Jordan Times Editorial: To be consistent

http://www.jordantimes.com/?news=2993

To be consistent

Israeli lawmakers have been busy exhibiting the kind of reprehensible behaviour that precludes any chance of peace between Israel and the Palestinians. On Friday, a petition against any kind of division of Jerusalem made the rounds of the Israeli parliament and garnered a majority 61 (out of 120 MPs) signatures. There is nothing binding about the petition, but it shows that any attempt by an Israeli leader to push through any kind of two-state peace proposal that is viable, i.e., a full return of occupied Palestinian territories, that includes occupied East Jerusalem, is bound to fail. Take also into account that the petition was aimed at Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert because he has openly spoken about a division of Jerusalem, but his version of a division of Jerusalem basically means giving Palestinians sovereignty over Shoufat refugee camp. If Israeli lawmakers are against Olmert’s proposal, they will certainly block any just arrangement for the Holy City. The petition is not much of a surprise. Since Israel occupied Jerusalem 40 years ago, all Israeli governments have maintained that Jerusalem should be the “eternal, indivisible” capital of Israel. What it is, is unacceptable. The international community, to great adverse effect, has boycotted an elected Palestinian political movement that refuses to recognise Israel’s “right to exist” until Israel recognises a Palestinian state’s right to exist, with all that which entails of clear border demarcations and full sovereignty. International parties, mainly Washington, have argued that Hamas cannot be granted international legitimacy for as long as such a position is held, because it precludes a negotiated solution. Will the international community then be consistent and boycott any Israeli political party that holds a position that Jerusalem cannot be divided, because this too precludes any chance for peace? In that case, and following the example of the Palestinian unity government, the Quartet should sanction the current Israeli government because within its coalition is a party, Israel Beitenu, that not only will not accept a division of Jerusalem, but is actively advocating the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from within 1948 areas. Or would the international community instead accept a statement by Hamas that it accepts Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, but just not on Palestinian land? To be consistent, the international community would have to do one or the other. But who’s holding their breath expecting moral clarity and logical consistency on behalf of Washington when it comes to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict? 21 October 2007