President War says Peace!
Posted by VK-Legget on 10 January, 2008
lol Norn’ Iron’ headline parody lol
This is something I though I’d never say, but…
George Bush has the right idea. He has the right idea in the Middle East. Well, that may be overstating the matter, as we can’t really overlook Warq, and that whole kerfuffle, but what he has done so far in his visit to Israel/Palestine.
President Bush has visited the area for the first time in his presidency, and has called for the Israeli occupation of Palestine to end, and for a viable Palestinian state to be created. This is certainly a step in the right direction!
Palestine has been frequently criticised for the terrorist violence related to it, as has Israel for it’s overzealous military policy, but neither is completely at fault. The Palestinians were, of course, natives to this area, and were therefore not too happy about another state, one that has nothing to do with the majority of the indigenous population, being created on top of them, and in the early years were given very little forum to make themselves heard. And so they did in the only way they could. Israel has, since it’s conception, been surrounded by antagonistic states, and has had to go to great lengths to ensure it’s survival. I’m not saying that either is ‘right’ to act like general assholes, but they’re not acting like this without reason.
So why should Mr. Bush, of all people, be the man to sort this (quite large) problem out?
Because, for various reasons, America is the country best placed to get results by pressurising the Middle Eastern democracy, and the president is the man best placed to apply this pressure.
Whichever side you’re on, you have to admit that this is a step in the right direction, firstly as were America to support the creation of a ‘proper’ Palestinian state, it may help alleviate tensions between it’s neighbouring countries and the west, as America isn’t really too popular in the area (Israel itself may be one of the reasons for this), and secondly because it may alleviate tensions between Israel and their neighbouring nations, which I needn’t tell you, is very bad, and has been since it’s creation 60 years or so ago.
I’m not being over-optimistic, tensions may not improve greatly, but any headway that can be made in this sensitive area really should be made.
Now much still needs to be sorted out, but if we can come to an agreement that neither sides completely hates (hey, it may be possible) then perhaps progress can be made for the first time in… Well, it’s been a while.
No matter how great war may seem in the short term, no one can deny that peace is a better option for the long term, no matter where they’re from, what background etc., barring only the war profiteers (or what I normally call them, which I won’t post here in a vain attempt to keep it civil).
The ‘I’m Not Political, But I Don’t Like George ‘Dubbya’ Bush’ brigade will of course be rather cynical at this attempt at peace by a well-known warmonger, but hey, look at what Tony ‘Bliar’ has done for Northern Ireland (Dr. No says Yes!, et. al.).
I will be watching the remainder of Bush’s tour of the area with great interest, and will probably post a follow up to this post upon it’s completion (now there’s something I’ve never done. Hell, I never even made another series review. I still may, though…)

mehmet12 said
Enschuldigung- but I don’t agree with the whole ‘Independent Palestine= Peace’ line you’re taking there, O Alexis.
Personally, I believe that as long as Hamas runs Palestine there will never be peace. One needs only to look at their coat of arms to see that they claim as Palestine the entire surface area of current day Israel PLUS the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Until they renounce those territorial claims there simply cannot be peace. Gaza and the West Bank (plus East Jerusalem of course) could constitute a proper Palestinian state but Hamas needs to realise that Israel is not an ‘occupation’. What ‘occupation’ consists of six million civilians, with municipal services and elected government? The very phrase ‘Israeli occupation’ is offensive and meaningless.
Independent Palestine would need to stay away from the idea of militarily allying with Jordan or Syria to end Israel’s existence. The citizens of Tel Aviv aren’t going to like being in artillery range of the hills on the West Bank, so Palestine needs to assure Israel that it will not undertake military action against it. Then can there be peace.
VK-Legget said
The point I was trying to make, Haji, is that Hamas is in charge of Palestine as the people of Palistine are bloody fed up. Of course, now that they’re in, it’ll take a bit to get out, but if we maintain the status quo, as you are advocating, it will continue untill every single Israeli and Palistinian is tot. And nobody wants that (well, some people would be glad to be rid of the Jews and Muslims, but I tend to stay well away from them). Of course peace will not occur overnight, and there will remain the radical factions, but if nothing changes, nothing will change, if you see what I mean. There is still a long road to travel with an independant Palestine, but with it peace is easier than without it.
What do you propose, if not an independant Palestine?
mehmet12 said
I’d propose- an independent Palestine comprising of East Jerusalem (and probably even the Dome of the Rock too), The West Bank and the Gaza Strip. However, Israel would still be allowed to retain control of the Egypt-Gaza border crossing for its own security, and likewise there would be no military interaction allowed between the Palestinians of the West Bank and the Kingdom of Jordan. Israel would unconditionally remove all settlements from the West Bank and move its capital back to Tel Aviv. Palestine’s capital would either be East Jerusalem, Gaza or Nablus.
Additionally, the Israelis would allow Palestinians to cross from Gaza to the West Bank through their territory without Palestinian passports- but the IDF would retain the right for border checks. Palestinian trade with nations like Egypt, Syria, and Jordan would be checked for weaponry until such a time as the Palestinian leadership is able to build up a sizeable, regulated army and police force which can deal with its insurgents such as those in Gaza and Israel and Palestine would recognise eachothers’ existence as sovereign nations. Israel would renounce all territorial claims on the West Bank and Gaza and Palestine would on Jaffa and the entirety of the Israel-Palestine region save for those it has been allocated. This would leave Israel shrinking back to its 1967-ish borders with a friendly, stable Palestine. Palestinian and Israeli governments should ban political parties with an overly Zionist or overly Arabist or Islamist outlook which would threaten peace and the two nations would exchange diplomatic missions. Both nations would retain their Laws of Return and Israel would add more land to Gaza to help accomodate new Palestinian refugees.
VK-Legget said
…
Thats still an independant Palestine…
Although I disagree with the border control, that could do more harm than good.