Paris and the End to a Western-dominated Era in the Middle East
29 January 2017
By Ramzy Baroud
No, it was not just 'another Middle East peace conference,' as a columnist in
Israeli 'Jerusalem Post' attempted to depict the Paris Peace Conference held
on January 15, with top official representations from 70 countries attending.
If it was, indeed, just 'another peace conference', representatives from the
Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority (PA) would have attended as
well.
Instead, it was a defining moment that we are likely to remember: as the one
that has officially ended the peace process charade after 25 years.
In fact, if the Madrid Conference of October 1991 was the vibrant official
start of peace talks between Israel and its Arab – including Palestinian –
neighbours, the Paris talks of January 2016 was the sad termination of it.
As soon as the Madrid talks began, the positive energy and expectations that
accompanied them began to fade. Even before the talks began, Israel had set
political traps and erected obstacles. For example, refusing to deal directly
with the Palestinian negotiations team led by the late Haidar Abdul-Shafi
(since, as far as Israel was concerned, Palestinians did not exist), and even
protested that negotiator, Saeb Erekat, was wearing the traditional
Palestinian headscarf (kufiyah).
It has been 25 years since that initial meeting. Since then, several of the
original Palestinian delegation members have passed away; others have aged
while talking about peace, but with no peace in sight. The then young Erekat
became the 'chief negotiator' of the PA, again, yet with nothing to talk
about.
What is really left to be negotiated, when Israel has doubled its illegal
settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem? When the number of Jewish
settlers have grown from a negligible 250,000 (in 1993) to over 600,000; when
the rate of Palestinian loss of land has accelerated like never before, since
the war and occupation of 1967; when Gaza has been under lock and key for over
10 years, suffering from war, polluted water and malnourishment?
Yet, the Americans have persisted. They needed the peace process. It is an
American investment, first and foremost, because American reputation and
leadership depended on it.
''We are joined at the hip with Israel,'' said Professor John Mearsheimer,
co-author of the 'Israeli Lobby' in a recent interview. ''What Israel does and
how Israel evolves matters greatly for America's reputation.''
''This is why President Obama – and President George W. Bush before him, and
President Clinton before him – went to great lengths to get a two-state
solution.''
Precisely. They persisted and failed, and they failed again and again until
the two-state solution (which was never a serious endeavour, to begin with)
became a distant and, eventually, an impossible quest.
As Israel's political centre moved sharply to the right under the leadership
of Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, the US maintained its position, as if
oblivious to the fact that 'facts on the ground' have altered the political
landscape beyond recognition.
Former President Barack Obama began his career in what some saw as an earnest
push for renewed talks, which were halted or stalled during the administration
of George W. Bush. He dispatched Senator George Mitchell, whose negotiations
skills in 2010 to 2011 could not move Israel from its obstinate position on
settlement expansion and, again, dispatched his Secretary of State, John
Kerry, who tried unsuccessfully to revitalise talks between 2013 and 2014.
Obama must have, at one point, realised that the efforts were futile. For a
start, Netanyahu seemed to have a greater influence on the US Congress than
the President himself. This is not an exaggeration. When Netanyahu clashed
with Obama over the Iran nuclear deal, he snubbed the US President and gave a
talk to a joint Congress in March 2015, in which he chastised Obama and the
'bad deal' with Iran. Obama appeared forlorn and irrelevant, as the
representatives of the American people gave numerous standing ovations to a
foreign leader, who boasted, yelled, assigned blame and praise.
Kerry's nostalgic last speech in late December was an indication of that epic
failure, the gist of his plea being that it was all over. However, both Kerry
and Obama have no one to blame but themselves. Their administration had the
political clout and the popular mandate to push Israel, and exact concessions
that could have served as the basis of something substantial. They chose not
to.
And now, an opportunistic real-estate mogul, Donald Trump, is the President of
the United States. He comes with an eerie agenda that looks identical to that
of the current Israeli government of right-wingers and ultra-nationalists.
''We have now reached the point where envoys from one country to the other
could almost switch places,'' wrote Palestinian Professor, Rashid Khalidi, in
the 'New Yorker':
''The Israeli Ambassador in Washington, Ron Dermer, who grew up in Florida,
could just as easily be the US Ambassador to Israel, while Donald Trump's
Ambassador-designate to Israel, David Friedman, who has intimate ties to the
Israeli settler movement, would make a fine Ambassador in Washington for the
pro-settler government of Benjamin Netanyahu.''
So that's it folks, the show is over. The era of the peace process is behind
us, and early signs indicate that Palestinians, themselves, are now realising
it as they are clearly seeking alternatives to the various overbearing US
administrations.
Indeed, several administrations under George Bush, Bill Clinton, George W.
Bush and Obama have all contributed to the idea that peace was at hand, that
Israel was willing to compromise, that pressure has to be applied (mostly on
Palestinians) to end the seemingly equal 'conflict', that the US was a neutral
party, even-handed 'honest broker', even.
The Israelis did not mind playing along as long as the game did not jeopardize
their colonialization scheme in the Occupied Territories; the (largely
unelected) Palestinian leadership joined in, seeking funds and meaningless
political recognition; and the rest of the world, including the United
Nations, watched from afar or played their assigned, marginal role.
But, now, Israel does not need to accommodate the rules of the game anymore,
simply because the American 'broker', himself, has lost interest. Trump
understands that his country can no longer maintain policing a unipolar world
and has no interest in picking fights with regionally powerful Israel.
Although Trump began his presidential campaign promising to keep an equal
distance from Palestinians and Israelis, only to then head in an extremely
alarming direction – with the promise to move the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to
Jerusalem thus, possibly, igniting another Palestinian uprising.
Knowing that the US is no longer an ally, so-called 'Palestinian moderates'
are now seeking alternatives. On the day of Trump's inauguration in an
unprecedented lavish party seen as the most expensive in history, Palestinian
factions were meeting, not in Washington, London or Paris, but in Moscow.
The news of an agreement that will see the admission of both Hamas and Islamic
Jihad into the Palestine Liberation Origination (PLO) received little media
coverage, but it was consequential, nonetheless. The timing (Trump's
inauguration) and the place (Moscow) were very telling of a changing political
reality in the Middle East.
But what are we to make of the Paris Conference? It was a sad display of a
final French-European-American attempt at showing relevance in a region that
has vastly changed, in a 'process' that existed on paper only, in a political
landscape that has become too complicated and diverse for the likes of
Francois Hollande (an ardent supporter of Israel, to begin with) to matter in
the least.
No, it was not just 'another Middle East peace conference', but an end of an
era. The American era in the Middle East.
– Dr. Ramzy Baroud has been writing about the Middle East for over 20
years. He is an internationally-syndicated columnist, a media consultant, an
author of several books and the founder of PalestineChronicle.com. His books
include ''Searching Jenin'', ''The Second Palestinian Intifada'' and his
latest ''My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza's Untold Story''. His website
is www.ramzybaroud.net.