The Israeli and Palestinian Conflict--Looking Back Fourteen Years

Yesterday, the Israeli Parliament (KNESSET) passed a major piece of legislation which will limit the Supreme Court of Israel from overruling legislation created by the KNESSET on the basis of its “reasonableness.”  It’s striking how differently this is being received: it is being bitterly opposed in Israel by a large portion of the population. Throngs of protestors continued to gather in Israel yesterday following the ruling.

Here in the U.S. it is being viewed very differently by the New York Times and, on the other hand, the Wall Street Journal.

 

The Times’ columnists, including Nick Kristof and Thomas Friedman, declaim it as “ushering in a precarious new era, defining a nationwide protest movement.”

 

In striking, but to me not surprising, contrast, the Wall Street Journal describes the reaction as a “panic attack.”  It describes the media and political response to the ruling as “overwrought” and asserts that, “It probably won’t make as much difference as either side claims.”

 

Who am I to judge what difference it will make in time?  Much depends on what happens next. What I am certain of is that quite apart from this legislation Netanyahu and his conservative colleagues are continuing to advance a condition of apartheid as evidenced by the continued expansion of settlements on the West Bank and their inhuman treatment of Palestinians, not only on the West Bank but in Jerusalem.

*****************************************

 

As I write this I am drawn back in time.I am struck by how what I see happening now was previewed in notes that I took on a trip to Israel fourteen years ago which I made with a fellow P&G retiree and dear friend, Fuad Kuraytem, and my daughter-in-law Maggie. 

 

The date is October 15, 2009.  Thanks to Eason Jordan, who was accompanying us on this part of the trip and had served as the former head of CNN International, we had a private meeting with then-Prime Minister Netanyahu.  Here are excerpts from my notes which I dictated at the time.

 

“The meeting clearly evidenced Netanyahu’s ‘commanding presence, articulateness and ability to make his case.’” 

 

“He was excited to hear that my Chairmanship at Disney followed that of George Mitchell, who is now the U.S.’s chief negotiator in the Middle East and who I know has been very frustrated by Netanyahu’s entrenched position on expanding the settlements.  I asked him about these (settlements), noting that they were a roadblock in negotiations.  He responded immediately (and vehemently), saying:  he did not feel they were the real issue.  That, he said, was the Palestinians’ unwillingness to agree to a sovereign nation on agreed borders.  (In fact, this had been agreed by Arafat years earlier.)  

He (Netanyahu) went on to make the case that the land had really belonged to both religions over time (conveniently ignoring the reality that this area had been consigned to Palestinians and that the Jewish settlements occupied only about 3% of the land area when the Jewish state was formed).   He also conveniently side-stepped the fact that the settlers are occupying choice areas and non-contiguous sections of the West Bank, making a unified Palestinian state ‘impossible.’”

 

“In the end, he indicated that he had made a proposal to the U.S. that he felt would resolve this issue.  I have no idea what that might be yet.  I hope it is meaningful", I wrote at the time. 

It wasn't meaningful.

 

As I review these notes, 14 years after my visit, it is clear that Netanyahu’s mindset and actions have not changed. He continues to pursue policies that in any honest reading of the word, boil down to "apartheid".  They must change if the long-sought peace is to be obtained and justice is to prevail.