Mission & Name
US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)
Despite its Intransigence, Apartheid Israel is
Losing the Future
By Khalid Amayreh
in occupied Jerusalem
PIC, Al-Jazeerah, CCUN, October 10, 2011
There are growing signs that the Apartheid state of Israel is
traveling on a losing track. Indeed, with the prospects of finding a
dignified, just and mutually-accepted settlement for the enduring
Palestinian question nearly nonexistent, Israel is making sure that its
future will be problematic, uncertain and even precarious.
Israel is militarily powerful and somewhat tightly controls the politics and
policies of the United States, its guardian ally. However, the strategic
value of the "American variable" or "American connection" is steadily
becoming less certain and less than absolute in light of the progressive
deterioration in America's global standing
Until a few years ago, the
U.S. was thought of as a potentially positive force, a source of an absolute
and matchless asset, facilitating rather than impeding the achievement of a
prospective peace deal in the Middle East.
However, with the
phenomenal domination of Zionist Jews of the American government, especially
Congress, the U.S. seems to have become a handy tool in the hands of Zionist
extremists pursuing maximalist goals in occupied Palestine, including the
contemplated liquidation of the Palestine cause.
Hence, one would
exaggerate little by saying that the U.S. has now a very limited ability to
effect real change in the Middle East. One would even dare say that the U.S.
is now a liability rather asset for efforts to effect real peace in the
There are those who argue that with the election of Barack
Obama nearly three years ago, the U.S. took its best shot in the hope of
being conceived as a fairer and more honest broker of the conflict between
Israel and the Palestinians. However, with the pathetic retreat to the
Jewish lobby's lap, Obama demonstrated to all and sundry the extreme
difficulty, which borders on the impossible, of pursuing a truly independent
Middle East policy based on a semblance of Justice and a simple fairness as
well as vital American geopolitical interests.
More to the point,
Obama's notorious reluctance to accentuate and assert the 1967-armistic line
as the future boundaries between Israel and a prospective Palestinian state
should be viewed as a forewarning to future American presidents which would
make them think twice before entertaining the same idea once again.
With the scaled-down American ability to effect change, let alone issue
orders and instructions, the fascist-minded forces in Israel are likely to
have their way, at least for the foreseeable future. In other words, the
genocidal and Nazi-like forces of Gush Emunim will continue to pursue and
accelerate the process of ethnic cleansing all over occupied Palestine
toward the creation of an Arab-free Jewish theocracy in which Talmudic
edicts would be the law of the land.
According to the Talmud,
non-Jews living under Jewish religious laws must be treated as water
carriers or wood cutters, in other words slaves. Those refusing to submit
would have to be violently expelled or slaughtered en mass.
toward genocidal religious fascism is guaranteed to reignite the flames of
an internecine Jewish-Muslim conflict as never before. And in this case, new
players would join the battle such as Iran and Turkey as well as new-old
players such as Egypt .
Statehood efforts are irrelevant
international media is focusing these days on the Palestinian leadership's
efforts to achieve a statehood-status at the United Nations. However, a
fleeting look at reality in occupied Palestine shows that the two-state
solution is dead, which denotes the utter impossibility of establishing a
viable and territorially contiguous Palestinian state that is worthy of the
Moreover, with the Israeli Jewish society continuing to drift
to right-wing jingoism and religious fascism, it is greatly unlikely that
any future Israeli government would agree to dismantling a significant
number of Jewish colonies east of the erstwhile armistice line, let alone
withdraw to the lines of the 4th of June, 1967.
This fact would bring
Israel face to face with two fateful choices: either full-fledged apartheid
rule in the West Bank, in other words, the continuation of the military
occupation, possibly with a few medications that would make it more
palatable and more manageable.
The other choice would be the
annexation of all or most of the occupied territories, along with granting
millions of Palestinians the right to vote. Israel might resort to
manipulating this important variable in order to prevent "Arabs from taking
over Israel." None the less, in the long run the democratic and demographic
processes would have to take their full course, otherwise real trouble would
ensue and the world community would probably identify with the Arabs' just
demands and grievances.
Correspondingly, the Palestinians of the
occupied territories and their brethren across the Green Line, who would
form one solid electoral bloc, would pursue and expedite their democratic
rights as meticulously and as vigorously as possible, including absolute
equality with Jews as well as terminating the definition of Israel as a
Israel, or at least the fascist power centers in the
Jewish state, would probably seek to affect more draconian "solutions" to
get rid of the Palestinians once and for all. However, this wouldn't be
easily done as said, given the potential, actual human, political and
military price. Israel, after all, is a small island in the midst of an
Arab-Muslim sea of 600-700 millions of Muslims and Arabs who will not accept
a status of children of a lesser God.
Since its misbegotten birth,
Israel has relied on military might almost exclusively in order to impose
its will and gain the legitimacy of the fait accompli, and it is useless
denying the fact that it has succeeded in snatching such legitimacy from the
mouth of history.
However, it was understood from day-1, that the
legitimacy of the fait accompli would be no substitute or even alternative
for a moral legitimacy that is based on justice and truth.
Abbas may succeed or fail to obtain a statehood status at the United
Nations. But that will be irrelevant, at least from the strategic view
point, regardless of the outcome.
In the final analysis, Abbas and
his Palestinian Authority are only a minor, even minute, factor in the
forces lining up for the momentous and extended battle of Palestine.
He will be remembered as a sincere man who tried but failed to make
peace with Israel, even at a terrible price, namely giving up more than 78%
of historical Palestine.