Bush Tries to Make Peace as Hamas Makes War

Despite rocket fire on the very day of his arrival in Israel, President Bush appears determined to push ahead towards a Palestinian state.

May 14, 2008 - by P. David Hornik

President Bush touched down at Ben-Gurion Airport today to mark the 60th anniversary of Israel’s establishment. He said America’s aim “must be to support our strongest ally and friend in the Middle East … and, at the same time, talk about a hopeful future” — a reference to the ever-elusive Israeli-Palestinian peace that Bush has focused on so strongly in his second term, and one that seems even more elusive as a rocket from Gaza devastated an Israeli shopping mall just hours after Bush touched down.

Bush, in Israel for the second time in four months, got red-carpet treatment at Ben-Gurion Airport and was greeted by a throng of dignitaries including Prime Minister Olmert, President Peres, the entire cabinet, religious leaders and others.Your decision to celebrate this historic milestone with us,” Olmert told him, “is an extraordinary gesture of friendship and it’s further evidence of your unending commitment to the security and well-being of our country.”

Bush went on to meet with Peres at his Jerusalem residence and offered his own upbeat homily, saying, “What happened here is possible everywhere. I suspect if you looked back 60 years ago and tried to guess where Israel would be at that time, it would be hard to be able to project such a prosperous, hopeful land.” Bush is scheduled to speak tonight at a conference for Israel’s 60th that will include figures like Henry Kissinger and Elie Wiesel.

No one likes to hear a sour note at a party, but yesterday Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas sounded somewhat less buoyant when he said,

“The Palestinian people won’t forget the right of return for the refugees. This is one of the rights of the Palestinian people. Our people have been living this nakba for 60 years, and they are continuing to struggle and defend themselves.”

He made this statement at an event in Ramallah marking Nakba Day — the official Palestinian day of mourning for the nakba (catastrophe) of Israel’s birth. He was saying that the creation of Israel in 1948 — not its conquest of the West Bank and Gaza in 1967- was the basic catastrophe, and he was referring to a “return” of refugees and their descendants that all Israeli governments, left to right, consider a formula for Israel’s destruction.

Abbas said these words despite an extraordinarily persistent courting by U.S. and Israeli leaders during his three-plus years as president. The courting even included a grand conference at Annapolis last November to promote a Palestinian state, attended by the European Union, the Vatican, the Arab League, Russia, China, and others along with such peace stalwarts as Syria and Sudan.

Nor was the pursuit of that Palestinian state deterred by a 2007 Pew Global Attitudes Project poll that found 70% of Muslims in the Palestinian territories justifying suicide bombings; the next highest total was Nigerian Muslims at 42%. Palestinian Muslims also scored highest -57%- in expressing confidence in Osama bin Laden’s leadership.

At present Imad Sa’ad, a Palestinian Authority police officer who gave Israel a lead on finding four accused Palestinian terrorists, is facing a sentence of death by firing squad. It was meted out to him in a PA court by a judge belonging to Abbas’s Fatah movement. According to the Oslo agreements, the PA is supposed to cooperate with Israel in fighting terrorism, not give death sentences to those who do so.

Although Israeli attorney Nitsana Darshan-Leitner has appealed to Bush to suspend $200 million in security assistance to Abbas and the PA until Sa’ad’s sentence is overturned, there is no word that Bush is interested in that suggestion.

Bush will be meeting in Jerusalem with both Olmert and Peres — but with Abbas (and other Arab leaders) only days later in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, since Abbas can’t publicly have anything positive to do with the nakba.

None of this, though, seems to affect Bush’s esteem for Abbas; he said just three weeks ago, when hosting him at the White House, that the PA president was “a man of peace … He’s a man of vision. He rejects the idea of using violence to achieve objectives.” He didn’t seem cognizant of Abbas’s statement last year that “We should put our internal fighting aside and raise our rifles only against the Israeli occupation.”

Bush’s praise of Abbas clearly isn’t just rhetoric, either, since Bush’s secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, has visited Israel and the PA 16 times in three years in a very determined quest to bring about that outcome of a Palestinian state.

Tony Blair is in the act too. Since stepping down as British PM in June 2007, he’s been official envoy of the Quartet on the Middle East and has been busy here trying to prepare the groundwork for that same Palestinian state. Just this week he announced a package of new measures including giving the Palestinians increased security control of an area of the West Bank that’s larger than Gaza-despite the fact that Israel’s leaving Gaza in 2005 has brought on a real nakba of nonstop rocket attacks.

Some say that, with Olmert now up to his neck in a corruption scandal and Bush soon to become a full-fledged lame duck, all this is just a last, meaningless attempt by Bush to go down as a Middle East peacemaker. Even if the present efforts fizzle, though, what Bush has done — with help from wishy-washy Israeli leaders like Olmert and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni — is make a Palestinian state a centerpiece, indeed an obsession, of international politics even though it’s the last thing the facts on the ground would warrant.

To see why, look at the cases of Iraq, Lebanon, and Turkey. After five years of hard American work in Iraq, it remains a violent, fractured society that no one should bet on becoming cohesive and peaceful let alone a Western-style democracy. Lebanon, which at its best showed real features of democracy and pluralism, is now teetering on the brink of becoming a fundamentalist terror-state.

As for Turkey, long held up as the model of a secular Muslim democracy, under Prime Minister Erdogan’s AKP regime it’s been in a slide toward Islamism and authoritarian rule.

If this is the current condition of the three Middle Eastern Muslim states that folks have been most hopeful about, why the optimism about the Palestinian Authority and why the concerted push for it to become Israel’s (and Jordan’s) fully sovereign neighbor? Although Bush, Rice, Blair, and other Western leaders agree that Gaza under Hamas is a big problem, why (without making it clear how Hamastan is supposed to fit into the Palestinian-state vision) are they so gung-ho about the Abbas-led entity in the West Bank?

They don’t seem to think Abbas means it when he says he’ll never accept Israel as a Jewish state, or that he insists on the “right of return,” or that the population means it when they express admiration for suicide bombings and Osama bin Laden. They don’t seem to know or care that the PA educational system, which Abbas played a prime role in designing, has been systematically instilling these anti-Israeli and anti-Western attitudes since 1993 and that, moreover, they’re deeply rooted in the jihad principle of Islamic civilization as a whole.

They don’t seem to notice the constant terror attacks and attempted terror attacks by the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades — the “military wing” of Abbas’s own Fatah — nor ever ask Abbas any tough questions like: Don’t you have any control of these guys? Do you approve of what they’re doing? Why don’t you ever arrest any of them? Or in the rare cases when you do, why do they always get released or seem to escape?

If Bush, Rice, Blair, and the rest ignore such bigger pictures, then it makes sense that they ignore “details” like Abbas marking Naqba Day or one of his courts sentencing a Palestinian to death for fighting terror.

If Bush’s legacy is going to be that this entity is deserving of statehood no matter what, then everyone truly concerned about democratic norms and Israel’s defensibility should be doing their best to undo that legacy.

P. David Hornik is a freelance writer and translator living in Tel Aviv. He blogs at http://pdavidhornik.typepad.com/

Bookmark and Share
Email Print Podcasts Digg PJM Home

9 Comments

1. DrKrbyLuv:

Bush is a barking dog with no teeth.

He has no credibility left and worse, the American economy and military is on the verge of collapse because of his ineptness.

Sad to say but, Israel is on her own for the balance of his term.

May 14, 2008 - 12:46 pm 2. Big Ben:

Bush started in th right direction after 9/11, but then the State diplomats got to him with the platitudes that he started repeating often enough that he may have started believing it.

This pre-occupation with trying to bring “peace” between the Israelis and Palestinians is a pipe dream.
The Israeli leaders, unfornuately, won’t say it becaause they need the leverage of the so-called Peace process to keep their jobs in light of the scandal a week that keeps popping up.
Good analysis by Mr. Hornik. I wish that it would get wider ciculation.

May 14, 2008 - 2:46 pm 3. Webutante:

Good piece, David. No doubt Bush is playing an endgame here with no real expectations of success. Actually, this compassionate stance towards Abbas and a Palestinean state (don’t they always have one sorta?) has lowered my view of Secretary Rice considerably. What ever are they thinking? Are they thinking?

May 14, 2008 - 5:11 pm 4. David Thomson:

“Sad to say but, Israel is on her own for the balance of his term.”

Israel must bomb Iran’s nuclear installations before the American elections in November. It would be foolish to take a chance on a “Barry” Obama presidency. Israel is indeed on its own. The dishonest pacifism of our elites is turning the United States into a toothless tiger.

May 14, 2008 - 6:02 pm 5. Alternate Media Making Headway | The Anchoress:

[...] site covers the gamut - you’ve got your economics page, your campaign analysis, book reviews, world politics, advice columns, internet stuff, showbiz/political stuff, film reviews, and even [...]

May 15, 2008 - 5:41 am 6. Moultrie:

Not sure why this US President has become so blinded by this faulty vision of long term terrorist becoming peace partners…he seems to have lost his direction after 2004 election…that assumes this hasn’t been planned all along….like the One World Conspiricist think.

May 15, 2008 - 9:37 am 7. SAF:

Although I voted for him twice I must say he has been a huge disappointment, to say the least. He swore he’d fight our enemies yet he lets Iran kill our boys in Iraq. A strong stance with Iran, like destroying their entire navy after the British Hostage incident or dropping metallic shrapnel on their power plants as a warning would have gotten their attention and stabilized Iraq. Hi stance on Hamas is equally and fatally flawed. Condoleezza Rice, someone I used to admire has been a failure. These people just ignore the obvious.

Ronald Regan would not have been elected had not the inept Jimmy Carter proceeded him. I think Obama will be Jimmy Carter II and hopefully there is another Regan in the wings to take his place when he inevitably gets hurled out of office in 2012.

May 16, 2008 - 7:37 am 8. Townie:

SAF - Do you really think that they ignore the obvious?

Maybe it’s time for you to take the next logical step and consider that they act the way they do in pursuit of some unstated goals which may not be very moral or even legal?

Maybe what you see as the plain, obvious reality is just a stage set set up intentionally to distract you from something you aren’t yet ready to acknowledge?

May 16, 2008 - 8:57 am 9. Michael Lonie:

No conspiracy theorizing. The simple fact of the matter is that the Bush Administration is exhausted. Seven years of guerilla politics by the Dems coming on top of having to fight a real war at the same time have drained the administration to the point where it has no new ideas and no energy to develop any. All it can do is push on with the Iraq Campaign, as the key campaign in the war against the jihadist terrorists.

This exhaustion has allowed the conventional wisdom of the foreign policy elites to rise to the surface. As Bernard Woolley put it in an episode of “Yes, Prime Minister,” it’s not just the cream that rises to the top. So the jejune ideas of the elite about appeasing the Arabs have gained sway. Rice seems surprisingly amenable to these silly ideas.

We should give up on a Palestinian Arab state. The Palis don’t want one, they only want to kill Jews and don’t care what or who tyrannizes them, so long as their bloodlust is slaked. They are plainly unfit for democracy. If they were endowed by their Creator with rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness they petulently tossed them away, seeking instead a right to murder.

May 18, 2008 - 10:02 pm

Write a Comment

Name: (required, displayed)
Email: (required, not publicized)
URL: (optional, displayed)
remember personal info?
Comments: