Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Left's latest panacea - trusteeship for Palestine
Jerusalem Post ^ | Jun. 25, 2003 | Efraim Inbar

Posted on 06/25/2003 11:43:32 AM PDT by yonif

The new panacea prescribed by the Israeli Left for calming the conflict with the Palestinians is an international trusteeship, which means transferring governmental responsibility in Judea, Samaria and Gaza to a US-led alliance and introducing American forces to keep the peace.

Figures such as former Meretz head Yossi Sarid and former Barak-era foreign minister Shlomo Ben-Ami have finally understood that the conflict cannot be resolved in the near future. Thus, in their despair, they have turned to the Americans to settle the dispute between the natives.

Some European states are similarly showing interest in participating in such an international force in order to enhance their involvement in the region and help the Palestinians withstand Israel military pressures.

It is not at all clear whether the Americans are prepared for an involvement of this kind. Seemingly they will first try to complete their missions in Afghanistan and Iraq. Washington's priorities prior to dealing with Palestinian terror apparently require focusing attention on Iran and North Korea, states with a nuclear potential and far-reaching consequences for international security.

The assumption of the Left that solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is of the utmost urgency is not shared by the US, especially with election year approaching.

Even if it were possible to lure the Americans into taking on the responsibility of ruling the Palestinians their chances of success would not be great. A historical survey of the past few decades on the use of foreign forces for peacemaking as opposed to peacekeeping is not encouraging, to say the least.

Peacekeeping forces are put in place after an agreement between two sides, generally following exhaustion (Bosnia) or the defeat of one side (the Serbs in Kosovo). Moreover, the relative success in former Yugoslavia and East Timor came after large waves of ethnic cleansing that led to reduced friction between the rival populations. In our case the Palestinians, especially the extremists, still have considerable energy and there is no separation between Jews and Arabs in Israel. Furthermore, the proposed foreign forces are to come in place of a bilateral agreement. In addition, the Arab-Israeli arena has illustrated the failure of peacekeeping forces a number of times.

UN forces placed on the Egyptian border did not fulfill their role in 1967; they were evacuated upon Egyptian demand, with Israel's opinion ignored. UNIFIL forces in south Lebanon have also been unsuccessful in providing an efficient buffer. At times they even cooperate with our enemies.

Nor has the Americans' attempt at peacemaking been promising. Their willingness to suffer losses in cases not defined as vital to US security is extremely low. They retreated from Lebanon in 1982 and from Somalia in 1992 due to local resistance. The short US military involvement in Haiti in 1994 did not achieve its goal. The US takeover of Afghanistan did not totally eradicate terror centers, and, in fact, the number of American forces has dropped due to replacement by soldiers from other countries, without stability being achieved. There are growing fears that a similar trend will follow in Iraq.

In general, American imperial capability and determination to bring order to various parts of the world, especially hostile Muslim regions, is still under question.

A US military presence in Palestine would undoubtedly face suicide attacks by Hamas and Islamic Jihad and extensive support for these organizations by Palestinian society. US forces would lack the good intelligence vital for fighting terror. And their deployment could not create a continuous buffer against terrorists. The American failure to foil terror would be an unavoidable source of tension between Israel and the US. Predictably, there would also be disagreements over the need for Israeli military actions to prevent attacks.

Bringing in American forces as a buffer between Palestinians and Israelis would put one of the pillars of Israeli national security the strategic partnership with the US at risk. American losses in defending Israel would erode support for the Jewish state. An even worse outcome would be unintentional American casualties resulting from Israeli military raids against terror organizations.

Worst of all, the trusteeship plan is an attempt to bypass the democratic process in Israel. Large parts of the Left despair not only of the vision of peace but also of Israeli democracy.Having failed to convince voters of the wisdom of their political plan they now wish to impose their position on Israel through the international community withdrawal to the 1967 borders and evacuation of Jewish settlements. The majority of Israelis do not support this plan, and there is no chance of a government in Israel agreeing to such a plan any time soon.

Israel has the diplomatic leverage to oppose the idea of international (American) trusteeship, which would not serve to make the Palestinians stop their terror and reach an interim agreement. On the contrary: International involvement would enable the Palestinians to avoid dismantling the terror infrastructure and spare them the need to negotiate with Israel the limitations on their state.

The writer is professor of political studies at Bar-Ilan University and the Director of the Begin-Sadat (BESA) Center for Strategic Studies.


TOPICS: Editorial; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; Israel; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: arabs; buffer; israel; leftists; palestine; peacekeepers; roadmap; terrorism; usa

1 posted on 06/25/2003 11:43:33 AM PDT by yonif
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SJackson; Yehuda; Nachum; adam_az; LarryM; American in Israel; ReligionofMassDestruction; ...
Ping.
2 posted on 06/25/2003 11:43:51 AM PDT by yonif
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yonif
Wasn't that Tom Clancy's idea?
3 posted on 06/25/2003 11:46:11 AM PDT by jdege
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yonif
What part of 'terrorism will continue no matter who manages the territories' do these idiots not understand? Instead of just Israelis being taken out in the region, then foreign troops will also. And if Europeans are part of the equasion, you can bet Israel will be sold out even further in the interest of peace.

Foreign involvement on the ground should be avoided at all costs. It would be the wedge that would split relationships never to be reunited.
4 posted on 06/25/2003 11:47:38 AM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yonif
Putting American soldiers in there to try and control those animals would be political suicide. There would be basically zero support for it on either the left or the right.
5 posted on 06/25/2003 11:47:49 AM PDT by jpl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yonif
The new panacea prescribed by the Israeli Left for calming the conflict with the Palestinians is an international trusteeship

Oh yes, that worked SOOOO WELL from 1918-1948 when the British was in charge.

6 posted on 06/25/2003 11:49:10 AM PDT by Alouette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdege
Swiss, not American
7 posted on 06/25/2003 11:49:28 AM PDT by omega4412
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: yonif
And the Voices from America are heard saying: NO WAY!
8 posted on 06/25/2003 11:52:22 AM PDT by sarasota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdege

Wasn't that Tom Clancy's idea?

Yes, partially. In his "universe" Palestinians also stopped armed and suicide attacks and used Gandhi-like protests only, which put in-turn enormous pressure on Israel to compromise ASAP. Clancy assumption was that otherwise the Palestinians won't get the world support. Clancy was right many times in his predictions, but he underestimates the world's gullibility and animosity toward Jews. The Palestinians get the world support without stopping any attacks on civilians. If terrorism works, why stop it?

9 posted on 06/25/2003 12:24:32 PM PDT by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson