the international arena. At the end of the day, this is a Turkish ship in international waters, a member of NATO. What the hell were you thinking? 

In a way, this kind of thing had to happen, and in the long-term, hopefully it can increase the chances for peace by forcing a correction in Israel's path towards a policy based on reality. Hamas isn't going anywhere, while the blockade is both a moral outrage and a strategic failure. 

But in the meantime, this is an unmitigated disaster that will bring diplomatic isolation and perhaps even sanctions and court cases. Stopping Iran's nuclear program just got a thousand times harder, while pressure will be on Israel to denuclearize. Netanyahu, if he has any honor, should resign.

- Jon

Click "read more" for the money excerpt of the article-->
 
 
This is from the Israeli Army. It starts at 10 sec. Israel should never have put these commandos into such an impossible situation.
 
 
Picture
A lot of questions remain after Israel attacked an aid flotilla headed for Gaza early this morning: Why launch an operation against protesters in darkness at 4:00 am, a time that would maximize chaos? Why not wait until the ships entered territorial waters? Why launch an attack at all, when there were less risky ways to divert the ships? [update: Israel attacked at night to avoid media coverage. That worked out well]

The only thing that is clear is that Israel walked, with hubris, right into a giant trap. And Binyamin Netanyahu is leading one of the most diplomatically incompetent governments in history.

As the world waits to see how Turkey responds, another country to watch is Egypt. Many people (especially outside of the Arab world and Iran) often forget this fact—but the Gaza blockade is a two country affair. Egypt also has a border with Gaza, and by opening the Refah crossing, it could end the blockade any minute that it wants to. Egyptian President Mubarak's support for the blockade is extremely unpopular at home, and it makes him a frequent target of invectives from al-Jazeera, Hezbullah TV (al-Manar), and Iranian government mouthpieces. 

But Mubarak also loathes Hamas, which is an offshoot of Mubarak’s main domestic opposition, the Muslim Brotherhood. Let’s see if he can withstand pressure this time. And if Turkey wants to use its opportunity in the spotlight to make the blockade untenable, it should not only condemn Israel but also put heavy pressure on Egypt, which is more likely to crack.

P.S. For those who aren’t familiar with the history of the region, Gaza was actually part of Egypt until Israel conquered the territory in the 1967 Six-Day War. Many Israelis undoubtedly wish that it was still part of Egypt.

- Jon
 
 
Ross Douthat suggests that perhaps the declining attachment of secular American Jews, as described in Peter Beinart's essay, is a product of natural assimilation—as has happened to Irish and Italian Americans’ decrease in attachment for their respective homelands. The Economist’s Democracy in America blog (the Economist is so money!) basically takes Douthat to school:

Here's the thing: Italy and Ireland are not projects. There is no way for Italy or Ireland to fail to become Italy or Ireland, to traduce their founders' visions and disappoint some group of their citizens so bitterly that they would rather emigrate than participate in or legitimate them. But Israel, like America or the Soviet Union, is an eschatological and ideological project. And for most American Jews (though not for all Jews), the Zionist project has always envisioned a liberal, democratic state upholding the norms of citizenship and human rights that Theodore Herzl felt had been violated by European anti-Semitism. Just as American socialists could turn away from the USSR in the aftermath of the show trials, and just as some Americans periodically feel that political developments in the US constitute a betrayal of the ideals that make the nation what it is, liberal Jews brought up on a liberal, democratic (and often socialist) vision of Zionism are coming to feel that the actually-existing Israeli state is a betrayal of those Zionist ideals, and that it does not deserve their allegiance.

This is what is torturing the moral compass of liberal Zionists—the idea that Jews, so poorly treated as minorities in Europe, have failed to give equal rights to minorities in the Jewish state. Despite all the slogans—“Israeli Arabs are freer than Arabs in any other country”—Arabs are not functionally equal to Jews in Israel—definitely not in East Jerusalem, and lets not mention the West Bank. Some may argue that it is impossible to be liberal in the Middle Eastern environment. Nevertheless, what does this mean for the Zionist project? How can an illiberal Israel be a light upon nations?
 
Loading
try {var pageTracker = _gat._getTracker("UA-9284776-1");pageTracker._trackPageview(); } catch(err) {}