Seeking Peace in the Middle East

 By Henry Srebrnik, [Charlottetown, PEI] Guardian

In the wake of the Gaza war, the so-called two-state solution – an Israeli and Palestinian state side by side -- has been resurrected.

This idea dates back to at least 1937, when a British commission suggested a partition of the British mandate of Palestine into two states. Ten years later, the UN General Assembly passed Resolution 181, which proposed two states for two peoples: one Arab, one Jewish.

Although the resolution’s recommendation of territorial partition left neither side satisfied, the Jews accepted it, but the Palestinians, encouraged by their Arab state sponsors, rejected it. The ensuing 1948 war led to the founding of the state of Israel; millions of Palestinians, meanwhile, became refugees, and their national aspirations languished.

In 1993, Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization signed the Oslo accords, recognizing each other and laying the groundwork for a phased, incremental process intended to eventually lead to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. The two-state solution’s moment appeared to have arrived.

But neither side was ready to compromise on the highly emotional question of who would control Jerusalem or on the issue of “the right of return” of Palestinian refugees, which was deeply threatening to the Israelis. And so it floundered and despite interminable attempts to resurrect it, by brokers such as the United States, it remained a dead letter.

Today, it seems even more of a fantasy. Given the current situation, the two sides seem less likely than ever to achieve the mutual trust that a two-state solution would require. There is a complete disconnect between renewed international calls for a two-state solution and the fears and desires currently shaping Israeli and Palestinian society.

Polls make it clear that both Israelis and Palestinians are highly unenthusiastic about and wary of the idea. Gallup polls conducted since late last year found that 65 per cent of Israeli respondents opposed the two-state solution and only 25 per cent supported it. The gap is even larger among Palestinians; in polls that Gallup conducted last summer, before the October 7 Hamas attacks, 72 per cent of Palestinian respondents opposed the two-state solution and only 24 per cent supported it.

What, then, of other solutions? There is Hamas’s position, which is the destruction of Israel. There is the Israeli right’s solution, which is the Israeli annexation of the West Bank and the dismantling of the Palestinian Authority. There is the approach pursued for the last decade or so by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, which aimed to maintain the status quo indefinitely – now impossible. And there is the idea of a binational state in which Jews would become a minority, thus ending Israel’s status as a Jewish state.

None of those alternatives would resolve the conflict to one or the other side’s satisfaction. That leaves only one viable medium-term arrangement that would allow Israel to safeguard its security and let Palestinians enjoy normal lives free from Israeli rule: some form of confederation with another entity for the Palestinians.

The most sensible idea would be to create a Palestinian government that would join in a confederation with an existing sovereign state, one that already has a stable and effective security force; maintains law and order; and fights terrorism.

That country would be Jordan, which borders the West Bank and whose population is overwhelmingly Arab and Muslim, and already more than half Palestinian. The Hashemite Kingdom was originally for a brief period part of the original Palestine Mandate, and, as Trans-Jordan, was the only Arab entity that more than held its own in 1948, conquering the West Bank and east Jerusalem, including the Old City and its religious centres. These areas were incorporated into Jordan until lost in 1967. To this day, Jordan still retains some rights there.

The 1994 peace treaty between Israel and Jordan committed Israel to “respect the present special role of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in Muslim Holy shrines in Jerusalem” and that “when negotiations on the permanent status will take place, Israel will give high priority to the Jordanian historic role in these shrines.” In 2013, an agreement between Jordan and the Palestinian Authority recognized Jordan’s role in Jerusalem’s Muslim and Christian holy sites.

This idea is not new and has been advanced before. But even as a stopgap solution, it is infinitely preferable to what exists today.

 

In a Dangerous Middle East Is Lebanon Doomed?

 By Henry Srebrnik, [Saint John, N.B.] Telegraph-Journal

Everyone understands that Lebanon is, by any measure, a failed state, paralyzed by its sectarianism. Its various Christian, Druze and Muslim communities have over the past four decades destroyed what little unity it possessed.

More than a dozen religious sects coexist in a precarious balancing act, reflected in a power-sharing system that reserves government posts by religion. Both the presidency and central bank governor, two top posts reserved for Maronite Christians, have been vacant since October 2022 and July 2023 respectively, due to divisions over choosing successors.

And with the rise of Hezbollah, the Shia Muslim group that uses its territory as a launching pad aimed at Israel, its future in any larger Middle East war is that of a death foretold. Lebanon has become little more than a pawn of Iran’s, with virtually no agency of its own.

Iran founded Hezbollah in 1982 to export its Islamic revolution and fight Israeli forces that had invaded Lebanon. Sharing Tehran’s Shia Islamist ideology, Hezbollah recruited among Shia Muslims, at the time the poorest people in the country.

It is Iran who shaped Hezbollah and to whom Hezbollah is loyal. It demonstrated its military strength in 2006 during a five-week war with Israel, and its power grew after deploying into Syria in 2012 to help President Bashar al-Assad fight Sunni rebels.

Hezbollah also entered politics and has ministers in government and lawmakers in parliament. In 2016, the Hezbollah-allied Christian politician Michel Aoun became president. Two years later, Hezbollah and its allies won a parliamentary majority. This majority was lost in 2022, but the group continues to exercise power over the state.

Hezbollah now boasts some 150,000 precision rockets and asserts it can hit all parts of Israel. In 2021, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said the group had 100,000 fighters.

Hezbollah began launching rockets from southern Lebanon at Israel on Oct. 8 in support of Hamas, which carried out an attack into Israel from Gaza the previous day. Some 90,000 people have been displaced from southern Lebanon since the conflict broke out.

Lebanon’s Christians politically dominated the country until they lost a vicious civil between 1975 and 1990 that resulted in an estimated 150,000 fatalities. They are now relatively helpless and caught in the crossfire, with little ability to steer the country away from disaster.

Maronite Patriarch Boutros al-Rai early in the current Gaza war called for Lebanon to stay on the sidelines and more recently declared that war had been “imposed” on Christians. Greek Orthodox Metropolitan of Beirut Elias Audi asked in March if it was fair for “one faction of Lebanese to decide on behalf of everyone and take unilateral decisions that not all Lebanese agree on.” Even Hezbollah’s main Christian ally, the Free Patriotic Movement, announced that its alliance with Hezbollah had been shaken.

“The main problem that arose recently was crossing the limits of defending Lebanon and getting involved in a conflict in which we cannot make decisions,” its leader Gebran Bassil complained.

Michael Young, senior editor at the Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Centre in Beirut, called Bassil’s comments an attempt to gain some leverage over Hezbollah by signaling a rift, but also reflected Christian unease with the status quo.

“The mood among the Christian community is almost a psychological divorce from the system. They don't feel that they have a say in the system and in a way it’s true -- Hezbollah is in control of much of the system,” Young told Reuters.

On Jan. 7, travelers through Beirut’s airport saw the arrival and departure screens suddenly flash a message addressed to the powerful leader of Hezbollah: “Hassan Nasrallah, you will not have any supporters if Lebanon is drawn into a war for which you will bear responsibility.” Nasrallah isn’t listening. Hezbollah fired a large barrage of rockets at northern Israel on April 12.

Lebanon was already hit hard by a financial meltdown that began in 2019. Since then, the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) has fallen by 50 per cent, the currency has lost more than 90 per cent of its value, and poverty now plagues 80 per cent of the population. Salaries became nearly worthless after the pound lost most of its value.

Lebanon’s insolvent banks won’t allow depositors to withdraw their money in full. The Association of Banks in Lebanon has said the institutions do not have enough liquidity to pay back depositors.

Now things are even worse, with tourists staying away, shops closed, and schools shuttered or sheltering thousands displaced by the fighting. Lebanon’s overburdened health-care system will be unable to cope if the war spreads.

Simon Neaime, an economics professor at the American University of Beirut, fears that the Lebanese are exhausted. “In 2006, during the last war with Israel, we had a fully functioning economy, we had a functional banking system supplying credit to the private sector and contributing to growth, we had a government in place, we had a president,” Neaime explained.

In 2006, Lebanon received support from Arab countries, particularly oil-rich Persian Gulf nations, for reconstruction after the end of that war. This is not the case today, with ties to the gulf monarchies, ruled by Sunni Muslims, strained by Hezbollah’s increased regional presence. The country, or what’s left of it, is on its own.

 

Israel and South Africa are Quarrelling About the Gaza War

 By Henry Srebrnik, [Saint John, N.B.] Telegraph-Journal

South Africa’s Chief Rabbi, Dr. Warren Goldstein, addressed the Congressional Summit of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in Washington March 10, speaking about politics in Africa and the Middle East.

He observed that the ideology of Al-Shabaab in Somalia, Boko Haram in Nigeria, and Islamic State (ISIS) throughout much of Africa is the same ideology espoused, funded, and propagated by Iran and its proxies, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis.

“Israel’s war with Hamas – and by extension Iran – is against the same enemy,” he asserted, suggesting that the way to fight a “diplomatic war” is to build alliances with states in Africa.

But relations between Israel and his own country have worsened. After the war in Gaza broke out last October, South Africa became one of the most outspoken countries against Israel in the world and one of its most vituperative critics, calling Israel an “apartheid state” and accusing it of “ethnic cleansing.

In December, Pretoria went further, charging Israel with genocide at the International Court of Justice. “Our opposition to the ongoing slaughter of the people of Gaza has driven us as a country to approach the ICJ,” South African President Cyril Ramaphosa said ahead of the proceedings.

“As a people who once tasted the bitter fruits of dispossession, discrimination, racism and state-sponsored violence, we are clear that we will stand on the right side of history.”

Israel’s Foreign Ministry responded by calling the claims “false and baseless” and a “sweeping counter-factual description” of the conflict with Hamas. It denounced South Africa for “collaborating with a terror group that calls for the destruction of the state of Israel” and accused it of participating in a “blood libel” against the Jewish state.

In January the court ordered Israel to take all measures within its power “to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide” and to immediately ensure that Palestinians have access to basic services and humanitarian assistance. While South Africa had called for the suspension of Israeli military operations in Gaza, the court did not grant this provisional measure.  

The world’s reaction to the landmark case showed a predictable global split. Most countries backing South Africa’s case were from the Arab world, Asia, and Africa. No Western country supported South Africa’s allegations against Israel.

Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor, visiting Washington for talks with American officials, on March 19 maintained that the International Criminal Court should have already issued an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “for war crimes committed against Palestinians in Gaza.”

South Africa also recalled its ambassador to Israel and suspended diplomatic relations. The Israeli airline El Al is planning to cancel its Tel Aviv to Johannesburg route, given a steep drop in demand.

It is the nadir of a relationship that had survived some challenges, largely thanks to the leadership of Nelson Mandela, who in 1994 became South Africa’s first president after apartheid.

Mandela supported Israeli territorial concessions and was close to the Palestinian cause, but he was also supportive of Israel, which he’d visited and where he’d received an honorary doctorate. His viewpoint was that Israel had the right to exist.

Today South Africa strongly backs the Palestinian cause, with formal diplomatic relations established in 1995, a year after the end of apartheid. It downgraded its embassy in Tel Aviv to a liaison office in 2019.

The issue of whether Israel should be granted observer status in the African Union (AU) has been subject to heated debate. In February, Israel thwarted an effort by South Africa and Algeria to deprive it of observer status in the AU. The two countries had also planned to urge the 55 member states to cut off relations with Israel. Nevertheless, leaders at the AU summit in Addis Ababa condemned Israel’s offensive in Gaza.

Both the pro-Israel and pro-Palestine movements in South Africa are large. The groups are openly hostile towards each other, especially since last Oct. 7.

Pro-Palestine marches bring together up to 200,000 people. In early December a senior Hamas delegation arrived in South Africa to participate in the Fifth Global Convention of Solidarity with Palestine. Speakers from the Hezbollah and Houthi organizations addressed students at the University of Cape Town on March 27.

The South African Jewish community numbers some 75,000, making it the twelfth largest Jewish community in the world. “Israel has many allies and friends here in South Africa who are ashamed of their government’s support for terrorist regimes and despots,” declared Goldstein.

Gabriella Farber-Cohen, former spokesperson for the African National Congress (ANC) Women’s League in Gauteng, resigned from the party in mid-October. She called South Africa accusing Israel of genocide a “slap in the face for all Jews in South Africa.”

Following threats by South Africa’s government in December to prosecute citizens who served in Israel’s army, including stripping naturalized South Africans of their citizenship, leaders of the South African Jewish community Feb. 20 organized a ceremony in Israel for members who were killed or wounded defending the Jewish state.

Already part of the white minority, South Africa’s Jews are become yet more marginalized. If the ANC is re-elected in the national election May 29, many believe that there will be a Jewish exodus from the country.