By Peter Trankner
LONDON, Paris and Ottowa suddenly want to recognize Palestine. But this is merely a show for the domestic political home front -- and not a strategy that could pave the way to a cold peace.
Palestine has so far been recognized by 147 United Nations (UN) members -- suddenly including heavyweights like England, France and Canada. But a state Palestine will once again remain a dream - as it has been since 1967, when Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza in the Six-Day War. Back then, Israel wanted to exchange both for peace. The Arab League responded with resounding No.
Since then, all Israeli two-state offer have ended up in the shredder. It’s a story of missed opportunities.
The national trauma of Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas slaughtered 1,200 Israelis, is too deeply rooted today. Now only 21 percent of Israelis want a two-state solution. With a swipe at the United Nations, Prime Minister Netanyahu declared on Sept. 11: “There will be no Palestinian State.” That had already turned out to be a nightmare when Israel took the lead in 2005 and voluntarily withdrew from Gaza, exchanging renunciation for understanding.
Hamas seized power and, with billions upon billions from the US, European Union and UN, transformed Gaza into a rocket launching pad, regularly provoking Israeli counterattacks.
The 147 friends of Palestine have acknowledged a fiction, and now London, Paris and Ottowa followed suit -- symbolic politics instead of realpolitik. A state Palestine doesn’t exist. Palestine may have a flag, but it lacks the other necessary attributes: defined borders and an effective government that maintains order and security. If Hamas remains, terror will remain. On the West Bank, Mahmoud Abbas ‘s Palestinian Authority (PA) survives -- ironically -- only thanks to the army of its archenemy, Israel. The last halfway free elections were in 2006!
Why recognize a non-state again? A look back:
1948, London, of all places, refused to recognize Israel because it hadn’t met classic requirements for statehood. On the same day, however, the United States and the Soviet Union gave their approval to the provisional government. It wasn’t about the intricacies of international law, but rather about crass national interest. The British, the long-standing hegemon, wanted to curry favor with the Arabs; the other two wanted to use Israel to gain a foothold against each other in the Middle East. Power politics was the crux of the matter in a region connecting three continents.
What interest would the Europeans and Canadians have in anointing Palestine?
Only domestic political ones can be discovered. Public opinion, especially among the Left, has turned relentlessly against Israel during the Gaza War; the Hamas massacre on Oct. 7 unleashed anti-Israel demonstrations and boycotts overnight.
The victim Israel was to blame. Since then, this resentment has also permeated the established parties.
Calm the angry ones at home.
Ergo, this isn’t about a realistic peace process, but rather domestic politics. London and its allies want to calm down the furor at home. Then there’s the electoral calculation. Tens of millions of Muslims now live in the West, especially in the big cities, where they represent a growing political potential. There are 1.7 million in Greater Paris, 1.4 million in London and 650,000 in Toronto. These figures likely explain why governments are positioning themselves against Israel; that’s how democratic politics works.
Israel’s unbridled warfare is nevertheless a distress. “Even those who wage an existential war against enemies, must respect the limits of what is morally permissible,” writes liberal thinker Yossi Klein Halevi. On the other hand, war must “rob terror of its ability to hide behind the innocents.” This is the core of Hamas’ strategy. It consciously sacrifices its own people. The more of its own dead, the better in the court of world opinion.
The Hamas fighters, disguised as civilians, entrench themselves beneath apartment blocks, mosques and hospitals. Meanwhile, “From the River to the Sea” blares, signifying the end of the Jewish state --stateicide.” Thus, the wave of recognition rewards a death cult that will never accept a two-state solution.
London, Paris and Ottowa are just as unable to crack the agonizing facts and murderous dilemmas as the 147 capitals before them. Because a show is not a strategy that could pave the way to at least a cold peace -- like the one between Jerusalem, Cairo and Amman. After many failed attempts, let’s take the best and final Israeli offer of 2008: the entire West Bank minus 6,5 percent and, in exchange, a similarly sized peace of Israel’s heartland.
Mahmood Abbas, the PA head blustered: “We don’t give up a inch!” If he didn’t accept that offer, what would he?
The Israelis never had any reason for conciliation, which would promise them security after withdrawal. Their experience speaks against it. This is all the more true after the Hamas massacre, and certainly not now that France is offering unconditional recognition. An iron law:
Whenever the world builds pressure solely against Israel, violence flares up on the other side.
Symbolic statehood is cheap and security is the central issue. Who will guarantee that in Gaza? An Arab, or even a Western, force to prevent the resurgence of Hamas? A PA to govern both the West Bank and Gaza? A pipe dream. Four-fifths of Palestinians want to get rid of PA leader Abbas. A “fast majority” of 77 percent does not want to disarm Hamas, notes the Palestinian polling center PCPSR.
And the two-state solution? The Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists would quickly seize power because, as Mao thought, it “comes from the barrel of a gun.” With weapons from Iran, paid for by Qatar. This is the root of the tragedy of this accursed region, from which both sides have suffered for 80 years. The domestically motivated wave of recognition cannot negate the realities. It will fuel Hamas’s strategy of denial just as much as the imperial fantasies of the Israeli ultras.
Recently, 61 percent of all Jewish Israelis want the army withdraw from Gaza if Hamas releases all its hostages. But Hamas won’t do so because they act as human shields. What’s missing on the other side? Hamas would have to recognize Israel’s right to exist and establish a somewhat legitimate order at home that renounces terror.
Paris isn’t imposing such conditions, while London knows full well that the demanded disarmament of Hamas is as real as a mirage.
They are concerned with pacifying the home front, not the Levant. Constant, painful pressure in both sides would be more productive than political theater staged in the UN General Assembly. Perhaps then, at least, the guns could fall silent; then the haggling in the bazaar could begin.
Recognition of Palestine builds castles in the air. Israelis and Palestinians deserves better than perpetual violence.
Inshallah -- God willing.