eastjerusalem1

The majority of Israelis believe that a peace treaty based on a two-state solution is not within reach. Find out why.

(Tel Aviv) SOME PEOPLE FEEL that the majority of Israelis are of the opinion that a peace treaty based on a two-state solution is not within reach. This assumption is based in part on the steps that must be taken to that end, and the belief that it will be impossible to uproot the settlers living in the more than 200 settlements that have been built on the West Bank, which would most likely be necessary in order to reach such an understanding. The belief that this is not doable is based on the painful experience of dismantling the settlements in the Gaza Strip in August of 2005, and the skirmishes that broke out a little bit later between settlers in the West Bank and the Israeli military. An important lesson learned from these confrontations is that the Israeli forces are not really in a position to carry out such an operation.

“The present Israeli negativism towards a settlement is in part a result of a series of events, among which figure: social changes in the aftermath of the massive immigration from the erstwhile Soviet Union in the beginning of the 1990s; the growth of powerful and vested economic interests; and Palestinian radicalization, including the Hamas surge”

The ideology that the military currently subscribes to differs significantly from what was considered to be the mainstream way of thinking in Israel in its early years, when there was a stronger desire for peace. At the time, the perceived assessment was that there were no Arab partners willing to negotiate a settlement. However, the positions of both sides have changed considerably in the past decade.

The present Israeli negativism towards a settlement is in part a result of a series of events, among which figure: social changes in the aftermath of the massive immigration from the erstwhile Soviet Union in the beginning of the 1990s; the growth of powerful and vested economic interests; and Palestinian radicalization, including the Hamas surge.

Among the factors that evolved during the past generation and now have a bearing on Israeli political thought are:

THE SECURITY STAFF’S SHIFT TO THE RIGHT

The composition of the majority of the senior security staff has been materially altered, and changes in its social structure have contributed to its ideology’s radical shift to the right. The dominant presence of former kibbutzniks and other farming families, who until the early 1980s formed the frontline thrust of the military and security forces, has all but dissipated during the past generation. Today, the bulk of the senior staff come from religious backgrounds, many of whose families live in settlements located on the West Bank. Unlike during the country’s first forty years, when most officers rose in rank while facing Arab armies on the battlefield, the main experience gained by present day military and security officers has been guiding their forces as they maintain order and rule in the occupied West Bank. In carrying out their orders, their assignments are more similar to those of police officers and back-seat military administrators than to battlefield commanders.

THE SPREAD OF MILITARY ARROGANCE

There is no evidence that the majority of Israelis are concerned about, or even aware of what is taking place on the West Bank, as military personnel continue to apply the often harsh military government laws and regulations in the occupied territory, which often do not respect, and indeed humiliate the indigenous Palestinians. Furthermore, there are indications that with the passage of time, the accompanying military arrogance has spread, and now influences many of the members of the Israeli media reporting on events there. This abrasiveness is often expressed in their biased reporting, and their prejudices have in turn been siphoned into the thought process of those who in the past were considered to be moderate Israelis. This helps explain why so many Israelis regard the Palestinians as a people of lesser worth or rights, and it also sheds some light onto why it is generally acceptable that the authorities maintain economic and civil double standards for the Arab population, in comparison with the neighboring Jewish communities. As such, the state should apply equitable laws regarding the allocation of resources, including public land and access to water, since there is currently no serious opposition to the preferential benefits bestowed upon the country’s Jewish citizens.

INFLUENTIAL MILITARY AND SECURITY FORCES

There are over 200,000 Israelis directly employed by the country’s military and security forces, and the number of civilians employed by security industries producing for either Israel’s defensive needs or military exports is well over 100,000. Together, they represent over ten percent of the active work force in the country. Among its achievements, Israel has become internationally recognized as a major military exporter, with its sales accounting for some ten percent of the global arms trade. While some of these exports are supported by the Israeli government, a good deal of them are conducted by private arms traders. They all contribute to the country’s GDP and the well-being of the population. What’s more, they also carry political ramifications, and although they are not always visible, form influential lobbies within the military-industrial economy.

“The state should apply equitable laws regarding the allocation of resources, including public land and access to water, since there is currently no serious opposition to the preferential benefits bestowed upon the country’s Jewish citizens”

In part encouraged by the Israeli establishment, over the years, the number of young men completing their military tour of duty who travel overseas and are retained to act as security officers has been on the rise. Their specific chores may include acting as security personnel, either assigned to defend vessels sailing in the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea from a possible Somali pirate attack, to the Caribbean tourist route, or to serve scheduled and charter international air carriers. Others are retained as bodyguards by very wealthy Europeans and Americans, as well as Russian oligarchs.

JOINING FORCES WITH PROFESSIONAL POLITICIANS

And then there are the professional politicians, some of whom identify with the ideologically radical right wing parties, while others may be seen as pragmatic demagogues. In recent years, they have discovered the attractiveness of joining forces with those in the military and security forces in order to get elected, and have repeatedly made and continue to make hate speeches in which they warn the Israeli public of the dire dangers it faces in the Palestinians, coupled with ominous existential threats citing Hamas, Hezbollah and the Iranians. What’s more, they explain that they see no way to compromise on matters concerning the West Bank. Most of those running for office on such platforms realized and appreciated just how effective those fear mongering speeches are when the results of the February 2009 elections were made known and they, the right-wing radicals, made disturbingly large gains.

“In recent years, politicians have discovered the attractiveness of joining forces with the military in order to get elected”

It is possible that one day Israel will be facing serious negotiations for a peace settlement; should it be a cause for concern that these vested interests might be powerful enough to obstruct such moves?