Irony: Arab League Gets It; Western Leaders Attack Only Israel
The oft quoted line of Will Ferrell’s hilarious Zoolander villain, Mugatu, seems so on-point right now: “Hasn’t anyone noticed this? I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.”
When the Arab League (!) – infamous for its Three No’s (“no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it, and insistence on the rights of the Palestinian people in their own country”) in 1967 – tells Hamas that it must disarm, that is remarkable. This occurred in the recent “New York Declaration,” which is still very far from a good document, filled with hypocrisy and lies as Anne Bayefsky explains in detail.
But that the Arab League, for the very first time, has called for an end to Hamas and release of all Israeli hostages is a major change. Hamas, naturally, immediately rejected the New York Declaration, just at it has rejected every other effort to end the war despite Israel’s acceptance of those same proposals (even if one has extreme skepticism, as I do, about Bibi Netanyahu’s actions and motivations).
At the same time, Western leaders in France, UK, Canada, and here in the US have made extremely wrong-headed statements that encourage the very opposite of their stated goals. France, UK, and Canada, along with a growing number of other countries, have threatened to unilaterally recognize a State of Palestine unless Israel somehow ends the war (apparently without any required participation or agreement by Hamas). In the US, 44 Democratic Senators, reportedly “led by four Jewish members of the Democratic Caucus” (Chuck Schumer (NY), Adam Schiff (CA), Jacky Rosen (NV), and Brian Schatz (HI)), authored and signed a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff that is so counterproductive as to require it be rejected out of hand.
The letter says: “Yet there still remains a viable pathway to end this war, bring home Israeli hostages, and achieve a diplomatic resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” But one can scour the letter again and again and not find one word on what that “viable pathway” might be.
The letter goes on to say: “To prevent the situation from getting even worse, we urge you to advocate for a large-scale expansion of humanitarian assistance and services throughout the Gaza Strip, including through the use of experienced multilateral bodies and NGOs that can get life-saving aid directly to those in need and prevent diversion.”
Just who is going to do that? The UN which allowed the diversion in the first place, and then left tons of aid sitting in Gaza undelivered? Which “experienced multilateral bodies and NGOs” do they mean? The letter does not name any of them – and if they existed, they certainly failed miserably by allowing Hamas to steal aid for nearly two years and to use Gaza civilians as human shields.
And remember when the US tried to use floating pier to deliver aid? It was entirely unsuccessful, despite costing a reported $230M. Getting aid to Gaza civilians is not quite so easy as the Senators and others seem to suggest.
And let’s also not forget that the assertion that Israel is the one responsible for aiding Gaza civilians is itself unprecedented and contrary to the requirements of international law, no matter how many false statements to the contrary are made by Western leaders and US Senators. As John Spencer, executive director of the Urban Warfare Institute, recently said: “There is no historical precedent for a military providing the level of direct aid to an enemy population that Israel has provided to Gaza.”
Spencer’s article also points out this:
At the same time, this war has produced another anomaly. One that should deeply trouble anyone who cares about humanitarian norms. There is no historical precedent to a non-warring party with the sole ability to assist, Egypt, not allowing civilians to flee a war zone.
So, as he highlights further in his article, and as I wrote in my prior article, but never mentioned by the authors of the New York Declaration, the 44 US Democratic Senators, or the leaders of France, UK, and Canada, there is indeed a “viable pathway” to move Gaza civilians out of harms way and get them humanitarian aid: require Egypt (the second largest recipient of US foreign military aid, following only Israel) to open its Gaza border and accept Gazan refugees. All of these so-concerned countries can pour in humanitarian aid to the Sinai, and at the same time deprive Hamas of its human shields.
But of course this option is never mentioned – because Israel bashing is so much easier, the facts, history, and international law notwithstanding.
Ultimately, it is the Western leaders who are crazy if they believe that their statements and pressure solely on Israel will result in peace or a two-state solution – a solution, by the way, that I fully support because it is best for Israel and because I support a Palestinian right of self-determination too. The problem is that the method adopted by Western leadership has caused and will continue to cause the opposite effect – hardening Hamas’s resolve not to surrender the hostages or accept any resolution proposals that do not meet its maximalist and changing demands.
If even the Arab League has finally understood that the end of the war requires that Hamas disarm and surrender the hostages, it remains incredible that Western leadership continues to pressure only Israel. Crazy pills indeed.
