2. Negotiations for Peace
Howard F. , |
Nirit, Israel |
|
(04.05.14) |
Peace is relative.
What we have here in Israel, in April 2014, is peace. Not the kind that prevails in Norway, New Zealand or Nepal, but the kind we have come to terms with, given that this is the Middle East. Of course it could be better, but we who have lived here for the last few decades, know it could also be a lot worse. We temper our expectations with a liberal dose of pragmatism; we also realize that to attain a lot more peace, we would have to take, as a nation and individually, much bigger risks. Weighed against each other, and speaking for probably the majority of Jewish Israelis, I would dare to venture that we are prepared to reconcile with the status quo.
So why, I ask, do we need to convert political prisoners into negotiating chips ? For the spurious right to conduct talks with the Palestinians, which talks have the words “dead-end” written all over them ? To re-affirm that their minimum demands are in excess of our maximum concessions, and vice-versa ? Is this all they have to tempt us with ? Is Israeli willingness to conduct talks not a carrot offered to the Palestinians in the same way as they dangle the same carrot before our faces ?
How does one look upon Uncle Sam, who deviates from all norms of negotiation, and as interlocutor, offers a deal sweetener to get one side to agree, if not capitulate, to the demands of the other ? 4 successive presidents have refused to release Pollard on a matter of principle, being the severity of his crime – is that principle now negotiable ? What has happened to morality ? What is the deterrence value of imprisonment for lengthy terms, if length only lasts until the region’s need for the next ‘deal’ ?
Has any other country released prisoners who have wantonly slaughtered its innocent citizens, for the right to talk about giving Statehood to the very people who identify and condone those murderous acts ? OK, we are Israel, and we are expected to be a moral beacon to the world, we are already used to such charges, and accustomed to its burdens. But should we tolerate the callous, repugnant calls for sanctions, boycotts and divestment from organizations who cannot hold a candle to our standards of morality ? Bereft of sound argument, they should hold their heads in shame, and ‘cross the floor’, in the way Justice Goldstone did, albeit meekly.
Looking around us, we see that we do hold the moral high ground, perhaps even by default. Either way, we should invite the Arab world to desist from violence, to recognize that mutual respect will bear the fruits of independence, that with Israeli help they will thrive economically and become a viable nation. Membership of international bodies, of whatever ilk, should be shelved until they can contribute as an independent nation, one which realizes reality and is willing to build from more modest beginnings than what their dreams dictate. Israel has conceded territories, has given up on many of its dreams, yet still yearns for that which its neighbours have not yet learned is in their own best interests to yield to her, a lasting peace.
|