Headphones Not Required

turnabout:

In the face of UN recognition of a Palestinian state, 69% of Israelis thought that Israel should accept the decision and either start negotiations with the Palestinians about its implementation (34%) or not allow any change on the ground by the Palestinians (35%); 16% said Israel should oppose the decision and intensify the construction in the settlements; 7% think that Israel should annex the PA territory to Israel; and 4% think Israel should invade the PA territories and use force to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state.

Faced with the same scenario, Palestinian participants of the survey said how they thought Israel might be made to withdraw from PA territory: 26% supported a return to armed attacks on army and settlers; 37% thought nonviolent resistance could be successful; and 30% supported negotiations with Israel. Fiftyfour percent of Palestinians in the West Bank said they would join large peaceful demonstrations in the West Bank and Jerusalem if they were to take place after the recognition of a Palestinian state.

I’m heartened by the statistics on both sides. 

(Source: brooklynmutt)

jonathan-cunningham:

The United States must back a Palestinian bid for UN recognition of statehood or risk becoming “toxic” in the Arab world and forcing a split with ally Saudi Arabia, a top Saudi diplomat warned Monday.

If Washington imposes its veto when the Palestinians seek to become the 194th member state of the United Nations then “Saudi Arabia would no longer be able to cooperate with America in the same way it historically has,” former Saudi ambassador to the United States, Prince Turki al-Faisal wrote.

He warned in a commentary in the The New York Times that a US veto would see American influence decline, “Israeli security undermined and Iran will be empowered, increasing the chances of another war in the region.”

“The ‘special relationship’ between Saudi Arabia and the United States would increasingly be seen as toxic by the vast majority of Arabs and Muslims, who demand justice for the Palestinian people.”

Saudi leaders would be forced therefore to “adopt a more independent and assertive regional policy,” he warned, pointing to such incidents as Riyadh’s recent military intervention in Bahrain.

The US has historically supported the Israeli occupation of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, but the Saudi’s are a powerful Ally in the region. Will their objection be enough to sway US policy?

This could get interesting…

“The goal is to liberate the minds of our people,” says Najwan Berekdar, an Israeli-born Arab who is a women’s-rights activist. “We want to get past all the old identities—Fatah, Hamas, religious, secular, Israeli and Palestinian Arab —and create a mass nonviolent movement.” Berekdar has touched on an idea that might prove truly threatening to Israelis: a “one state” movement uniting Palestinians on both sides of the current border. But the young Palestinians have not focused on anything so specific. Their current political plan is to go back to the future—to achieve Palestinian unity by resurrecting and holding elections for a body called the Palestinian National Council, which took a backseat after the Oslo accords created the Palestinian Authority and its parliamentary component. This seems rather abstruse—the basic rule for people-power movements is, Organize first, bureaucratize later — and it would be easy to dismiss these young people as hopelessly naive but for two factors. The first is that they’ve seized the Palestinian version of a suddenly valuable international brand: the Tahrir Square revolution. “We cannot discount their importance,” a prominent Israeli official told me. “Not after what happened in Egypt.”

But equally important are their methods. Ever since Israel won control of the West Bank and Gaza in 1967, the Palestinian national movement has been defined by terrorism, intransigence and, until recently in the West Bank, corruption. It has never been known for dramatic acts of nonviolence. “If they’d been led by Gandhi rather than Yasser Arafat, they would have had a state 20 years ago,” Kenneth Pollack of the Saban Center at the Brookings Institution told me. Israeli officials acknowledge that the recent, peaceful economic and security reforms led by Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad have been the most effective tactics the Palestinians have ever used in trying to create a state. But they haven’t gotten the Palestinians anywhere in their negotiations with the equally intransigent Israeli government. Jewish settlements continue to expand on Palestinian land. A mass nonviolent movement might tip the balance, especially if the world—including the Israeli public —began to see Palestinians as noble practitioners of passive resistance rather than as suicide bombers.

The Israeli leadership is as perplexed as everyone else about what the revolutionary tide in the region will bring. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said he’d prefer dealing with democracies, but he isn’t so sure that the Tahrir Square movement will yield a democracy in Egypt (and there are already indications that Egypt’s new government will push harder for a Palestinian peace accord than Mubarak ever did). Netanyahu has wisely called for a Marshall Plan for the Middle East, an idea that the Saudis—who seem to agree with the Israelis on practically everything these days—have also quietly endorsed. “If you can’t get the young Egyptians involved in big public-works projects, like new housing, which is badly needed,” an Israeli intelligence expert told me, “then they’re back in the square for sure, only they’ll be supporting the Muslim Brotherhood this time.”

That seems unduly pessimistic. The Facebook rebels may have more influence on the suddenly antiquated Islamists than vice versa; if there is Shari’a, it will come with alternative-energy start-ups and a Coca-Cola chaser. “You have to wonder what sort of influence this revolution has had on Hamas,” a Palestinian Christian said to me. “Are they watching al-Jazeera and seeing nonviolence succeed where terrorism has failed?”
(Read full article)

jonathan-cunningham:

Israel informed the 15 members of the United Nations Security Council last week, as well as several other prominent European Union countries, that if the Palestinian Authority persists in its efforts to gain recognition in September as a state within the 1967 borders, Israel would respond with a series of unilateral steps of its own.

…

The Israeli diplomatic corps conveyed the message that support for international recognition, particularly by most of the members of the European Union, encouraged the Palestinians to forgo negotiations with Israel and to move more quickly toward recognition at the UN of Palestinian statehood. Israeli diplomats stressed that such a move violates the Oslo Accords and will not lead to a Palestinian state even if the General Assembly grants recognition, but could lead to violence on the ground.

To those who continue to say the Israeli/Palestine conflict is between two equal sides: how can you justify Israel not recognizing the existence of Palestine, killing six Palestinians (including civilians) with an armed, disciplined military for every Israeli killed, and continuing settlements/bulldozing/forced evictions?  There is only one ‘side’ of this conflict that can end the violence, and it’s definitely not Palestine.