Pressuring Israel May Prevent a 'Generational' Mideast War

[cali]

The Middle East stands at the edge of an abyss, and the most powerful country in the world has become institutionally incapable of pulling it back.

The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reports that there "will be a war next summer. Only the sector has not been chosen yet." According to Israeli defense officials, "the IDF's operative assumption is that during the coming summer months, a war will break out against Hezbollah and perhaps against Syria as well."

America's best hope of containing the escalating tensions in the region would be to address the festering wound that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has represented for decades. Common sense dictates that the time has come for the United States to apply pressure on Israel to restart negotiations with the Palestinians equal to that already put on the Palestinians to recognize Israel and contain their violent factions.

That would mark a dramatic shift in policy, and would potentially transform Bush's smoldering wreckage of a Middle East agenda. It could also represent a turnaround in the larger struggle against Islamic extremism, pulling the world back from the brink of the real "Clash of Civilizations" that ideologues from both East and West apparently covet.

<snip>

http://www.alternet.org/story/45680/

[azurnoir]

1. Distasteful as this may be to some

all of the parties have to be allowed at the table, that means Hezbollah and Hamas too.This is not a debate on whether or not they are "terrorist organizations who only purpose is to destroy Israel", nor is it making light of the fact that is part of their rhetoric.They are in fact players and to keeping them out does not deny their existence, it only allows them to remain wild cards, the game can not be refereed with half the players.Will this work, will it make things worse? I do not know however excluding them only maintains the present situation of escalation.

[PCIntern]

2. Fair enough...

and their assurances of anything will be worth...what?

If someone were to tell you that when they saw your children they would crush their heads with a baseball bat, would you be satisfied to sit down with, say, a police officer, and discuss things? Would you believe their assurances and implement policies to 'live with' them? Or would you cast a prejudiced eye towards their secondary rhetoric, assuming that they were just behaving for the polce officer's benefit?

Because that's what we're talkng about here.

Just asking...

[cali]

3. while I agree that Israel

must sit down at the table with representatives of the Palestinians, H'zbollah does not have a legitimate seat at the table.

[pelsar]

4. hamas or Fatah?

which one should israel sit down with?....perhaps with hamas for gaza, since they are stronger there and Fatah in the westbank?

or is the president (abbas) the one to sit with while the govt (hamas) is to be ignored...or maybe its the other way around?

_______

until they sort of out whos in charge and its agreed and enforced, there is no one to sit down with......

[cali]

5. I agree.

At this point there's no one to sit down with, but what happens if new elections are called and Hamas comes out solidly on top? Should Israel continue to draw the line at negoitiating with Hamas?

[pelsar]

7. i dont know...

as i've thought about it, i looked at Begin...who was adamant about "greater israel"..and yet in the end returned to Egypt the Sinai. I also realize that its only the ones on the right, be it the Palestinians or israelis who can really "make a deal".......so heres the problem.

Hamas is "religious" and thats my problem with them. Not the recognition or non recognition, that could easily be nothing more than politics. But when you've "god on your side"...in a fanatic way, as in Iran, Taliban. I tend to believe them at their word and at the same time see them as not being very flexible (as in the extremist settlers etc).

I pity the Palestinians in gaza, their lives just seem to be getting worse and worse...and if hamas really takes over with all their religious 'stuff" and implement it...well god help the citizens of gaza.

[oberliner]

9. Arafat eventually recognized Israel's right to exist

The PLO went from a terrorist organization committed to the destruction of the State of Israel to a peace partner.

Perhaps the same will happen with Hamas.

[pelsar]

10. PLO...was secular in nature...

...secular movements can change as their platforms and beliefs are based on the political environment...religious movements are less flexible..especially those that are fundamentalist in nature as god is not part of any "political environment. Fundamentalists are basically cults....for them to change means they have to disavow their previous belief in god and his commandments...for many of the believers that will amount to treason.....is hamas a fundamentalist type movement like the taliban and iran?...those were/are pretty sick societies (looking from a liberal civil rights point of view)

[azurnoir]

8. Both, their conflict or civil war

is a part of the picture. Sorting out who's in charge is part of the deal.

[sabbat hunter]

6. how can you sit down

with someone who doesnt even recognize you and refuses to negotiate with you (hamas)?