Ghassan Charbel
Editor-in-Chief of Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper
TT

The Policy of Running towards Fires

The Israeli government is adopting a very dangerous policy. The raids of the Al-Aqsa Mosque are pouring fuel on already blazing fires.

The insistence on settlement expansion offers the owners of the land no choice but to defend it relentlessly. The insistence on dismissing the moderate and legitimate Palestinian negotiator leaves the conflict up for any confrontation. Forging ahead in eliminating what remains of the Oslo Accords effectively returns open conflict.

It is not odd for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government to become a burden on Israel’s allies and on those who have always justified its actions. The allies have found it impossible to continue to justify this excessive Israeli insistence on stoking fires.

Some believe that the current Israeli government is trying to benefit the most from the international situation created in wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. They say that the war has brought back to the political forefront the use of force to achieve goals given the horrific loss of authority of international law and the United Nations.

However, the possession of an advanced military machine may mean the ability to deliver painful blows or win some fights, but it never translates into the ability to decisively turn a battle or conflict in one’s favor once and for all.

Netanyahu has failed to learn lessons from his predecessors. In 1982, the Israeli army succeeded in occupying Beirut and expelling the forces of the Palestinian Liberation Organization from Lebanon. Four decades later, messages, in the form of Palestinian rockets, are again being fired from Lebanese territories, even though they are obviously being launched with Iran’s blessing.

Yitzhak Rabin tried to take the hard line, but reached the painful conclusion that Israel is incapable of eliminating the Palestinian people from the equation, even if it succeeded in taking out some figures. In wake of this realization, Rabin surrendered to the Oslo Accords and shook Yasser Arafat’s hand at the White House.

It was difficult for the Palestinian leadership to make painful concessions, namely making do with dividing the territory to save what remained of it from settlement expansion. Only a Palestinian leader like Arafat could have made such a difficult decision.

I recall what famed Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish said in Tunisia, “I am afraid to look at the map.” Darwish knew of the agreement before it was signed. He too surrendered to relinquishing a portion of his dream.

The Israeli leaders who succeeded Rabin failed to seize the opportunity that became available with Arafat’s signing of the peace accord. They also failed to seize the opportunity provided by the 2002 Arab peace initiative. We all saw how General Ariel Sharon took advantage of the September 11 attacks to erase some articles of the accord and its spirit.

One cannot deny Netanyahu’s skill that allowed him to become Israel’s longest serving prime minister. One cannot deny the relations he has forged in the past decades with major powers. He has maintained the traditional alliance with the United States. He also forged strong ties with a major player called Vladimir Putin. Best evidence of these relations is that the Russian military intervention in Syria gave Netanyahu the open opportunity to launch repeated attacks against “Iranian targets in Syria.”

We can also talk about Netanyahu’s relations with Europe, China and India. Even after the eruption of the Ukraine war, Israel managed to sign contracts to bolster the air defenses of some frightened countries.

All of these successes seem to be a form of avoidance. They are an attempt to settle the Palestinian conflict, but by avoiding its essence. These attempts at avoidance will not succeed no matter how mighty the Israeli military machine grows. The army that can reach far off targets in the region, ultimately, cannot prevent attacks carried out by individuals in the West Bank or beyond.

Any realistic reading of the situation will prove that Israel cannot enjoy stability if it does not acknowledge the right of Palestinians to form an independent state. The aspirations of an entire people cannot be dashed. The Palestinian people must be allowed to live in their own state. These people have ties to their land and dream to reclaim their rights and pass them on to future generations in spite of the sacrifices and setbacks.

Israel believes that Ismail Hanieh’s rockets that were fired from Beirut and the rockets that were fired from Syria were Iranian messages. It also believes that the increased frequency of these attacks could be tied to the Iranian nuclear program. Iran’s fingerprints could be found everywhere. But the real question is: Would these rockets have been fired had successive Israeli governments respected the Oslo Accords and seriously approached the Arab peace initiative?

The exchange of Iranian-Israeli strikes is a reality. But another question is: Are we headed to a war where thousands of rockets will be launched and fires will blaze on Israel’s borders with Syria and Lebanon and perhaps, beyond? What about Russia’s role and military involvement in Syria? What about China that has presented itself for the first time – through the Saudi-Iranian deal – as a peacemaker? Is it true that Israel is worried about the changes in the international scene and the possible birth of a multipolar Middle East? Will it address old and new crises by resorting to enflaming fires instead of returning to the root of the conflict?