For some, reviving the Palestinian economiy is the route to peace. For others, it's the route to fragmentation
A Good Comment
By Ben White
guardian.co.uk, Thursday November 20 2008
"....Netanyahu seems to be treading a fine line between staking out a position sufficiently different from Kadima so as to attract dissatisfied voters, and completely writing off any chances for progress with the Palestinians. Yet the interesting thing about his "economy first" stance is that it is actually remarkably conventional, and very similar to the approach taken since the Oslo process in the 1990s through to the Quartet.
The premise of Oslo was that through incremental "confidence-building measures" taken by both sides, the Israeli and Palestinian leaderships would eventually reach a position where the stickier questions of territory, borders, natural resources, Jerusalem and the refugees could be resolved through compromise. A key part was the stimulation of the Palestinian economy and a massive influx of foreign aid into the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT).
Of course, the paradox of Oslo was that "on the ground" conditions for Palestinian statehood actually worsened as the decade progressed (this book is a must read); Israeli colonies increased and expanded as did the settler bypass roads, the closure system was implemented at will by Israel, and the fragmentation of the OPT began in earnest along the absurdly contrived contours of Areas A, B and C.
....Netanyahu may be portrayed as the archetypal hawk (an image he helps to cultivate), but his ideas on the relationship between the Palestinian economy and "peace" are almost identical to those of the Quartet's envoy, Tony Blair.
In his capacity as official representative of the Quartet (the US, UN, EU and Russia), Blair has consistently responded to questions about continued Israeli colonisation and West Bank fragmentation by pointing to "economic projects" like industrial parks and tourism initiatives in Bethlehem.
In fact, even Blair's language echoes that of Netanyahu. During a Quartet press conference in September, Blair highlighted apparent "economic and social development" in Jenin as an example of "the bottom-up capability being created for a Palestinian state for the future". Perhaps Netanyahu was listening: speaking to the Jewish Agency, he affirmed that "we need to make peace from the bottom up, rather than the top down, by improving the lives of Palestinians so that they have a stake in peace"......
Oddly, the argument by the likes of Netanyahu and Blair that poverty pushes Palestinians towards "extremism" (albeit without looking at the conditions that created and maintain the poverty) goes against the current Israeli strategy for Gaza, where policies are deliberately intended to destroy the local economy and quality of life.
This seeming contradiction can be understood by the Israeli government's attitude to Hamas: punish the residents of Gaza and hit hard the group's interests in the West Bank. The "economy first" strategy, then, is intended for a West Bank dominated by a cooperative Palestinian leadership (made up of technocrats and elements within Fatah) and territorially carved into statelets and industrial zones.....
Netanyahu is thus speaking very much within the mainstream of Israeli politics and the "peace" discourse of the "international community", and if by talking more straightforwardly than others he attracts more flak, then perhaps this could serve to highlight the disingenuous futility of strategies currently favoured by both Knesset and Quartet."
A Good Comment
By Ben White
guardian.co.uk, Thursday November 20 2008
"....Netanyahu seems to be treading a fine line between staking out a position sufficiently different from Kadima so as to attract dissatisfied voters, and completely writing off any chances for progress with the Palestinians. Yet the interesting thing about his "economy first" stance is that it is actually remarkably conventional, and very similar to the approach taken since the Oslo process in the 1990s through to the Quartet.
The premise of Oslo was that through incremental "confidence-building measures" taken by both sides, the Israeli and Palestinian leaderships would eventually reach a position where the stickier questions of territory, borders, natural resources, Jerusalem and the refugees could be resolved through compromise. A key part was the stimulation of the Palestinian economy and a massive influx of foreign aid into the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT).
Of course, the paradox of Oslo was that "on the ground" conditions for Palestinian statehood actually worsened as the decade progressed (this book is a must read); Israeli colonies increased and expanded as did the settler bypass roads, the closure system was implemented at will by Israel, and the fragmentation of the OPT began in earnest along the absurdly contrived contours of Areas A, B and C.
....Netanyahu may be portrayed as the archetypal hawk (an image he helps to cultivate), but his ideas on the relationship between the Palestinian economy and "peace" are almost identical to those of the Quartet's envoy, Tony Blair.
In his capacity as official representative of the Quartet (the US, UN, EU and Russia), Blair has consistently responded to questions about continued Israeli colonisation and West Bank fragmentation by pointing to "economic projects" like industrial parks and tourism initiatives in Bethlehem.
In fact, even Blair's language echoes that of Netanyahu. During a Quartet press conference in September, Blair highlighted apparent "economic and social development" in Jenin as an example of "the bottom-up capability being created for a Palestinian state for the future". Perhaps Netanyahu was listening: speaking to the Jewish Agency, he affirmed that "we need to make peace from the bottom up, rather than the top down, by improving the lives of Palestinians so that they have a stake in peace"......
Oddly, the argument by the likes of Netanyahu and Blair that poverty pushes Palestinians towards "extremism" (albeit without looking at the conditions that created and maintain the poverty) goes against the current Israeli strategy for Gaza, where policies are deliberately intended to destroy the local economy and quality of life.
This seeming contradiction can be understood by the Israeli government's attitude to Hamas: punish the residents of Gaza and hit hard the group's interests in the West Bank. The "economy first" strategy, then, is intended for a West Bank dominated by a cooperative Palestinian leadership (made up of technocrats and elements within Fatah) and territorially carved into statelets and industrial zones.....
Netanyahu is thus speaking very much within the mainstream of Israeli politics and the "peace" discourse of the "international community", and if by talking more straightforwardly than others he attracts more flak, then perhaps this could serve to highlight the disingenuous futility of strategies currently favoured by both Knesset and Quartet."
No comments:
Post a Comment