Palestinians Need Tough Talk From Europe

[Mosby]

The final communiqué of the G-8 summit meeting next week in Northern Ireland will invariably mention Middle East peace, perhaps supporting Secretary of State John Kerry’s efforts to revive peace negotiations. In any case, any statement will be promptly forgotten when the summit ends. Nevertheless, Europe can help Kerry.

-snip-

In order to give Middle East peace talks a new chance, here are some things that a European speech needs to say:

• The only way to achieve Palestinian statehood is through direct, unconditional talks with Israel. The European Union’s council of ministers has said as much in a diplomatic communiqué, but it is not stated so directly to the Palestinians. The United Nations would willingly endorse statehood, but the Security Council has blocked this in the past, and joining Unesco will not lift Israeli control of the West Bank. The Palestinians must try negotiations. The road to statehood runs through peace.

• Both Jews and Arabs have a historical connection to the land, and therefore, it must be shared.

• Any Palestinian refugee can go to the new state of Palestine, but not to Palestine and Israel.

• Israel is not wrong to insist on strict security arrangements. Security is not ancillary to any deal. Just as the world needs to empathize with the Palestinians’ predicament, so too should we see security issues through Israel’s eyes. On the Gaza-Egypt border, tunnels have been used to smuggle rockets into Gaza that have been repeatedly and indiscriminately fired on Israeli cities. It is indisputable that aspects of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701 calling for an arms embargo on Hezbollah after the 2006 Lebanon war, were never implemented. Moreover, international peacekeepers cannot be the sole basis of security — as shown by Austria’s recent decision to pull out of the U.N. Disengagement Observer Force interposed between Syrian and Israeli forces.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/15/opinion/global/palestinians-need-tough-talk-from-europe.html?_r=0

[Scootaloo]

1. That's a lot of words to say

"Europeans must tell Palestinians to agree with everything Israel demands of them."

But hey, what's NYT without a "white man's burden is to make the amaleks cave!" splooge-piece written by a lobbyist for Israel?

David Makovsky is a senior WINEP fellow and former executive editor of pro-Likud Jerusalem Post. His brother Michael Makovsky was a member of the Office of Special Plans[1] which produced the defective intelligence to justify the Iraq War. Both brothers took up Israeli citizenship after finishing their education in the US.[2] In 2009 Makovsky coauthored Myths, Illusions, and Peace: Finding a New Direction for America in the Middle East with Dennis Ross.

Established in 1985, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) is known as the think thank of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), and described as a major lobbying organization.[1] Martin Indyk, WINEP's founding director, is a former AIPAC research director. Whereas AIPAC mainly focuses on the Congress, WINEP was developed into a think tank devoted to maintaining and strengthening the US-Israel alliance through advocacy in the media and lobbying the executive branch. [2] WINEP is funded and run by individuals that have proved themselves to be deeply committed to advancing the Israeli agenda.[3]

And once again, Mosby - you too could be paid for this. Why you choose to do it for free baffles me.

[oberliner]

2. Yes they should stick to Hamas propaganda pieces

We reject attempts to divide Palestine into two parts and to pass Hamas off as an extreme and dangerous force. We continue to believe that there is still a chance to establish a long-term truce. But this will not happen unless the international community fully engages with Hamas.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/20/opinion/20yousef.html

Better to have Hamas tell Israel (and the US and Europe) what to do.

Much more easier to digest for some.

[Scootaloo]

3. Your best argument is a six year-old editorial that suggests dialogue as a viable option?

Dialogue, how... how horrible. Good thing nobody listened, leading to the current era of peace and prosperity for all the people involved! Dodged a bullet on that one!

Just can't gulp down the fact that Mosby has provided us with a rather laughable editorial from a laughable source, so you try to deflect by pointing this one out, as if it were relevant to either of our posts?

If your goal was to demonstrate that the NYT gives equal airtime, well, we're going to need more than just two articles separated by more than half a decade.