A novel by Thomas Hardy: Return of the Native written in the mid nineteenth century depicts a man in a village of England who is prosperous and has a good reputation because he is working in Paris. He returns to his homeland and marries one of the most beautiful girls in the village but doesn’t want to return to Paris. He wants to work in his native land. However, he becomes blind and suddenly understands that it is impossible to return to the prosperous and elegant past thus begins to destruct everything around him. His wife runs away to Europe, falls into a flood and is drowned. At the end he remains helpless.
The case in the novel is similar to the situation that Israel is to fall, because significant powers in the world politics such as Russia, the US and Latina American states began to recognize the Palestinian state with her 1967 borders one by one and Israel is blindfolded in her security based violent policy. In this article, the statements concerning the aforementioned recognition and Israel’s responses will be focused on and it will conclude with the point that Israel reached in the course of this conflict.
May the Native Want to Return?
As an agent of a prosperous colonial power, that is British Empire, Israelis came to the Middle East firstly to Uganda in accordance with the Belfour Declaration and then to Palestine where they defined as the lands bestowed to them two millennia ago by God in the Bible. The US and all other European powers remained silent to this settlement and in 1948 the Israel State was recognized internationally which was also the beginning of the conflict of sixty years under the surveillance of United Nations. Israel generated more and more power in order to have a prosperous life in hernative lands where they left hundreds years ago according to Zionist mythology. However the more power they generated the more they were blinded to the other verses of the Bible and certain realities in politics.
First of all, the Bible does not only talk about the native lands that God bestowed to Israelis. It also talks about mercy, compassion, justice, harmony, and deliverance of peace to the humanity. Israelis blinded of mercy and compassion and used every kind of weapons against armless people. They did not differentiated between woman, elders or children and killed everyone they come across in order to create coercion over Palestinians to make them leave the lands they live on. Furthermore, they blinded of justice and harmony thus closed their ears to the rule of law, international justice and built settlements in the Palestinian lands depriving them of their farms and water sources. Instead of deliverance of peace they reminded conflict to humanity each time by breaching each peace process and negotiation.
Secondly, there are certain realities in politics which cannot be casted out. If the force used does not bring a clear cut solution to a case there is no meaning in using it, because it will just generate hatred. Israel has used force against Palestinians for sixty years but they haven’t been able to chase the Palestinian out of their lands. What is more, Palestine remained there as a de facto state. Political scientists, politicians and military strategists were well aware that the case will end up as a stalemate or deadlock and cost a lot to Israelis. However nobody has been able to persuade the parties to end this conflict. Israel, very like the native of Hardy, also understood that it would not be able to destruct Palestinians and Palestine as a whole and it tried in 2006 onward to make a last blow. However today it remained in his blindness alone in the Middle East. States one by one recognizes Palestine.
The US joined the caravan recognizing the Palestinian state with the 1967 borders with Obama’s remarks on the events in the region on Thursday. President Obama in his speech on the Middle East referred to the issue as a costly conflict for the region and went on saying “The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state[1].” Of course these words are a part of the the discourse that President Obama used for the new era and new American foreign policy in the Middle East. The main point in discussing it here is the response of Israel.
As a response to these words of Obama Israeli state secretary released a written response beginning with a ultranationalist remark saying: “Israel believes that for peace to endure between Israelis and Palestinians, the viability of a Palestinian state cannot come at the expense of the viability of the one and only Jewish state. That is why Prime Minister Netanyahu expects to hear a re-affirmation from President Obama of U.S. commitments made to Israel in 2004 [2].” The phrase “one and only Jewish state” is quite interesting and essentialist because states cannot legitimize any of their unlawful claims through their religion or nationality in international politics. In international relations the principle of self determination is accepted as jus cogens which means self determination of a people of their fate cannot be opposed by any country or organization. Israel violating this for years is now worried about the recognition of Palestine as a threat at the expense of Israel as a Jewish state. This is a clear blindfolding in her principles and shutting her eyes to the international political culture.
Another power that startled the Israeli administration was Russia. Russian president Medvedev visited the Palestinian territories in January “as the first high- profile international figure who had gone to Palestinian territory independently of a visit to Israel. What is more Medvedev emphasized “the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to an independent, territorially contiguous and viable state with its capital in East Jerusalem,” and went on saying “Russia’s position remains unchanged, referring to the Soviet Union’s support for the Palestinian declaration of independence of 1988[3]” This was considered to be the most serious blow to the Israel since it had the potential to open the way for other states to recognize the Palestine State.
Furthermore, a few months ago, Brazil recognized Palestine state with the borders before the 1967 West Bank conquest and then Argentina recognized it. Upon this Israel's Foreign Ministry said in a statement that it was disappointed by the Brazilian declaration and continued: "Recognition of a Palestinian state is a breach of the interim agreement which was signed between Israel and the Palestinian Authority in 1995, which said that the issue of the status of the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be discussed and resolved through negotiations. Every attempt to bypass this process and to decide in advance in a unilateral manner about important issues which are disputed only harms trust between the sides and hurts their commitment to the agreed framework of negotiating towards peace.”
This statement brings a few questions together with it: Has ever Israel obeyed any agreements including the interim agreement in 1995 regarding the Gaza Strip and West Bank? Which negotiations? Was there a bilateral decision? Is there a trust to be hurt and a commitment to the agreed framework of negotiating towards peace?
As clearly seen each phrase uttered in the statement rises a question because, Israel continued to build settlements in Palestinian lands since the respective so called agreement; None of the negotiations worked in resolving the aggression of Israel in the region. There has not been any bilateral decision making even in the mediation of the UN. Alvaro De Soto, the former Middle East Peace Conveyor of the UN, was in Boğaziçi University last semester and lectured on peaceful settlement of disputes and mediation. He stated that during his term of office he always paid attention to show empathy to both Israeli and Palestinian concerns although he had not spoken to the Hamas elected representative of Palestinians except for once hands shaking and once calling by phone. I raised my hand and stated this case then asked whether this was empathy. He replied that this was a rule put by the UN and his successor had never talked to Hamas. There was no need to ask any other questions everything was clear. The empathy was to be maintained in unilateral negotiations. What is more, it is very difficult for Palestinian to trust Israel behind the wall built around them and among the settlement built up on their lands.
What is now?
Following Brazil, Argentina and Russia, now the US noticed that there is no other way out of recognizing the Palestinian state. This may bring more recognition in the international arena an turn the ongoing process in favor of Palestine. This brings the possibility of a regeneration of pan-Arab power in the region to minds. In other words, a native returns to his powers while the sun of the other alleged native gives the signal of setting down. Another conflict like that of 1960s in the region may not bring the same consequences to Israel and mobilize the Muslim mass against the Israel.
Kasım İLERİ, Middle East Technical University, International Relations MSc.
Notes
[1] http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/05/19/remarks-president-middle-east-and-north-africa
[2]http://foxnewsinsider.com/2011/05/19/full-text-official-response-from-netanyahu-to-obamas-israel-palestine-1967-border-remarks/
[3] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/19/world/middleeast/19mideast.html