By Patricia Lee Sharpe
It’s time to abandon all hope that the U.S. will play a creatively constructive role in breaking the impasse between hardline Israelis and their equally malicious Palestinian counterparts.
Barack Obama gave a surprisingly bold—for an American President—but far from groundbreaking speech last week He reiterated what every fair-minded person has long considered to be the only way to configure a two-state solution for Israel and the Palestinians. Maybe his picture wasn’t inspired, but remember this: dull is always better than dreadful.
It was, of course, hard to believe that the ever-obliging Obama would have the courage to fight for this wholly conventional, middle-of-the-road proposal. Yet, for a few precious hours, we could entertain a pleasing fantasy, despite the looming fact that its accomplishment would require the support of most Democrats and many Republicans in both House and Senate.
It didn’t take long for the dream bubble to implode. Two days later, the representatives of the American people, jointly assembled in full sight of the entire world, deposed the duly elected President of the United States in order to set in his place the hardline West Bank annexationist Binyamin Natanhayu, heretofore merely the Prime Minister of Israel. For Bibi there was standing ovation after standing ovation, even when this consummate abuser of words like peace asserted that Arab citizens get a fair shake in Israel and that the West Bank hasn’t been occupied.
Lest we ever had doubts, it’s clear now: the U.S. is little more than a territory of Israel. Israel bleeds America for funds just as colonial powers have always milked their bigger, well-cowed dependencies. Remember when the sun never set on the British Empire? Vast territories were ruled by a tiny island in the North Atlantic. And so the mighty U.S. kowtows to a dot of a country on the Mediterranean.
That hope was dashed in Washington, even though the President reiterated his position in London yesterday. When he travels around the U.S. with that message, undiluted, I will take him seriously—and only then will Israel take him seriously.
Meanwhile, as in Cairo and Tunis, it’s up to the people, a position I reached some time ago. Tom Friedman concurred, on Tuesday. Go here, to see what he wrote. Here are my refinements:
Israelis, including Jew and Arabs, and Palestinians must march, in hundreds and thousands, to the border which, these days, is often a wall. Dates, times and locations should be announced by Facebook, by Twitter, by blogs, by the print press, by every possible means. In matters like this, numbers count, for impact, for security. Above all, no marcher should carry arms, not even sticks.
I’m sorry to say that it wouldn’t surprise me if the Israeli army fired on what they’d call a murderous mob of unarmed Palestinians, so it’s absolutely essential that hundreds and thousands of Israelis also approach the wall in the same places and at the same time. The Israeli army will not fire on its own people. For that matter, if the Israeli army actually fired on crowds of unarmed Palestinians I’d hope that Israel would then be repudiated by those slavish members of Congress who applauded Netanyahu’s blind bellicosity, though you can’t be sure with puppets.
Now, here’s where the ladders come into play—and here’s where true heroism is required. On each side, all along the wall, people must mount those ladders. I am not proposing an invasion. No one will cross the wall. At the top this and only this will happen: Israelis and Palestinians will shake hands. Maybe they will embrace. They may even wave flags. What a wonderful sight that will be, especially from the helicopters that are sure to be hovering overhead in hopes of having an intimidating effect.
During these gestures of friendship and solidarity both Isrealis and Palestinians easy targets for those who don’t want peace and amity and neighborly co-existence based on a just allocation of land. But the risk is essential.
As this demonstration occurs, day after day in ever increasing numbers, foolishly cowed moderate politicians may perhaps understand that they really do have enough support to do the right thing, to enact the agreements which Barak Obama and many other practical politicians have envisioned and sometimes dared to articulate.
And who, I wonder, would Congress support? The hand-shakers or the land-grabbers?
.