Compiled Aff Answers
Peace Process Fails – Israel
Download 1.62 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Peace Process Fails – US involvement Bad
- Peace Process Fails – Palestinian rejection
Peace Process Fails – IsraelIsrael not ready for peace process Slater 10(Jerome, Professor Emeritus of political science, SUNY Buffalo, Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jerome-slater/the-israeli-palestinian-c_b_499010.html, 3/16)dc. The prospects for a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have never been worse, primarily because of the rightward shift of the Israeli government and public opinion and, secondarily, because of the end of any expectations that the United States would help "save Israel from itself." Is there any hope at all? The best chance for peace would be a sea-change within Israeli public opinion. However, Israeli peace groups have not succeeded in convincing mainstream opinion in their country that Israel's policies are both a moral and a long-term security disaster. For this reason, many on the Israeli left have long hoped that the U.S. would bring serious pressures to bear on their government to agree to a just and viable peace settlement. However, the Obama administration's abandonment of its mild initial efforts to persuade Israel to change its policies has now dashed those hopes: in the absence of a major shift in public and congressional attitudes, there is no chance of change in the traditional US policies of near-unconditional support of Israel. Consequently, the primary function of the leading U.S. peace groups -- Americans for Peace Now (APN) and, more recently, J Street -- must be to persuade American opinion that those traditional policies are detrimental to the best interests of Israel and, for that matter, of the U.S. itself. Even those who deny the existence of an Israel lobby that dominates U.S. policies towards Israel are not likely to deny that the Jewish community is the most important sector of American public opinion on all issues pertaining to Israel. Consequently, domestic politics ensures that there will be no change in American government policies in the absence of strong Jewish support for sustained pressures on Israel. And if they are to have any chance of success, those pressures must include making U.S. diplomatic, economic, and military assistance of Israel conditional on major changes in its policies. While there has been increased dissent within the U.S. Jewish community over Israel's policies, the dominant majority still supports them -- even despite the much-criticized Israeli attack on Gaza last year and the subsequent Goldstone report (hereafter referred to as Gaza/Goldstone). In light of mainstream opinion in this country, it is undeniable that APN and J Street confront a strategic dilemma. On the one hand, an open acknowledgment of the true depth of Israel's moral collapse and even its capability of recognizing and acting on its rational self-interest might backfire: if the peace groups move too far to the left of the mainstream they may well be seen as illegitimate and lose even more influence. On the other hand, the situation is desperate, requiring a more forthright strategy, whatever the risks: if the peace groups continue to be too timid in their criticisms of Israeli policies and the complicity of the United States in them, they will become increasingly ineffectual and irrelevant. Peace Process Fails – US involvement BadUS backing of Israel prevents peace process – Israel leaving Gaza and Palestinians desolate making peace unlikely. Chomsky 10(Noam, Institute Professor emeritus in the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/noam-chomsky/a-middle-east-peace-that_b_554178.html?view=print, 4/27)dc. After its formal withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, Israel never actually relinquished its total control over the territory, often described realistically as “the world’s largest prison.” In January 2006, a few months after the withdrawal, Palestine had an election that was recognized as free and fair by international observers. Palestinians, however, voted “the wrong way,” electing Hamas. Instantly, the U.S. and Israel intensified their assault against Gazans as punishment for this misdeed. The facts and the reasoning were not concealed; rather, they were openly published alongside reverential commentary on Washington’s sincere dedication to democracy. The U.S.-backed Israeli assault against the Gazans has only been intensified since, thanks to violence and economic strangulation, increasingly savage. Meanwhile in the West Bank, always with firm U.S. backing, Israel has been carrying forward longstanding programs to take the valuable land and resources of the Palestinians and leave them in unviable cantons, mostly out of sight. Israeli commentators frankly refer to these goals as “neocolonial.” Ariel Sharon, the main architect of the settlement programs, called these cantons “Bantustans,” though the term is misleading: South Africa needed the majority black work force, while Israel would be happy if the Palestinians disappeared, and its policies are directed to that end Peace Process Fails – Palestinian rejectionPeace Process Fails – Palestinian Rejectionism Foxman 10 (Abraham H., National Director, Anti-Defamation League, 3-28-2010, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/02/opinion/l02israel.html) One doesn’t have to agree with every action and policy of the government of Israel to recognize that the fundamental problems that have surfaced are far more a product of Palestinian rejectionism and extremism than alleged Israeli intransigence. It is the Palestinians, not Israel, who have refused to return to negotiations. Unfortunately, the Obama administration gave the Palestinians an excuse not to come to the table by making settlements the central issue. In fact, over the years there have been negotiations despite the settlement issue. Had the Palestinians accepted Israel’s generous offers under two prime ministers for a Palestinian state, the issue of settlements would have been resolved. The Obama administration has gone off track not only in its excessive focus on settlements and its overreaction to Israel’s faux pas in announcing new construction while the vice president was in Israel, but also by suggesting that Israel is harming American interests in the region. This is a misguided and counterproductive view. Ultimately, America’s interests in the region will rise or fall on its willingness to support its true friends there and its ability to distinguish between moderates who want peace and rejectionists who want to undermine it. There is no doubt that Israel is a true ally and peacemaker. Peace Process Empirically denied – Palestinians more interested in attacking Israel than their own state Jacoby ‘9 ( Jeff, Global Columist, Boston.com, 5-20-2009, http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/05/20/peace_isnt_arab_goal/) CM International consensus or no, the two-state solution is a chimera. Peace will not be achieved by granting sovereignty to the Palestinians, because Palestinian sovereignty has never been the Arabs' goal. Time and time again, a two-state solution has been proposed. Time and time again, the Arabs have turned it down. In 1936, when Palestine was still under British rule, a royal commission headed by Lord Peel was sent to investigate the steadily worsening Arab violence. After a detailed inquiry, the Peel Commission concluded that "an irrepressible conflict has arisen between two national communities within the narrow bounds of one small country." It recommended a two-state solution - a partition of the land into separate Arab and Jewish states. "Partition offers a chance of ultimate peace," the commission reported. "No other plan does." But the Arab leaders, more intent on preventing Jewish sovereignty in Palestine than in achieving a state for themselves, rejected the Peel plan out of hand. The foremost Palestinian leader, Haj Amin al-Husseini, actively supported the Nazi regime in Germany. In return, Husseini wrote in his memoirs, Hitler promised him "a free hand to eradicate every last Jew from Palestine and the Arab world." In 1947, the Palestinians were again presented with a two-state proposal. Again they spurned it. Like the Peel Commission, the United Nations concluded that only a division of the land into adjacent states, one Arab and one Jewish, could put an end to the conflict. On Nov. 29, 1947, by a vote of 33-13, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 181, partitioning Palestine on the basis of population. Had the Arabs accepted the UN decision, the Palestinian state that "the whole world wants" would today be 61 years old. Instead, the Arab League vowed to block Jewish sovereignty by waging "a war of extermination and a momentous massacre." Over and over, the pattern has been repeated. Following its stunning victory in the 1967 Six Day War, Israel offered to exchange the land it had won for permanent peace with its neighbors. From their summit in Khartoum came the Arabs' notorious response: "No peace with Israel, no negotiations with Israel, no recognition of Israel." At Camp David in 2000, Ehud Barak offered the Palestinians virtually everything they claimed to be seeking - a sovereign state with its capital in East Jerusalem, 97 percent of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, tens of billions of dollars in "compensation" for the plight of Palestinian refugees. Yasser Arafat refused the offer, and launched the bloodiest wave of terrorism in Israel's history. To this day, the charters of Hamas and Fatah, the two main Palestinian factions, call for Israel's liquidation. "The whole world" may want peace and a Palestinian state, but the Palestinians want something very different. Until that changes, there is no two-state solution. Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 1.62 Mb. Share with your friends:
|