Addict (drugaddict) wrote,
Addict
drugaddict

Barack Obama's Historic speech

Subject: JVW ARTICLE: "BARACK OBAMA'S HISTORIC SPEECH"
To: Undisclosed-Recipient


 
TO: Distinguished Recipients
FM: John Whitbeck
 
As Israel's savage assault on Gaza continues, even thinking about possibilities for genuine peace between Israelis and Palestinians gives rise to an understandable presumption that the thinker must be drowning his sorrows in mind-altering drugs. Reconciliation and mutual respect have never seemed more distant, and the willingness of the Arab world to accept the permanent presence of a Jewish State in Palestine, which was born when the "Oslo" Declaration of Principles was signed on the White House lawn in 1993 and has been in declining health ever since, has been definitively consigned to the grave along with the torn bodies of the women and children of Gaza.
 
Nevertheless, I am transmitting below a new article of mine which was published today in the DAILY STAR (Beirut). It was also published on Wednesday in the JORDAN TIMES (Amman) and yesterday in AL-AHRAM WEEKLY (Cairo).
 
Having justified his silence until now on the principle that the United States has only "one president at a time", Barack Obama will have to say SOMETHING almost immediately upon assuming office on January 20. What seems to me to be essential is that President Obama should NOT immediately commit himself to working toward the same impossible goal by the same constricted means which have repeatedly failed (and which appear to have been expressly designed so as to ensure that they would "fail" successfully). Particularly in light of the uncertainty over the composition and leadership of the new Israeli government which will emerge from Israel's February 10 elections, he should keep his options open.
 
Ideally, he would state that his administation intended to make the actual achievement of a just peace in the Middle East its foremost foreign policy priority, that it would not necessarily be bound by policies and approaches which have repeatedly failed over a period of decades and that it would be examining urgently and with an open mind new approaches to achieving both peace and justice in the Middle East -- and, then, he and his Middle East advisors (hopefully including some representation from the traditionally excluded "98% minority" of the American population) would do so, both urgently and with open minds.
 
If any of my distinguished recipients who are in contact with Barack Obama or those close to him saw fit to pass on this suggestion and/or my article, I would be extremely grateful.
 
 

 

Copyright (c) 2009 The Daily Star

 

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=5&article_id=98878#

 

 

Friday, January 09, 2009

 

Barack Obama's historic speech on the Middle East

By John V. Whitbeck

 

President-elect Barack Obama has a problem. Particularly in the wake of Israel's holiday-season massacre of Gazans, he is under heavy pressure to focus immediately on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and to "do something." However, if he were simply to announce an intention to work harder to achieve an impossible goal by means that have repeatedly failed - a decent "two-state solution" through bilateral Israeli-Palestinian negotiations - such a commitment to further years of time-wasting would kill hope rather than inspire it and be counterproductive.

 

Furthermore, Obama's entourage has let it be known that he would like to make a major speech in a Muslim country early in his presidency. A welcome gesture, to be sure, but what would he say? If he were simply to promise "more of the same," as he did during his campaign, his frustrated audience might be tempted to throw shoes. What could he say that would be new and exciting, would truly represent "change" in American policy and would inspire genuine and justified hope that Middle East peace really is possible?

 

A conclusion to his speech along the following lines would offer change to believe in and audacious hope and could produce a far better future for Israelis, Palestinians and all mankind than most people would dare to dream possible in these somber days:

 

"During the 20 years since the Palestinian leadership formally committed itself to seeking peace with some measure of justice through a 'two-state solution,' virtually the entire international community has, at some point, come to subscribe, at least formally, to that goal. Unfortunately, during those same 20 years, the realistic possibility of actually achieving a decent 'two-state solution' has become more remote with each passing year. Constantly expanding 'facts on the ground' which render a viable and coherent Palestinian state virtually inconceivable have aggravated the multitude of excruciatingly complicated and difficult 'final status issues' which have proven too sensitive even for serious discussion between the Israeli and Palestinian leaderships. As a result, the most knowledgeable and realistic observers have reluctantly concluded that a decent 'two-state solution' is no longer possible.

 

"I therefore call on Israelis, Palestinians and all who truly care about peace, justice and the best interests of both Israelis and Palestinians to consider the only other acceptable alternative - democracy: a single state in all of the land which both Israelis and Palestinians love and consider rightfully theirs, with full and equal rights for both peoples and free of any form of discrimination based on race, religion or any other distinction, in accordance with the inspiring aspiration of the United States and all true democracies.

 

"Just as marriage is vastly less complicated than divorce, democracy is vastly less complicated than partition. A democratic solution to this century-old conflict would not require any borders to be agreed, any division of Jerusalem, anyone to move from his current home or any assets to be evaluated and apportioned. Full rights of citizenship would simply be extended to all surviving natives still living in the country, as happened in the United States in the early 20th century and in South Africa in the late 20th century.

 

"The obstacle to such a simple and morally unimpeachable solution is, of course, ethical, intellectual and psychological - on both sides of the current divide. No one would suggest that the ethical, intellectual and psychological transformation necessary to achieve a democratic one-state solution will be easy. However, since the only transformations necessary would be in the human mind, they could occur suddenly under proper leadership and inspiration. In any event, it is in no one's interests to waste further time before striving to inspire minds to accept the only remaining acceptable alternative to perpetual hatred and bloodshed.

 

"In this context, Israelis might wish to consider and reflect upon the experience of white South Africans. The transformation of South Africa's racial-supremacist ideology and state system into a truly democratic one has liberated white South Africans, as well as black South Africans, and has transformed white South Africans from international pariahs into people welcomed throughout their region and the world. It has also ensured the permanence of a strong and vital white presence in southern Africa in a way that prolonging the flagrant injustice of a racial-supremacist ideology and state system and imposing fragmented and dependent "independent states" on the natives could never have achieved. This is not a precedent to dismiss. It is one that could and should inspire.

 

"As an incentive to encourage all Israelis to adopt a more humanistic, humane, hopeful and democratic view of present realities and future possibilities and as an accommodation to those Israelis who might have difficulty doing so, the United States would commit, upon the implementation of such a democratic one-state solution, to welcome in the United States any Jewish Israelis who held Israeli citizenship as of today and who would then prefer to resettle in the United States, according them an immediate right of residence and a fast track to citizenship. The United States would also encourage other countries, particularly those with a moral obligation toward the Jewish people, to make the same generous offer.

 

"I solemnly call upon not only Israelis and Palestinians but on nations and peoples everywhere to unite to make this vision of peace through democracy and equal rights a reality and, by doing so, to make the world in which we live and in which future generations will live a far better and safer world than the one in which we have lived in recent decades and in which we live today."

 

Likely? Of course not. Possible? Absolutely. All that is needed is an American president with true ethical values and a genuine belief in democracy who is willing to risk putting the interests of his country and mankind ahead of narrow calculations of personal political self-interest. It is far from certain that America has finally elected such a president, but it is certainly possible.

 

If Barack Obama dared to advocate democracy as the path to peace for Israelis and Palestinians at the start of his presidency and to press for its achievement in the years remaining to him, it might well happen. No greater service to mankind can be imagined.

 

 

John V. Whitbeck is an international lawyer who has advised the Palestinian negotiating team in negotiations with Israel. This article is published by permission.

Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments