The Middle East Crisis That Just Won't Go Away

Barack Obama may think that Israel and Palestine alone can end their decades of conflict, but the Arab Spring has changed the contours of any potential negotiations.

BY SALMAN SHAIKH | MAY 20, 2011

It is often said by people in the Middle East, especially Israelis and Palestinians, that "in the end, we always come back to the Arab-Israeli conflict." That is exactly what happened on Thursday, May 19, when U.S. President Barack Obama delivered a major policy speech at the State Department, introducing new principles for negotiations based on 1967 borders, and this past weekend, when at least 10 unarmed protesters were killed by Israeli fire on a day the Palestinians call the "Nakba," or "Catastrophe." The Arab-Israeli conflict is once again front and center.

But if the broad brush strokes of this story are by now painfully familiar, the context and the particulars of this week may point to a different kind of flare-up while the United States seeks to restart peace talks. There is, of course, the Arab Spring: The Palestinians see the new narrative of the Arab revolts for greater freedoms, justice, and equality joining their own decades-old search for the same, and for a state of their own. For Israelis, Sunday, May 15, was the day when the Arab awakening washed up on their own still provisional borders, reminding them yet again of how vulnerable they are and how isolated they have become.

Coordinated protests on Israel's 1949 armistice lines with Syria and Lebanon -- as well as in the West Bank, Gaza, Egypt, and Jordan -- have alarmed many Israelis and raised concerns that Israel lacks the practical means to counter mass demonstrations in the future. In fact, only a heavy security presence near the Egyptian and Jordanian borders with Israel prevented protesters from besieging these areas as well. Israelis are realizing the tangible effects of a rapidly changing region in which old certainties are dying and fears of a return to conflict are revived.

Palestinian refugees, meanwhile, used the tools of today's revolutions -- the Internet in general and Facebook in particular -- to organize protests and assert their right to return to their homes in what is now Israel. An estimated 600,000 Palestinians are on Facebook in the West Bank and Gaza alone, and nearly one-third of them are thought to be politically influenced by social media. When Fatah and Hamas finally signed a reconciliation agreement two weeks ago in Cairo, they were responding in part to a campaign for Palestinian unity organized by Internet activists that had managed to mobilize thousands in both the West Bank and Gaza. Emboldened by these developments, activists are organizing more mass protests and marches to pressure Israel, the international community, and their own leadership as the Palestinian-imposed deadline for statehood approaches in September.

What made this year's Nakba Day all the more remarkable, though, were the events along the Syrian-Israeli de facto border. Thirty-eight years of near-total calm along the nearly 50-mile frontier were shattered as dozens of Palestinian protesters trampled their way through the security fence into the Israel-occupied Golan Heights. The event marked a failure for Israeli intelligence and the military and showed the impotence of the 1,250-member United Nations observer force established to monitor the 1974 Separation of Forces Agreement. It also showed that Bashar al-Assad's Baathist regime is ready to export instability if necessary, especially to Israel; given the degree of restrictions on movement in the area, it is inconceivable that the protesters could have reached the security fence without the acquiescence and participation of the Syrian authorities and security forces.

With the situation in Syria likely to worsen in the weeks ahead, was the breach a power play from a regime determined to reinforce the point that only it can ensure stability? Or was this a means of diverting attention from Syria's own crackdown and bolstering Assad's credentials as a resistance regime against Israel? In fact, it was likely both. The move may have backfired, however, leading Israel's military to conclude that Assad and his regime cannot be relied upon to deliver calm along their sensitive border. With May 15's events, the assertion that only with Assad comes stability and after him there is chaos has already been turned on its head. This is the moment for the international community to send a clear signal that it will not tolerate being blackmailed by the Assad regime, especially when the region's stability and security are at stake.

AHMAD GHARABLI/AFP/Getty Images

 

Salman Shaikh is director of the Brookings Doha Center and a fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution. He previously served as the special assistant to the U.N. envoy for the Middle East peace process.

GURINGO

4:09 PM ET

May 20, 2011

ORLY?

You got to be kidding me, to suggest that the problem is that this Obama proposal arrived 2 yrs too late?! Gee, if only we had a time machine...

Mr Shaikh appears oblivious of the wiki leaks; the Palestinians at best are trumping the 'right of return' as a bargaining chip, besides being nowhere near abandoning their dream to annihilate Israel. These are the main obstacles to a viable solution.

So the real problem is how so many like Mr Shaikh are complicit in supporting false narratives and bogus claims perpetuated by fellow muslims.
For instance, his first link is from such an article -

"They placed Palestinian flags at the (Lebanese) fence, and after Israeli troops fired on them, some threw rocks at the soldiers, witnesses said." -NY Times -contributed by Nada Bakri and Hwaida Saad from Beirut, Fares Akram from Gaza, etc...

And there you have it, blatant bias bordering on the pathological. How civil of them to place flags on the border, how monstrous of the Israelis to open fire on them for doing so, and how courageous of them to pelt the Israelis with stones in retaliation. Except you have to be munching on used diapers to swallow such condescending drivel.

 

JOHNBOY4546

11:29 PM ET

May 23, 2011

The problem with Marine's rant

It is this: these refugees are stateless, and they are stateless BECAUSE of the actions of the Haganah/IDF in 1948.

This conflict will never be resolved until those refugees end their statelessnes, and it is beyond chutzpah for the state that CAUSED their statelessness to insist that the solution is to be found "anywhere but here".

These people have an argument, USMarine, and it is a damn good one: Chapter 3 of the Partition Plan meant that their parents/grandparents would automatically have Israeli citizenship when the state of Israel was declared, and that Chapter used language that ensured that Israel could NOT deprive them of that right merely be ejecting them from Israeli territory.

So if the state of Israel had NOT done that (and, remember, Israel was NOT entitled to do that) then those parents/grandparents would have been "Israeli citizens", and so should their descendents.

The state of Israel owes them, and all that Israel (and you) can say is "Out, Damn Spot!".

Didn't work for Lady Macbeth.
It ain't working for Israel.

 

GURINGO

12:19 PM ET

May 25, 2011

JOHNBOY4546, Liar or Dupe,

JOHNBOY4546,

Liar or Dupe, either way, your first statement is false; they are stateless BECAUSE the arab leaders opted to war with Israel and to that end, they persuaded many of them to flee - according to their official line, it was in order to facilitate their military campaign, but in truth, it was to better appropriate ALL of the land in question.

One tactic those neighbors employed was to disseminate the lie that the Israelis were raping the womenfolk, much like Qadaffi did recently by claiming his soldiers were provided with Viagra - as nothing would compel an Arab to flee than the daughter shaming the family by being raped, if he didn't kill her to restore the family honor he would have to disown her.

Furthermore, no Arab in the region at the time perceived himself as a 'Palestinian', nor can you find any such sentiment for an entire generation to come - the PLO was founded in 64, touting Palestinian nationalism prior to then, in Ramallah as in Gaza, would be signing your own death-warrant.

Same neighbors would see to it that the refugees rot in subhuman conditions, lest they integrate into their own societies.

You've had a nice run of perpetuating a contrived narrative, do keep it up, it's working wonders and bound to bring forth a Palestinian state.

 

ETHEKYAA

8:25 PM ET

May 20, 2011

The anihilation of the Jewish homeland is the ultimate goal

The pre-1967 border is 11 miles from Tel Aviv, 9 miles from Netanya, and 10 miles from Beersheba.

 

JOHNBOY4546

10:37 PM ET

May 20, 2011

Yeah, and the Palestinian Army (sic) will.....

..... launch its armoured divisions into the breach......

Of course, the fact that the Palestinians possess not a single tank - let alone an "army" - should never be allowed to get in the way of collective paranoia.

"The pre-1967 border is 11 miles from Tel Aviv, 9 miles from Netanya, and 10 miles from Beersheba"

Still quite a distance to walk, and if the Palestinians decided to "anihilate the Jewish homeland" they'd have to walk.....

lacking as they do tanks 'n' all.....

 

BOK CHOI

2:13 AM ET

May 21, 2011

Did the Palestinians have to walk to Sderot?

Or to that schoolbus they purposefully targeted that killed a child recently? Use your noggin now.

 

BASE

11:19 AM ET

May 21, 2011

Too much Bok Choi

Really? You cannot look at the relative number of deaths between the Palestinians and the Israelis and say that it is the Israelis that need to worry about their security.

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/images/killedbyyear-lg.jpg

According to B'Tselem, the numer of deaths in the past 5 years has been 22 times higher among the Palestinians than the Israelis.

Who, exactly, needs the protection?

Give me a break.

 

BOK CHOI

12:59 PM ET

May 21, 2011

Conflicts are more than comparing death tolls

If they were about comparing death tolls, I guess the Germans were in the right, because more of them were killed in WWII. Bok choi!

 

IDIOTPRAYER84

8:06 PM ET

May 21, 2011

Doing nothing isn't an option

Obama didn't say the Israel would have to withdraw back to the pre-67 boarders. He said that the '67 boarders would be the starting point of the negotiations with mutually agreed upon land swaps that would allow for most settlers to live in the new Israeli boarders.

What would cause the end of Israel would be to continue the statues quo. Israel has only two options. give the Palestinians there own homeland or give Palestinians the right to vote in Israeli elections. If you want Israel to remain the Jewish homeland, your only option is the first option. Sticking your head in the ground hoping that the problem will just go away will be the end of the Jewish state.

 

JOHNBOY4546

5:24 AM ET

May 23, 2011

I see.....

"Or to that schoolbus they purposefully targeted that killed a child recently? Use your noggin now"

I see.... the anihilation of the Jewish homeland will be accomplished one school bus at a time.

Have you actually attempted to calculate how long that would take... you know... one school bus at a time?

 

JOHNBOY4546

11:18 PM ET

May 23, 2011

No need to do that to explore the stupidity of that claim

Simply maths would tell you that if you cram, owww, say, 50 kiddies in a bus and the Pals are able to take out those buses (and I'm being exceptionally generous to Palestian markmanship here) at a rate of one per hour THEN you will end up with a death toll of 50*24 = 1,200 dead Israelis per day.

Which would equate to 438,000 dead Israelis per year.

Which would mean that the "anihilation of the Jewish homeland" would require Hamas to take out one bus PER HOUR for the next 15 years.

I don't think they'd be able to keep that up, USMarine.

You do, do you?

 

COMETLINEAR

9:04 PM ET

May 20, 2011

The Palestinian "cause"

...is the opiate of the Arab masses.

 

NAZROOT

9:58 PM ET

May 20, 2011

Are we human?

Sometimes I wonder, " Are we really a Human?" As far as I know humanity means kindness and love towards your fellow beings. Why should we fight and kill each others?

 

PULLER58

12:11 AM ET

May 21, 2011

Arab-Israeli conflict

David Harris' book, "The Gun And The Olive Branch" long ago spelled out that the surrounding Arab countries use the Palestinians as a weapon against the Israelis. Don't look for that to change anytime soon.

 

IDIOTPRAYER84

8:29 PM ET

May 21, 2011

Solving the Arab-Israeli conflict is good for Israel too

One more reason for Israel to make peace. One reason that Iran has overcome the traditional Arab-Persian hostility is the fact Iran has used the Arab-Israeli to co-opt the "Arab Street." That would undercut Iranian influence in the region at a time in which it sees the rise of Iran as an existential threat. Peace would also take away an issue that Arab dictators use to deflect attention away their failed leadership. Arab leaders would be too busy responding to domestic matters than picking a new fight with Israel.

 

BOK CHOI

2:15 AM ET

May 21, 2011

Article is misleading

The crux of the conflict is that Palestinian insistence on their "right of return," AKA flooding Israel with 5.5 million Palestinians, most of whom have never lived in Israel their entire lives. The entire purpose of a Palestinian state, which I fully support, is for them to absorb their own refugees. I don't see Pakistanis attempting to offset the cultural, lingual, and ethnic demographics in india or vice verse, for example. Bok choi!

 

LANTERN ROGUE

10:31 AM ET

May 21, 2011

~"The crux of the conflict is

~"The crux of the conflict is that Palestinian insistence on their "right of return," AKA flooding Israel with 5.5 million Palestinians, most of whom have never lived in Israel their entire lives."

........and what of the Khazars?

 

FRISBEETARIAN

10:56 AM ET

May 21, 2011

Wow the irony in this post is

Wow the irony in this post is riveting.

 

BOK CHOI

1:33 AM ET

May 22, 2011

The reason different countries exist

is so that different peoples of different cultural traits such as languages, traditions, religions, and customs can enjoy national autonomy and preside over themselves. The goal of any future peace deal is to establish a state. It is perfectly logical for the Palestinians to absorb their own refugees in their newly formed state, rather than turn Israel into another country where Jews are a minority and are considered second class citizens (dhimmis) according to Islamic law, which is undeniably popular among many Arab countries, if not every single one prior to the yet-inconclusive arab spring. Bok choi!

 

BUDAHH

2:20 AM ET

May 21, 2011

why are the protests being called nonviolent when they are very

violent, throwing rocks is violent, they hurt people, and going over a boarder fence of a sovereign nation is an act of war, so please enough with the bs.
They are proving they are not willing to compromise and go for the peace idea, refusing to negotiate and still calling for the "right of return that nobody in the world deserves besides the people that lived in Israel during the British mandate, They tried to attack and kick out the jews (kill) and they lost tough shit should have and could've had a state a long time ago. Funny how the idea of a state never came to mind while the Egyptians and Jordanians controlled the west bank and gaza.

 

MUSE

6:51 AM ET

May 21, 2011

Is time running out for Israel's best friend in the White House?

Dennis Ross has been described as Israel's advocate, more extreme than Binyamin Netanyahu, and "the éminence grise, a sort of Rasputin who casts a spell over secretaries of state and presidents”.

Now, The New York Times says Ross single-handedly made president Obama water down his criticism of Israel in his Thursday address.

The reality is that the course Mr. Obama outlined Thursday was much more modest than what some of his advisers initially advocated. [...] “Starting with Mitchell and Jones, there was a preponderance of advisers who were more in tune with the Palestinian narrative than the Israeli narrative,” said Abraham H. Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League and a friend of Mr. Ross. “Dennis balanced that.”

That Ross is single-handedly able to "balance" the opinions of "a preponderance of advisers" in this way is not a surprise to Washington insiders. What is unusual is to learn, from a mainstream publication like the Times, that the White House inner circle may be getting exceedingly uncomfortable about the grip Ross is exerting on Obama and his Middle East policies.

 

GREGORY M

10:10 AM ET

May 22, 2011

Is It Really Our Business?

I'm just wondering how many of you think that this whole issue is really the business of the United States to interject? It sometimes seem like we (the USA) tries to get involved in any and all kinds of conflicts that happen around the world.

I mean I know that we are a big supporter of Israel, although I'm not totally sure why, but I just don't think we always need to jump in the middle of every single issue around the world. Don't get me wrong I love my country - it's the greatest country in the world, but it seems that we have to be involved with every issue around the world. Maybe this is why the worldwide brands the United States as a "bully country" - and maybe this is why so many countries HATE us.

Again I love my country, but you don't see other countries getting involved like we do in the Iraq war, the Afghanistan war, and all of these types of issues around the world. The USA is always the ones to jump in the middle.

In a way it shows that we care, and in a way it looks like we just want to have total power and control over the rest of the world. I don't understand why some of the wealthy affiliates of the USA can not be more involved in some of the world issues. Either that or we need to just mind our own business more.

Don't get me wrong, I think that almost all of the time the USA has the best intentions when getting involved in world issues, but I can see where other people who hate the United States are coming from because we do try to dictate a whole lot of what goes on around the world.

Not to mention that we have enough problems in the USA that could use all of that money that is going to solving other issues around the world, outside of the USA.

And again I love my country to death and will always support my country, but this is definitely one aspect of the USA that I question.

Just wondering what anyone else thinks of this?

 

EDDYSHIA

4:33 PM ET

May 22, 2011

Powerless

To maintain superiority, control and influence over the region, the West has placed corrupt Arab leaders into positions of power and supported the overthrow of those that are not seen as favorable. This has also served to keep their populations at bay, in return for militarization, karmaloop codes, power and personal wealth of the elite. Sometimes this has been done in the name of fighting communism. The common theme underlying it though has been the struggle to control access to important resources such as oil.

The Middle East is the most militarized region in the world and most arms sales head there. A suppressed people that sees US influence as a major root cause of the current problems in the Middle East has led to a rise in Islamic militancy, acts of terrorism and anti-west sentiment, anti-US in particular. When looking at some of the actions of the US, it can often be seen why this is unfortunately so.

 

HELLEHOU503

11:09 AM ET

June 18, 2011

The Middle East Crisis That Just Won't Go Away

Barack Obama may think that Israel and Palestine alone can end their decades of conflict, but the Arab Spring has changed the contours of any potential negotiations. To maintain superiority, control and influence over the region, the West has placed corrupt Arab leaders into positions of power and supported the overthrow of those that are not seen as favorable. This has also served to keep their populations at bay, in return for militarization, karmaloop codes, power and personal wealth of the elite. Sometimes this has been done in the name of fighting communi take a peek Another Brookings Institutional Stasis scholar opining on the futility of the process, oii. Shaikh bemoans Syria's crass manipulation of the people while neglecting to mention the long history of self-interest at the expense of democracy and freedom for all practiced by Israel and America. The corollary to that is that Israel and America would have been better served by the votes of the ordinary p