TEL AVIV—Israel's defense force, accustomed to armed opposition, faces a new challenge in halting unarmed protesters at the country's borders without drawing international criticism for use of force or domestic rancor for being too passive.
The wave of protests that began May 15 has heightened Israeli concerns that popular uprisings in the Mideast and a United Nations vote on Palestinian statehood in September—amid a stalled peace process—will inspire mass civil disobedience and further isolate Israel.
"There is the belief that the Palestinians have chosen to shift from peace negotiations to actions that will generate international pressure on Israel," said a senior Israeli diplomat.
Adding another dimension to the conflict, a group of activists is planning to challenge Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip in coming weeks by sending a flotilla to the Palestinian territory, led by the Turkish cruise ship, the Mavi Marmara. A year ago, the United Nations Security Council condemned Israel for the deaths of nine activists in a clash with Israeli soldiers who commandeered the same vessel.
Then, and in recent incidents, Israel said it was provoked and justified in its actions. But the latest protests against Israel carry a new veneer of legitimacy by echoing recent popular struggles against entrenched, undemocratic regimes across the region.
In the first border protests, on May 15, the anniversary of Israel's independence, demonstrators marched toward Israeli forces from the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, Lebanon and Syria.
At the Syrian border, Israel Defense Forces were surprised and overwhelmed—letting protesters break through the fence and reach the Golan Heights. Israeli media cried out that the army was unprepared, allowed citizens from an enemy country to waltz over the border, and gave a symbolic victory to protesters.
Abbas' main fear is that the United States will veto the proposal in the Security Council. Erekat tried to persuade the United States that Abbas would renew talks with Israel immediately after the declaration of a Palestinian state. He also told Clinton that Abbas would commit to this in a letter to the UN secretary general and would announce publicly that he recognized Israel within the 1967 borders.
Erekat told Clinton that from the Palestinian perspective the move was not unilateral. He said they did not intend to isolate Israel or encourage delegitimization of Israel, but rather help reach a two-state solution.
If negotiations are not renewed based on the Obama speech, Abbas is determined to turn to the United Nations as early as July 15. Erekat is among the officials who support the unilateral move. Although his experience with the United Nations is limited, he is entirely dependent on Abbas and therefore disinclined to oppose him. Senior Fatah official Nabil Sha'ath, who toes an extremist line vis-a-vis Israel and was among those who pushed for reconciliation with Hamas, is also in favor of the UN option.
"Abu Mazen [Abbas] wants the UN move and is uninterested in renewing the talks," said a senior government official in Jerusalem who is very involved in the Palestinian issue and preparations for the September vote.
"Abu Mazen wants to leave his imprint and be the one during whose term Palestinian reconciliation and recognition in the United Nations takes place. There are a great many who oppose this line of his, but so far, his is the dominant and decisive voice.
No comments:
Post a Comment