ANSWER #3

Steve Cohen writes, in conclusion:
Yes, yes, if only all Palestinians would adopt Gandhian non-violence strategies. It would be a wise move. I hope they do it. Maybe Jesse Jackson can convince them of that. Until that happens, however, we must continue to live in the real world.
I think the right position is still that America must use its power to force peace. The Israelis bear a significant piece of responsibility for the current situation and they couldn’t do what they do without the uncritical aid check from the United States.
Do you believe that the 2000 peace plan was generous? (The tactical question of whether the Palestinians should have accepted it is a different question). What can Arafat actually do to stop the violence now that the Palestinian Authority has had all of its authority taken away? If he stopped talking out of both sides of his mouth would anyone notice? Or care? Isn’t the demand for all terrorist acts to cease before talks begin a call for unconditional surrender? Aren’t the Israelis acting as allies of the extremists by giving them what they want at the expense of whatever moderates are out there?
In short I am not willing to say that the behavior of the Palestinians must change without making a similar demand on the Israelis.

Look, here we get down to the nub of the matter.
First, ask yourself why aren’t you willing to hold the Palestinians to some acceptable standard of behavior? I can’t speak for you, but believe that most people don’t in part because of the Romantic attachment to outsider behavior, a fascination with expressive violence, and a built-in disdain for the bourgeois virtues of compromise and cooperation, as I’ve discussed elsewhere.
I think that the Palestinian powers-that-be have fundamentally miscalculated by choosing terrorism over guerilla warfare, and until they have the political capability and social will to renounce terrorism, they will never get a fair hearing from the U.S., nor from Israel.
I agree that we need to use our power to force peace, but how? We tried in it Beirut, and you may have noticed that it didn’t work so well. There is no central government that we can attack, threaten, or neutralize. There really isn’t a central government or group that we can negotiate with, because every time we start with a group, the more rejectionist elements either kill the negotiators or split off into a new group.
You say “Isn’t the demand for all terrorist acts to cease before talks begin a call for unconditional surrender?”, and that’s the key point. No, it wouldn’t be.
The PA could act politically and economically (nonviolent action, general strikes, boycotts). They could even act militarily, but within the accepted confines of guerilla warfare (as noted by that damn idea-front-runner Owens) by attacking Israeli military targets. But these actions would require a level of social and political cohesion that I don’t think exist today in Palestine.
Sadly.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.