As the Israeli incursion into Gaza continues I will be creating
posts in this series entitled “Notes of the Gaza Assault,” attempting to highlight
some of the primary issues we should all be concerned with as events continue
to develop. These may be a bit more free form and written a bit more “from the
hip” so to speak, however I will do my best to keep providing sources for
information discussed.
The lack of discourse in American
politics
Since
Barak Obama’s re-election two weeks ago, the media outlets in the United States
have been reporting heavily on the political deadlock in congress. Well, I’m
happy to report, that this deadlock has been officially broken. On Friday, 16
November, both the House of Representatives and the Senate passed identical
resolutions supporting Israel’s onslaught in Gaza. H.Res.813.EH frames this
support in terms that reproduce Israel’s narrative of the current conflict.[1]
Reading
the document one might be led to believe that the source of violence between
Israel and Palestine boils down to the agitation and belligerence of militants:
the resolution “expresses unwavering commitment to the security of the State of
Israel… and recognizes and strongly supports its inherent right to act in self
defense and protect its citizens against acts of terrorism;” and “reiterates
that Hamas must end Gaza-linked terrorist rocket and missile attacks against
Israel, recognize Israel’s right to exist, renounce violence, and agree to
accept previous agreements between Israel and the Palestinians.”
Considering
the ever-rising body count in Gaza, anyone with even a moderately informed
conception of the history of this conflict should be offended by this
resolution, however this is bizarrely the only accepted position in Washington.
Take for instance Senator Frank Lautenberg’s (D-NJ) comments[2]
in solidarity with Israeli aggression and imagine if they represented an honest
and reasonable reaction to the onslaught. They may sound something like this:
"No country should be forced to withstand attacks on its own people. We cannot expect [the people of Gaza] to stand idly by while its [people] are the targets of continued... attacks. We support [the Palestinians people's] right to defend itself and call on [Israel] to immediately renounce terror and recognize [Palestine's] right to exist."
Overnight, Lautenbergy would be ostracized and denounced rather than lauded by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).
Much is made of American support for Israel, and I want to make it clear what my thoughts are on the issue. The United State's unwavering support for Israel is based on two things: vote and money. Consider that in 2008 AIPAC spent
just over $2.5 million on political lobbying.[3] This is not an insubstantial sum, but the
fact that key corporations in American’s military industry like Lockheed-Martin
and Boeing spent $17 million[4]
and $15 million[5]
respectively on lobbying. These types of
arms sales not only affect regional balances of power but also American
domestic concerns. The Wallstreet
Journal reports that a 2010 arms deal with Saudi Arabia will create at least
75,000 jobs.[6] The fact that Saudi Arabia is widely regarded
as one of the most brutal, un-free regimes in the world is at best irrelevant
(and at worst a positive). More recently discussions of cutting back on the
US’s grossly overinflated military spending could result in the loss of many
jobs in the “defense” industry, though this is somewhat overdramatized.[7]
Israel is the largest recipient of US foreign military aid, earmarked to be
spent in the United States on contractors like Lockheed-Martin and Boeing.
Currently, Israel receives approximately $3 billion every year from the United
States, though this is set to increase by 2018. [8]
Votes are easy enough to explain: for the Republicans, their policies are informed by evangelical Christians that believe that Israel (and apparently Israeli) oppression is a necessary component of their eschatology. On states (like Florida) and dominant in others (like New York).[9]
All eyes on Egypt
Any attention to media coverage of the violence taking place in Gaza brings to fore questions regarding the new government in Egypt. If the Palestinians have any hope for avoiding an Israeli ground offensive, that hope lies with the new political geography of the Middle East. The consequences of such a ground assault are simply too unpredictable.
The Washington Post's Max Fisher had some cogent observations and predictions regarding Egypt's response, explaining the Egypt may lift its end of the embargo on Gaza and--while not likely--a campaign like 2008-2009 may very well result in the dissolution of the 1079 Camp David Accords.[10] It's certainly true that the newly elected Egyptian President Muhammad Morsi has little interest in a confrontation with Israel, but Egypt's post-Mubarak political landscape demands an new attention and respect for popular opinion.
On the one hand, there is little doubt that Egypt was severely embarrassed by Israeli's assassination of Ahmed Jabari, breaching the Egyptian mediated ceasefire that had persisted for over 24 hours. A brief review of the events transpired through the ceasefire.
On Tuesday, in the midst of the short-lived ceasefire, Egypt made it clear that in the event of an escalation in violence, Egypt would not intervene on Hams' behalf.[11] However, significant protest against Israel was already mobilizing in Egypt's political arena, with ten different political parties signing a statement criticizing the government's relationship with Israel before marching through the streets of Cairo.[12]
Nevertheless, the ceasefire continued to hold while Hamas leaders--no doubt Jabari was among them--met with leaders from the Popular Resistance Committees and Islamic Jihad. The result was a consensus on continuing the ceasefire as long as Israel did. A Hamas spokesperson made what turned out to be a rather ominous statement: "Palestinian
organizations answered Hamas' call and are willing to stop firing, so long as
Israel doesn't attack or carry out assassinations in Gaza.”[13]
Worse yet Jabari was a valuable mechanism in the dialogue between Israel and Hamas facilitated by Egyptian mediators. Israeli peace activist Gershon Baskin has written several Op-Eds detailing his interactions with Jabari and the draft proposals for a permanent ceasefire that Jabari received just hourse before his death. This narrative is worth the time of anyone serious about understanding the relationship between Israel and Gaza. [14]
At the end of it all, there is no doubt that Egypt has lost face after their efforts to prevent escalation. Outraged and shamed, Egypt recalled their ambassador from Israel, though this has not stopped them from continuing ceasefire efforts. Egypt's prime minister visited Gaza on Friday, with the promise that both Hamas and Israel would stop firing once he arrived, but the attacks did not stop for long. Tunisia's foreign minister followed suit with similar results.
Egypt has an uphill battle as it tries to mediate a ceasefire especially since one or both sides may be unwilling to participate for very long if at all. It won't be surprising to learn that Hamas has no faith in Israel's participation in a ceasefire, but more likely Hamas must surely know that they cannot balk at the offer, if only for the sake of the Palestinians in Gaza.
Currently, Egypt is hosting talks between Hamas politiburo chief Khaled Mashaal, Qatar's emir SHeikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, and Turkish prime minister Tayyip Erdogan about how to arrive at a ceasefire. Time will tell how Egypt's efforts play out as well as how the Morsi government compares to its predecessor.
[2] Lautenberg’s
original comments: “No country should be forced to withstand attacks on its own people. We
cannot expect Israel to stand idly by while its citizens are the targets of
continued rocket attacks. We support Israel’s right to defend itself and
call on Hamas to immediately renounce terror and recognize Israel’s right to
exist.” http://supportisrael.us/news/?p=1735
[3]
"Lobbying
Spending Database-American Israel Public Affairs Cmte, 2008." OpenSecrets.
Web. 14 Dec. 2010. Online
[6]
Entous,
Adam. "U.S.-Saudi Arms Deal Moves Ahead." The Wall Street Journal.
12 Sept. 2010. Web. 14 Dec. 2010. Online.
[7]
Cassata, Donna. “Defense Budget Remains Likely Target For Deficit Reduction.” The Huffington Post. 12 Novemebr 2012.
Accessed 17 November 2012. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/12/defense-budget_n_2116166.html
[8]
Sharp, Jeremy M. “U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel.” Congressional Research Service. 12 March 2012. Accessed 17 November
2012. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf
[9]
This is a bit of an oversimplification, and it deserves mentioning that Jewish
Americans by and large do not vote based on a referendum of policies toward
Israel. For a good analysis of the Jewish vote in 2012 see Moore, Mik. “Reflections
on the Jewish Vote, 2012.” The Huffington
Post. 9 November 2012. Accessed 17 November 2012. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mik-moore/jewish-voters-2012_b_2100586.html
[10]
Fisher, Max. “How will Egypt respond to Israeli strikes on Gaza?” The Washington Post. 14 November 2012.
Accessed 17 November 2012.
[11]
“Egypt to Hamas: We will not intervene if violence continues.” Israel Hayom. 13 November 2012. Accessed
17 November 2012. http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=6398
[12]
Ibid.
[13]
Ibid.
[14] Baskin, Gershon. “Israel’s
Shortsighted Assassination.” New York
Times. 16 November 2012. 17 November 2012. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/17/opinion/israels-shortsighted-assassination.html?hp&_r=0
No comments:
Post a Comment