Uri Avnery

Uncs, Thank goodness, you have re-appeared.

I post these so that y'all can see that we are for the most part aware of
the situation in Palestine Gaza and Iraq. This is in no way an
endorsement of armed struggle. I still think that violence is the ultimate
"trap"

Zohar my wife is one of the smartest people I know and when I despair
about the situation here I take comfort in her observations.

One of them is this.
"It has always been this bad. I take heart in the fact that more people are
finally noticing. This in itself is the first step towards a real change for the
better."

America and the world are in sore need of responsible leadership. It's
coming.


Take it away Uri...


A Trap for Fools


21/07/07

IN A classical American western, the difference is as glaring as the midday
sun in Colorado: there are Good Guys and Bad Guys. The good ones are
the settlers, who are making the prairie bloom. The bad ones are the
Indians, who are blood-thirsty savages. The ultimate hero is the cowboy,
tough, humane, with a big revolver or two, ready to defend himself at all
times.

George Bush, who grew up on this myth, sticks to it even now, when he is
the leader of the world's only superpower. This week he presented the
world with an up-to-date western.

In this western - or, rather, middle eastern - there are also Good Guys
and Bad Guys. The good ones are the "moderates", who are the allies of
the US in the Middle East - Israel, Mahmoud Abbas and the pro-American
Arab regimes. The bad ones are Hamas, Hizbullah, Iran, Syria and al-
Qaeda.

It is a simple script. So simple, indeed, that an 8-year-old can understand
it. The conclusions are also simple: the good guys have to be supported,
the bad guys have to bite the dust. At the end, the hero - George himself
- will ride off into the sunset on his noble steed, while the music reaches
a crescendo.

THE CLASSICAL western, of course, does not show us the heroic pioneers
stealing the land from the Indians. Or the United States Cavalry attacking
the camps of the Indians, burning down the tents and killing their
inhabitants, men, women and children. How the US government, after
signing formal treaties with the Indian nations, breaks them one after
another. And how it drives the remnants into desolate regions, long
before the term "ethnic cleansing" was first used.

Denial runs through the classical western like a purple thread, as it does
through this speech of Bush's. This finds its main expression in a simple
fact: the occupation is hardly mentioned at all.

In the Palestinian community, for example, there is a struggle between
the "moderates" and the "extremists". The extremists are killers. Why are
they killers? There is no why. They are killers because they are killers. It's
in their nature. They were just born that way. The moderates are
moderates because they are moderates. Some people are just born good.

So the whole problem is a Palestinian problem. They must decide. They
must choose between moderates and extremists. If they choose the
moderates, they will get everything they can imagine: colorful glass beads
and gallons of whisky. If they choose the extremists, their end will be
bitter.

The Jewish Israelis do not have to choose between good and bad. Why?
Simply because there are no Bad Guys among them. They are just good.
They must help the good Palestinians. "Release" the Palestinian tax
moneys and give them to "Prime Minister (Salem) Fayad". Not to the
Palestinian government, but to one specific named person, the darling of
Bush.

What else is required from the Israelis? They must understand that their
"future lies in developing areas like the Negev and Galilee - not in
continuing occupation of the West Bank". (That's the only time the
occupation is mentioned at all.) They should remove unauthorized
outposts and end settlement expansion. Also, they may "find other
practical ways to reduce their footprint (in the West Bank) without
reducing their security". Meaning: the occupation can continue, but it
would be nice if we take some steps to make it less visible.

A long time ago, the United States viewed all settlements as illegal. When
the Israeli government continued to expand them, James Baker, the
Secretary of State under Bush the father, imposed financial sanctions
upon Israel. Bush the son at first demanded that all settlements
established after January 2001 should be dismantled. Later he withdrew
all opposition to the settlement blocs ("centers of population"). In the
"Road Map" he decreed that Israel must immediately freeze the
enlargement of the settlements. Now he is satisfied with a sanctimonious
request to "remove unauthorized outposts" (with no article) - that's to
say, some of those put up without the official authorization of the Israeli
government itself. All this without "or else" or any mention of sanctions.

In the last few years, only one such outpost, Amona, has been
dismantled, and this week Ehud Olmert decided to pardon all the fanatics
accused of attacking the police during that event. The Israeli government
knows that Bush is only paying lip service, and does not take him
seriously.

IN MANY classical westerns there appears a crook selling a patent
medicine to heal all ills: headaches and hemorrhoids, tuberculosis and
syphilis. George Bush has his own patent medicine, which appears in the
speech again and again. It will heal all diseases and ensure the final
victory of the Sons of Light over the Sons of Darkness.

The label on the bottle says "Building Palestinian Institutions".

How come we didn't think of this until now? Why did we go chasing off
after all kinds of solutions, and did not find this one, so simple, lying in
front of us for all to see?

It is an egg of Columbus, with a whiff of Alexander the Great's sword
cutting the Gordian knot. The Palestinians have no institutions. The two
good people, "President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayad�are striving to
build the institutions of a modern democracy." This means: "security
services�ministries that deliver services without corruption�steps that
unleash the natural enterprise of the Palestinian people�the rule of
law�"

All this under occupation, behind roadblocks, walls and fences, while the
main roads are barred to Palestinians, while the West Bank is chopped
into pieces and cut off from the rest of the world. By the way, in this
matter Bush has another patent medicine: all Palestinian exports will in
future go through Jordan and Egypt, not Israel.

In order to realize the vision of "building Palestinian institutions", Bush is
sending along his poodle. According to Bush, the sole task of Tony Blair
is indeed this: "to coordinate international efforts to help the Palestinians
establish the institutions of a strong and lasting free society." (Like which
example? Egypt? Saudi Arabia? Jordan? Pakistan? Morocco? Or perhaps
even Iraq?)

Let's hope no one is rude enough to mention the fact that the Palestinians
held democratic elections for their Parliament, not so long ago, under the
strict supervision of ex-President Jimmy Carter. As far as Bush is
concerned, that just did not happen, since the majority of the people
voted for Hamas. Therefore, Bush mentions only the elections held before
that, when Mahmoud Abbas was elected president, practically without
opposition. Everything else has been wiped off the slate.

So this is the up-to-date vision: "democratic Palestinian institutions" will
be in place, free of corruption (as in the US and Israel), and "capable
security forces" will be functioning, and Hamas will be eliminated, and the
armed factions will be dismantled, and all attacks on Israel will be
stopped, and the security of Israel ensured, and the incitement against
Israel ended, and everybody will recognize Israel's right to exist as "a
Jewish state and a homeland for the Jewish people", and all the
agreements that were signed in the past will be accepted - then "we can
soon begin serious negotiations towards the creation of a Palestinian
state." Wow!

What a wonderful sentence! "Soon" - without a timetable. "Serious
negotiations" - without fixing a date for their conclusion. "A Palestinian
state" (again, without the definite article, which Bush seems to detest) -
without specific borders. But a hint is given: "mutually agreed borders
reflecting previous lines and current realities, and mutually agreed
adjustments." Meaning: the settlement blocs and much else will be
annexed by Israel.

IT SEEMS as if the speech writers, after finishing the product, noticed that
it was pitifully devoid of content. Nothing new, nothing that could cause a
self-respecting newspaper to give it a headline.

I imagine the media advisor saying: "Mister President, we must add
something that will look new." Thus the "international meeting" was born.

"So I will call together an international meeting this fall of representatives
from nations that support a two-state solution, reject violence, recognize
Israel's right to exist, and commit to all previous agreements between the
parties. The key participants in this meeting will be the Israelis, the
Palestinians, and their neighbors in the region. Secretary Rice will chair
the meeting."

Wonderful. A meeting which has no date yet, but has a season of the year.
And for which no location has yet been fixed. And no list of participants.
And no planned conclusions, except the general statement: "She
(Condoleezza) and her counterparts will review the progress that has
been made towards building Palestinian institutions. They will look for
innovative and effective ways to support further reform. And they will
provide diplomatic support for the parties in their bilateral discussions
and negotiations, so that we can move forward on a successful path to a
Palestinian state." The meeting will not review the progress made towards
the removal of the outposts, for example.

It is not by accident that Bush omitted to identify the governments he
intends to invite. Clearly, he will try to fulfill one of the most cherished
dreams of Olmert: to meet publicly with a top representative of Saudi
Arabia. For Olmert this would be an immense achievement: an official
meeting with the most important Arab country which has no peace
agreement with Israel. A meeting for which he will not have to pay any
price. A free lunch.

It is dubious whether this wish will be fulfilled. The Saudis are very
cautious. They do not want to quarrel with any party in the Region - not
with Syria (which will not be invited, though it is a "neighbor" of the
Israelis and the Palestinians) and not with Hamas. Unlike Egypt, Jordan
and the Palestinian Authority, Saudi Arabia cannot be bribed with money.
It has enough of its own.

THE FINAL objective is a "Palestinian state", the "two-state solution". That
is a far-far-off aim. Not for nothing is it called a "political horizon", since
a horizon, as is well-known, recedes in the distance as one tries to
approach it.

In his poem "If", Rudyard Kipling describes all the tests an Englishman has
to endure in order to be considered a "man". One of them is: "If you can
bear to hear the truth you've spoken / Twisted by knaves to make a trap
for fools�"

We, the small group of Israelis who raised the banner of the "two-state
solution" more than fifty years ago, now have to endure George Bush
turning it into a rag to cover his nakedness. In his mouth, it is an empty,
deceitful and mendacious slogan. Only a fool will fall into this trap.

As Chaim Weizmann, the prominent Zionist leader and first president of
Israel, once said: "No state is given to a people on a silver platter." The
Palestinians, too, will not get their state without struggle, not as
baksheesh from Bush nor as a '"gesture" from Olmert. Nations achieve
their freedom by political or military struggle. Every struggle, violent or
non-violent, is a matter of power.

And power means first of all: Unity.


Edited by Daniel Dworsky

Bismillah and Salaams,

We hope and pray so as well, Uri.

In Riyadh,
The assembled leaders
Of the Arab countries
Offered us
Peace with the Palestinians
And the entire Arab world
For generations to come.

In Homesh
The assembled settlers
Offered us
War with the Palestinians
And the entire Arab world
For generations to come.

We must choose.




                      Gush Shalom ad published in Haaretz,
                March 30, 2007
          

.