As long as Likud’s principles remain uncompromising and Netanyahu holds firm to them there is little that will come of the peace process with the Palestinians.
Twenty years ago, the country known until then as Yugoslavia plunged into war. Over the next decade, a succession of armed conflicts on the territory of the “former Yugoslavia” would recurrently make headlines. The wars spelled the end not just of a multinational state, but of any prospect of a viable multinational society at a local level.
Whether the ends justify the means is an impossible question to answer decisively. How unpalatable are the means and how desirable the ends? There is no definitive rulebook on how violent organisations such as Hamas need to be handled. Each example illustrates a different dynamic that requires a different response.
Palestine now only requires a two-thirds majority in the General Assembly, or 129 votes, to be admitted as the 194th member of the United Nations. The long conflict between Israel and Palestine has shed enough blood. It is high time that the international community worked to support the peaceful future of two sovereign states.
Salam Fayyad, the western-educated economist/Prime Minister of the West Bank, has been the point man for western backed development efforts throughout Palestine. With the controversial vote on Palestinian statehood approaching and the reconciliation of Fatah and Hamas nearly complete, Fayyad may soon find himself a victim of the inconsistencies and contradictions in his national strategy.
The notion that democracy in the region is in the interest of the US and its NATO allies was and continues to be an illusion and a fabrication. It becomes a dangerous fantasy when taken up by some liberal circles and champions of humanitarian intervention. This fantasy could kill a million people and destroy an entire country, as in Iraq, and might yet do the same in Libya, Syria, Lebanon and Iran.
Israel would be in a better position if it accepted the Arab Peace Plan put forward by Saudi Arabia and addressed the sixty years of UN resolutions that deal with the unilateral decision making of the Palestinian National Authority. That way Israel would benefit from normalised relations with Arab nations, which is more conducive to its national interest.
Hamas is currently treading a very risky line. For the Salafi-Jihadists, Hamas has de-legitimised itself as an Islamic group and as a leader of the resistance against Israel. Rather ironically, Hamas will be better off in the short term continuing to simultaneously straddle positions of moderation and extremism – basically maintaining the status quo.
The self-immolation of Mohammed Bouazizi instilled enough courage in the Arab people to demand the democratic and human rights that they deserve. If the present protests on the Arab streets are sending tremors across the world, then in the near future, an unexpected political event in the region will be potent enough to hit globally with the force of a tsunami.
The Iranian Revolution of 1979 is considered a defining moment because the Islamic Republic replaced an authoritarian monarchy that was friendly to the West. The revolution, moreover, linked religion to politics in an unprecedented way. The books reviewed herein demonstrate that the idea of a “monolithic Islam” is not only wrong, it is dangerous.
Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing.
E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks!
Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.