December 31, 2007
The Peace Process Delusion
Like the proverbial emperor and his nonexistent clothes, the 'Process' has no 'Peace'
A serious pandemic of delusion is gripping the world. Ground Zero for the spread of this scourge was in Annapolis, Maryland in late November. Within hours, millions of otherwise intelligent people started exhibiting the symptoms of this horrible affliction: uncontrollable optimism, abrupt failure of reasoning, oblivious disregard of reality, and a deeply religious faith in a fictional 'Peace Process' that will be the New Messiah that will deliver the world from all evil.
It would be fun to watch this mass hysteria unfold as it infects more and more people, but unfortunately, there are real human costs to the continuation of this delusion. It is time for sane people everywhere to rise to confront this delusion and break the news to the millions of devout Peace-Processians springing up around the world: like the proverbial Emperor and his nonexistent clothes, this 'Process' has no 'Peace'. This fictional god you have been worshipping exists only in your brains; just because you insist on seeing it in spite of all evidence does not in any way change the cold hard reality that it is simply not there.
There is utterly no evidence to suggest that any prospects for 'Peace' exist from this charade of a 'Process'. Israel is finishing the construction of its apartheid wall, the world's only religiously-segregated road network, and thousands of watch-towers from which it observes everything going on in the life of all Palestinians. Complete towns are locked up behind gates that open arbitrarily according to the whims of callous soldiers. Israeli illegal colonies are growing more than ever—mere days after the conclusion of the Annapolis conference, Israel announced it would expand a crucial colony outside Jerusalem. More than 400,000 illegal Israeli settlers still litter the West Bank, having benefited from 40 years of expansionist colonialism and generous subsidies from every single Israeli government elected by the Israeli populace. The Gaza Strip remains legally an occupied land, though effectively it is the world's biggest prison. Normal service will by all means continue.
It is quite clear to anyone who would care listen to Israeli leaders themselves that Israel has absolutely no intention of giving away anything meaningful in the West Bank—certainly nothing on which anyone could establish a viable state. It is also painfully clear to anyone who cares to reason that the American government has no intention whatsoever of pressuring the Israelis into any form of concession. Seeing as these issues are the main issues standing between us and a peaceful solution, one can be sure that there will be no way for a peaceful solution to be achieved.
So why do so many people continue to believe in this mythical 'Peace Process'? Like other fictitious beliefs, there are the few who benefit, and then there are the masses who are deluded. There are also, of course, the many that are harmed.
The biggest beneficiary from this delusion is the Israeli government. That is why its leaders have gone around the world trumpeting the importance of achieving peace. Olmert claimed that failure to achieve peace would doom Israel; Haim Ramon, his deputy, even beseeched American Jewish groups to work for a peaceful solution for the sake of Israel. There is a desperate attempt to make sure that Israel appears desperate for peace. But of course, actions speak louder than words. If Israel really meant any of this, they wouldn't have approved an illegal colony on stolen Palestinian land in East Jerusalem hours after Annapolis. It is this hypocrisy that has come to accurately define the past few years, and will be the hallmark of the future: Israeli actions that solidify and perpetuate the occupation, along with Israeli statements desperate for peace. All that Israel has to do is to play pretend and everything will be fine. It just needs to pay some lip-service to the possibility of potentially starting some sort of a 'Process' that might, with a few miracles, result in something or the other, someday, somewhere, and the entire world will applaud in awe. Any Peace-processian fundamentalist who still has faith needs to ask themselves the honest question of how they can maintain this delusion in the face of this hypocrisy and this disparity between actions and rhetoric.
As for those who are harmed, they are the millions of Palestinians living under apartheid, repression and murder in Gaza and the West Bank, with their hopes of ever seeing normalcy in their lives evaporating; and the millions of refugees whose legitimate right to return to their homes the world is happy to forget.
The worst thing about this sorry state of affairs is its indomitable sustainability. Israel will continue expanding settlements, oppressing Palestinians, and murdering an unborn nation with complete impunity. The Palestinians, left to their fate by the world, will continue to suffer completely unable to do anything to alter Israel's position. And the world will cheer on, and assure the Palestinians that all they need is just a little more 'Process'. So long as the 'Process' goes on; no one pressures Israel to do anything, and Israel won't do anything. So long as Israel does nothing; the tragedy of the Palestinians continues. So long as the tragedy of the Palestinians continues, the mirage of 'peace' will become more unattainable.
What the Peace-Processians don't realize is that not only is the status quo here to stay, their cult-like enthusiasm for it is the main reason why it is here to stay. If the hordes of 'Peace Processians' want 'Peace' and not 'Process', they should be condemning Israel's colonies and occupation, not applauding its empty statements. So long as the masses continue to convince themselves the emperor is dressed in splendid clothes, he will continue to parade his hideous crotch all over the world, from Jerusalem to Annapolis and beyond.
Posted by Saifedean Ammous at 12:40 AM | Permalink
Comments
There isn't a shred of intelligence in this post. Just arrogant bravado and emotional remarks. I would expect more from 3quarks, and more from Mr Ammous. In fact, this post comes across as silly, like a freshman protester at a rally, spewing venomous spectacle.
Posted by: J | Dec 31, 2007 12:44:55 PM
Meantime, Israel announces it is to build some new settlements and Arabs fire upon Israelis, killing two and wounding another....and so it goes.
Posted by: fred lapides | Dec 31, 2007 1:42:18 PM
Knock Knock!
Yes?
Get out, this land is mine!
My family has been living here 2000 years.
-Yes but we have a book of Bronze Age Text that has a Magical Man that says this is our land.
What if I won't leave?
We will kill you, or put you on reservations.
Posted by: Dave Ranning | Dec 31, 2007 3:19:51 PM
In contrast to the first commentator, who relies on the tried and true 'it's more complicated than that/you're an idiot' rebuttal without a shred of evidence (although the phrase 'venomous spectacle' deserves its share of praise), I have to say this is an excellent piece: if anything is to be learned from the failure of the first 'peace process' it's surely that we cannot let progressive rhetoric blind us to the facts on the ground.
Posted by: C | Dec 31, 2007 4:50:13 PM
Yes, but it's so lucrative for both Israel and the U.S. politicians to continue the conflict, they couldn't afford peace if it was thrown in their faces.
The U.S. gives Israel billions of dollars every year to "protect" them. And Israel launders a percentage back through lobbies into the pockets of U.S. politicians who then vote to send billions more to Israel. It's just a huge con, with the U.S. taxpayers funding it and, of course, the Palestinians suffering the worst of it.
Congress recently voted to send $70 million to Israel this year, on top of the other billions, for "refugee" assistance. What refugees? The only refugees are the Palestinians.
By "refugee" is the Congress talking about the U.S. citizens who are drawn by whatever bizarre romantized view of life to leave the U.S. and move to Israel where they will be given a free apartment on somebody else's land, a job, and a semi-automatic weapon? All paid for by the taxpayers of the U.S.?
We actually subsidize people from anywhere in the world who want to move to Israel. What's in it for me? Last year there were a grand total of about 20,000 people who moved to Israel. I've moved lots of times in my life, but nobody has ever paid me money to do so.
The citizens of the U.S. need to demand that this whole con stop. Israel can learn to live in peace or they can stay and fight on their own nickel, but there is no reason for the U.S. to fund this continued theft of the land of others and, of course, the Israeli goal of genocide of the Palestinian people.
Posted by: NABNYC | Dec 31, 2007 4:53:06 PM
Re Anmous
Mr. Anmous whines about Israel being beastly to the Fakestinians. He wants the separation barrier removed so that the homicide bombers can get through more easily. Mr. Anmous is full of prunes.
Re NABNYC
Oddly enough, I agree with Mr. NABNYC that US aid to Israel should be phased out. That would remove the handcuffs on the IDF which currently prevent it from applying Hama Rules to the Gaza strip and winning a total military victory over the Fakestinian terrorists therein.
Posted by: SLC | Dec 31, 2007 5:00:16 PM
I am very happy to see 3QD and NABNYC taking a stand and recognizing global hypocrisy, how refreshing to see anyone in USA say "Yes, but it's so lucrative for both Israel and the U.S. politicians to continue the conflict, they couldn't afford peace if it was thrown in their faces". In the past and present, US elected Gov't often have no regards for anyone but their own agenda. Now a known fact, that US Gov't funded the creation of Taliban, training of future suicide bombers, hatred and terror, yet knowing/unknowingly war agenda prevails in USA. When an innocent tax-payer American vacationing any where in Asia, wonders why he is hated around the world, that is because CNN/Fox news is guided to lead the majority of America to have no clue about how their tax dollars are spent.
Once in a while someone dares to acknowledge an elephant in the room, lets give him/her a chance to speak and hear a perspective other than CNN/Fox.
3QD-good choice.
Posted by: Shabbir | Dec 31, 2007 5:47:02 PM
Stop allaid to Israel!W right. But continue it to how many other countries.Quick: which country is number two in amount of money given it by the US? right: Egypt.
The US does not fund those movin g to Israel and Israel has fewer moving there than it has had for the past20 years.
Refugees? 750 thousand Jews kicked out of Arab countries and all they owned taken from them.
Israel is a country, since 1948, and it has every right to exist and to protect itself and toget help from those that care to help them in the same way thatso many Arab nations help, fund, and assist Arab countries in continuing to attack Israel.
Let the duly elected Hamas declare it recognizes Israel's right to exist and then let Hezbollah also do this, and then the Arab League--then see if peace is possible.
Posted by: fred lapides | Dec 31, 2007 6:51:42 PM
We must acknowledge the situation. We have a East European culture, traumatized by genocide, given a mandate to commit invasion and appropriation of another peoples land who have occupied it for 2000 years. The cultures surrounding this traumatized, invader and colonizer wish it's destruction.
It is being subsidized and supported by the US, which views it a military and geopolitical outpost in a energy and strategically rich region, along with superstition based religious psychopaths in the US also lending support.
Anyone have a solution for bringing social justice to this situation?
Or any other goal?
Posted by: Dave Ranning | Dec 31, 2007 8:08:04 PM
The situation on the ground is a direct result of the type of strategy Mr Ammous endorses - or should I say, appears to endorse. Because, as I said, I don't think he says much of anything. Like the propaganda parades Hamas held the day the talks kicked off, he is willing to see the current situation on the ground as untenable, as am I. But what is posturing about everyone elses inability to grasp the magnitude of suffering (I'm sure Abbas is written off a priori) doing besides shoring up radical reputations. It is quite obvious that dialogue is not a solution for Mr Ammous. So what does all this bluster add up to? More militant resistance? What has that achieved? When was the last time Syria sent a emissary to the US? In fact, tell me the last time Syria and Saudi Arabia sat in the same room as Israel? Like I said, it is more complicated, more nuanced, and in need of a more intelligent analysis than veiled calls for Death To Israel, No Compromise, blah blah. Venomous Spectacle, indeed. I just expected more from Mr Ammous, whose posts I've enjoyed, and to 3quarks who generally approach such topics with a little more integrity. I for one have some hope, reserved hope, that the moderates can bring about some real change, because militancy has shown - since the early 2000's - an absolute inability to effect change for the Palestinians.
Posted by: J | Dec 31, 2007 10:24:41 PM
Wow, 3quarks wonderfully surprises me, posting an accurate current-events assessment. Truth is as is written.
The commenting voices hissing and booing and stammering inanely like their fantasy-bubble popped, only embarrass themselves reciting the brain-washing of blind fools. Ordinary eyes see and minds recognize the plainly naked imperious agressions.
Israel's government policies and practices amount to fascism, vile murderous fascism. Israeli citizens must dislodge and rebuke the figureheads of their country, as must American citizens our own. Imprisonment for their hideous war crimes and human rights atrocities -- both Isreali and American -- seems so inadequate, but a good first step away from the way of the fascists.
In the interest of common agreement in the operative narrative, here are links to informed tracts, one describing the past (the preliminaries of 1948), and one surveying the future.
Simply copy and paste and go -- ready, set, read:
en.Wikipedia.ORG/wiki/St._John_Philby
St. John Philby: British colonial office intelligence operative
www.InformationClearinghouse.INFO/article18976.htm
The Post-Bush Regime: A Prognosis - By Richard K. Moore
A clue in answer to the 'Prognosis' closing question: Please notice the Lakota First People simply seceded from federal governance, taking with them the most part of land in five states. Old Glory now needs being redesigned with 45 stars ... while that many might not remain for long.
eeng.NET/CS/blogs/smileycoyote/archive/2007/12/22/1032.aspx
LAKOTA SECEDE FROM U.S. AND ALL TREATIES
Posted by: Meremark | Dec 31, 2007 10:57:27 PM
A little over 150 years ago, my father's country, the Union, conquered my mother's country, the Confederacy. Fortunately, my mother's country had leaders who did not try to continue to fight the war. What small wealth my mother's family had was destroyed. But one generation later, one of the children was a professor at a university, and another was a dentist. The second generations was a generation of medical professionals; three generations later, we have doctors, lawyers, & engineers.
The Palestinians have lost the war against Israel. Until that defeat is accepted, and their leaders stop their violence, there will be no peace. There will be no return for Palestinians to their former wealth in the past. Your wealth is in the future, but only if you accept defeat and make peace with the Israelis. As long as you tolerate the terrorists among you, you have no future.
My mother's family, and her defeated country, had the courage to face the future. I wonder if the Palestinians do.
Posted by: punditius | Dec 31, 2007 11:09:38 PM
This sort of drivel is pretty thick on the ground these days (on both sides of conflict--see examples in the comments). Doesn't this blog have better things to do with its time than pass off rhetorical grandstanding for intelligent commentary? There's usually much better to be found here.
Posted by: JM | Jan 1, 2008 12:55:18 AM
Re Meremark
I must say I am vaguely amused by Mr. Meremarks' invocation of St John Philby. Just for the information of the readers of this site who are unfamiliar with the name Philby, St. John Philbys' son Kim was a traitor who the notorious Soviet mole in British intelligence service. It is generally believed that the elder Philby was at least aware that his son had some dubious alliances and continued to defend the latter after his defection to the former Soviet Union.
Posted by: SLC | Jan 1, 2008 9:13:48 AM
J-
Well said, but what solution or strategy do you suggest?
Getting the "moderates" talking about what?
Until the region universally converts to Buddhism, we still have the battle of who's imaginary friend is the real imaginary friend.
On second thought, forget the Buddhism, they would argue over Bronze Age Fiction on that also.
Posted by: Dave Ranning | Jan 1, 2008 1:09:37 PM
Yeah Dave!
From another perspective, what if everything is exactly as it should be in this moment? Let that soak in. Now what do we do?
Posted by: eric | Jan 1, 2008 2:35:59 PM
Regarding SLC's regarding background reading: Readers unfamiliar with the name Philby need only read the link provided to know more, if not better, than the prejudging simplification given of Sheikh Abdullah -- the person, and contradiction-containing character, (as much is or as little is any of us).
Caveat reader: Wikipedia is known to have erroneous or misleading or biased bits of information, for being 'hacked' by 'intelligence community' anonymice who fictionalize revisionist history there. Further, Wikipedia is neither the only nor necessarily the definitive compilation of biographical or chronological information, in the instance of Jack Philby or any other; however, it serves me as a fount of search words and terms for googling beyond it.
Posted by: Meremark | Jan 1, 2008 4:14:13 PM
Re Meremark
It's unclear to me what Mr. Meremark is trying to say in his comment on my comment. Is Mr. Meremark denying that St. John Philby is the father of the traitor and Soviet mole in MI6, Kim Philby? Is Mr. Meremark denying that St. John Philby continued to support his son, Kim Philby, even after the latters' defection to the former Soviet Union? My point is that the Philbys are unreliable commentators on the issues of the Middle East.
Posted by: SLC | Jan 1, 2008 5:31:20 PM
Peace existing first in the hearts and minds of men will always be the start of it being manifested on earth. ALWAYS!
Posted by: CarpeDiemVoice | Jan 1, 2008 6:39:06 PM
"Apartheid walls"?
Hasn't suicide terrorism declined because of those security walls? Ammous' post is the sort of sloganeering bigotry one sees at many blogs. After George Johnson's recommendation came here expecting intelligence -- instead we are treated to self-righteous anger boy victimhood without balance or nuance -- devoid of any editorial oversight. Hello and goodbye.
Posted by: MarkA | Jan 1, 2008 8:31:58 PM
Dave Ranning,
I guess I don't agree with your formulation of the problem.
Israel isn't an "East European" culture. More than half of its population has its roots in Arab and Muslim countries, and many of the rest are from Western European or Anglo countries. In fact, even with the Russian emigrants, it gets less and less "Eastern European" all the time, and never was overwhelmingly so.
Who precisely has occupied the land for 2000 years?
What is this invasion we are talking about? Much of the current area of Israel was settled by Jews before the creation of the state of Israel under the Ottomans or the British empire. Only 1948 and after can you talk about armed conflicts and "invasion", and that's later than I think you want to go.
It would be nice if everything could be easily simplified, but the reality isn't that simple, for anyone on either side.
Posted by: Hektor Bim | Jan 2, 2008 10:41:31 AM
Bim--
Point well taken on the simplicity--
But the land was "invaded and occupied" in 1948.
As far as a historical claim to the land, I think I also have a claim (being of Swedish origin), as my ancestors also occupied the land (or traveled through it).
Look at the global map- humans have occupied that area of the Eastern Mediterranean for 2 million years, as it is the migration rout out of Africa, the original home to all humans.
The Palestinians are just the latest residence, having majority population for 2000 years.
Let's get away from even considering peace-- social justice should be the primary concern now.
My wife is Jewish, and I'm a member of a Jewish Community Center, and I speak with Israelis on almost a daily basis. I am not alienated from divergent points of view.
And yes, Israel was founded by a "East European" culture, although has become more diverse after the occupation, as you pointed out.
Posted by: Dave Ranning | Jan 2, 2008 1:08:32 PM
Dave Ranning,
I understand what you are saying here somewhat, but it is still more complicated than that.
Which part of "the land" being invaded and occupied in 1948 are we talking about? The part where Jews were the majority, the part where they were the minority, or the part where Arabs were the majority? Are we talking about the Jewish-populated areas in East Jerusalem and the West Bank that were destroyed in 1948? The part which was part of the UN-defined Jewish state or the parts outside of it? What does "the land" mean here?
Lots of people have historical claims to the land. Do you accept claims by people whose grandparents lived in Palestine but who have never seen it? That's a historical claim as far as I can tell, but that is a claim advanced by the Palestinian national movement. The complexity is deciding which historical claims to honor.
Saying the Palestinians had majority population in Palestine for 2000 years is also problematic. Certainly the majority population of Palestine at 7 CE was Jewish, and even the attempts by Hadrian to expel the Jewish population from Palestine after the Bar Kokhba Jewish revolt in 133 CE was largely unsuccessful. Now after the conversion of Constantine the area was progressively Christianized and Hellenized until the conquests of the caliphs in the 7th century.
Now, one could argue that the Palestinians are descendants of the non-Arab speaking, non-Muslim population of Palestine 2000 years ago, but then one would be arguing that the Palestinians are descendants of Jews, which would likely disturb lots of people on both sides of the fence (even though it is clearly true for certain people). Are you arguing that, and thereby arguing that the Palestinian historical claim based on their Jewish descent is stronger than the Jewish historical claim based on their Jewish descent?
Posted by: Hektor Bim | Jan 2, 2008 2:00:39 PM
What I'm saying is it is all based on religious and cultural superstition-
People are cognitively irrational, and human nature is evolutionary determined.
Traits that have helped small bands of people to survive are now a liability, and this is being played out in the Eastern Mediterranean region you are so attached to.
It is apparently a small step, though not a logical one, from taking perception seriously to taking them literally.
Until these fictitious narratives in these poor beings heads stop, the killing and hatred will continue.
Posted by: Dave Ranning | Jan 2, 2008 10:18:15 PM
Dave Ranning,
Every time I ask you to clarify something or get into the details, you get more big picture on me. I don't feel like we are getting anywhere.
Why do you assume _I_ am so attached to the Eastern Mediterranean? I've never been there and have no plans to visit.
Posted by: Hektor Bim | Jan 3, 2008 8:53:02 AM
HB-
We wouldn't be having this discourse if you weren't.
I see this as a social justice issue. I am in agreement with you on the issue that theses are essentially the same people, they just have been colonized by different memes.
What is your solution? What are moderates going to talk about? How can a occupied people negotiate, and in what manner?
I'm open for ideas--
I'm going to the Jewish Community center this morning, and will hear various opinions on what to do, of which none will come to any sort of solution.
Posted by: Dave Ranning | Jan 3, 2008 12:55:34 PM
DR,
Yes and no. The Israel/Palestine issue is so complicated and thorny in discussions like this that I like to focus on accuracy and correctness. You've made repeated statements that seem to me to be either factually wrong or wrong-headed, and you won't engage on them at all.
All the moderates basically agree - there's not much to talk about. 2 state, close to or identical to the 67 borders, some compensation for refugees, some special provisions for Jerusalem. It's not that complicated. Amos Oz and Sari Nusseibeh have been talking about this for decades!
Saifedeam Ammous, for example, is not a moderate however, and neither are a surprisingly large number of people on both sides of this issue.
So I'm a lot less ambitious - now I just go for simple accuracy.
Posted by: Hektor Bim | Jan 4, 2008 10:41:23 AM
HB-
As a realist, if we can accomplish the above stated goals, I will support anyone who can accomplish them. Let's live in the present.
The world is dynamic, and it will continue on from there.
Posted by: Dave Ranning | Jan 5, 2008 6:57:40 PM
The U.S. has been largely silent publicly on the issues of settlements, roads, and free movement. Ms. Rice has mentioned settlements in hushed tones once or twice, but nothing about freedom of movement, etc. It also rejects the language of "occupation."
As that is the case, it is hard to see why one should expect Mr. Ammous to take the peace process seriously. Why is the U.S. not threatening Israeli external investments over the settlements (or funding for that matter)? This is a threat leveled at the Palestinians every couple months. Can we all admit that there is serious hypocrisy in the way the U.S, as main peace broker, has dealt with the two sides?
That said, this article offers absolutely nothing constructive. I don't mind when people need to bitch, but at a minimum there should be implicit suggestions contained in such a monologue. There are absolutely none in this post.
---
SLC, your posts are as vapid as ever. Having a son who goes off and does something stupid does not suddenly make one's views unimportant (re: John Philby). George Bush Senior's views are still respected even though his son has shown himself as a complete idiot. I doubt you would abandon your children in such an instance.
"Fakestinian?" You do realize that no one who matters will ever take you seriously with language like that? It's hardliners like you who slow down any sort of progress. At least Mr. Ammous has some facts, even if he can't seem to do anything constructive with them.
Posted by: Cyrus Hall | Jan 5, 2008 8:03:22 PM
Post a comment