The Grim Picture

A CNN headline, reporting Obama's plans for his June 4 Cairo address, reads 'Obamalooks to reach the soul of the Muslim world.' Perhaps that captures his intent,but more significant is the content hidden in the rhetorical stance, or moreaccurately, omitted.

Keeping just to Israel-Palestine -- there was nothing substantive about anythingelse -- Obama called on Arabs and Israelis not to 'point fingers' at each otheror to 'see this conflict only from one side or the other.'  There is,however, a third side, that of the United States, which has played a decisiverole in sustaining the current conflict. Obama gave no indication that its roleshould change or even be considered.

Those familiar with the history will rationally conclude, then, that Obamawill continue in the path of unilateral U.S. rejectionism.

Obama once again praised the Arab Peace Initiative, saying only that Arabsshould see it as 'an important beginning, but not the end of theirresponsibilities.' How should the Obama administration see it? Obama and hisadvisers are surely aware that the Initiative reiterates the long-standinginternational consensus calling for a two-state settlement on the international(pre-June '67) border, perhaps with 'minor and mutual modifications,' to borrowU.S. government usage before it departed sharply from world opinion in the1970s, vetoing a Security Council resolution backed by the Arab 'confrontationstates' (Egypt, Iran, Syria), and tacitly by the PLO, with the same essentialcontent as the Arab Peace Initiative except that the latter goes beyond bycalling on Arab states to normalize relations with Israel in the context of thispolitical settlement. Obama has called on the Arab states to proceed withnormalization, studiously ignoring, however, the crucial political settlementthat is its precondition. The Initiative cannot be a 'beginning' if the U.S.continues to refuse to accept its core principles, even to acknowledge them.

In the background is the Obama administration's goal, enunciated most clearly bySenator John Kerry, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, to forge analliance of Israel and the 'moderate' Arab states against Iran. The term'moderate' has nothing to do with the character of the state, but rather signalsits willingness to conform to U.S. demands.

What is Israel to do in return for Arab steps to normalize relations? Thestrongest position so far enunciated by the Obama administration is that Israelshould conform to Phase I of the 2003 Road Map, which states: 'Israel freezesall settlement activity (including natural growth of settlements).' All sidesclaim to accept the Road Map, overlooking the fact that Israel instantly added14 reservations that render it inoperable.

Overlooked in the debate over settlements is that even if Israel were to acceptPhase I of the Road Map, that would leave in place the entire settlement projectthat has already been developed, with decisive U.S. support, to ensure thatIsrael will take over the valuable land within the illegal 'separation wall'(including the primary water supplies of the region) as well as the JordanValley, thus imprisoning what is left, which is being broken up into cantons bysettlement/infrastructure salients extending far to the East. Unmentioned aswell is that Israel is taking over Greater Jerusalem, the site of its majorcurrent development programs, displacing many Arabs, so that what remains toPalestinians will be separated from the center of their cultural, economic, andsociopolitical life. Also unmentioned is that all of this is in violation ofinternational law, as conceded by the government of Israel after the 1967conquest, and reaffirmed by Security Council resolutions and the InternationalCourt of Justice. Also unmentioned are Israel's successful operations since 1991to separate the West Bank from Gaza, since turned into a prison where survivalis barely possible, further undermining the hopes for a viable Palestinianstate.

It is worth remembering that there has been one break in U.S.-Israelirejectionism. President Clinton recognized that the terms he had offered at thefailed 2000 Camp David meetings were not acceptable to any Palestinians, and inDecember, proposed his 'parameters,' vague but more forthcoming. He thenannounced that both sides had accepted the parameters, though both hadreservations. Israeli and Palestinian negotiators met in Taba, Egypt to iron outthe differences, and made considerable progress. A full resolution could havebeen reached in a few more days, they announced in their final joint pressconference. But Israel called off the negotiations prematurely, and they havenot been formally resumed. The single exception indicates that if an Americanpresident is willing to tolerate a meaningful diplomatic settlement, it can verylikely be reached.

It is also worth remembering that the Bush I administration went a bit beyondwords in objecting to illegal Israeli settlement projects, namely, bywithholding U.S. economic support for them. In contrast, Obama administrationofficials stated that such measures are 'not under discussion' and that anypressures on Israel to conform to the Road Map will be 'largely symbolic,' sothe New York Times reported (Helene Cooper, June 1).

There is more to say, but it does not relieve the grim picture that Obama hasbeen painting, with a few extra touches in his widely-heralded address to theMuslim World in Cairo on June 4.

Noam Chomsky is Institute Professor (retired) at MIT. He is the author ofmany books and articles on international affairs and social-political issues,and a long-time participant in activist movements. His most recent booksinclude: Failed States, What We Say Goes (with David Barsamian), Hegemonyor Survival, and the Essential Chomsky. Courtesy, Znet