Will Clinton's Message to the Palestinians Get Through?

In a press conference in Washington with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and Palestinian President Abbas, Secretary of State Clinton reportedly said:

Your leaders may be sitting at the negotiating table, but you [the people of the Middle East] are ultimately the ones who will ultimately decide the future. [sic]

She's right. With regard to the Palestinians, it's not Abbas's signature on some piece of paper that's going to bring peace, but whether or not the Palestinian people are ready to put the conflict behind them. Their leadership, however, has a responsibility to prepare them for conflict-ending concessions and coexistence with Israel. Clinton's message is a good first step, but the question is, Will it get through? We were reminded this week that at least some of the Arab press cannot be counted on to deliver it.

Egypt's state-run newspaper, al-Ahram, doctored a photo of President Obama and Middle East leaders at the White House recently to depict Egyptian President Mubarak leading the others down a hallway, rather than walking last which was the real situation.

It's just the latest illustration of how messages intended for Middle East audiences are shaped by autocratic leaders and their government-controlled media. And it reflects the challenges that may lie ahead in reaching out to the Palestinians to condition them for peace. Palestinian leaders -- and not U.S. leaders in Washington -- ultimately will have to do that themselves.

International Double-Standard on House Demolitions

International opinion towards Israeli counterterrorism is biased and reflects a double-standard.

Israeli policy is to demolish the houses of Palestinian suicide bombers to exact a significant enough cost so that others choose not to emulate them. The policy is divisive, even within Israel. Critics argue that, if a bomber's family had no idea of his plans, why should it be punished. Israel examines each situation individually, but with bombers taking the lives of dozens of innocent Israelis with them, Israel is left with little choice but to try to deter more attacks.

The United Nations has condemned the practice and called upon Israel to "respect its obligations under international humanitarian law...not to undertake demolition of homes."

The U.S. State Department has said the "demolition of civilian structures deprives Palestinians of shelter and the ability to peacefully earn a livelihood" and "make[s] more difficult bringing an end to violence." However, with bombings now halted, it seems demolitions expedited, not prevented, an end to violence.

For several years, Nigeria has suffered from a pandemic of kidnaps-for-ransom, mostly of foreign-company workers in the oil-rich Niger Delta. More recently, however, as foreign workers have taken security precautions, kidnappers have begun to target more often local political leaders, the wealthy, and others.

Recently, the government of Nigeria's Enugu State announced that "any house used to harbor [kidnapped] hostages or found to be a hideout for kidnappers...will be demolished while the certificate of occupancy...will be revoked and the property seized by the government." The State's Governor said the government "would not accept any excuse from anybody.... No one is above the law. We will tackle the problem of kidnappers and violent crime in the state [one] hundred percent, not with kid gloves."

The announcement has prompted not one word of criticism or condemnation from the U.S. State Department, United Nations, or others. Nor should it. As long as Israelis are not doing the demolition, house demolition appears to be an internationally-acceptable strategy of helping to ensure public safety.

Palestinians to Abbas: Stay Put

The Palestinians' problems at times seem insurmountable. Their justice system is in shambles. Extrajudicial killings are common. A terrorist group, Hamas, rival to the ruling Fatah party, delivers most social services. The Palestinians were promised peace, but their leaders have yet to deliver. Palestinian society remains largely dependent on foreign aid. One would think the Palestinian President would be too preoccupied solving issues to have time for anything else, much less travel.

Not the case.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas this week heads to Latin America -- Argentina, Brazil, Columbia, and Mexico, specifically. He aims to rally international support for a push at the United Nations for a unilateral declaration of statehood, which would contravene the Oslo Accords' prohibition on any step prejudging the outcome of final-status negotiations.

Abbas travels a lot, especially for a leader with tons of unresolved problems at home. Last December, he visited Chechnya and Russia. And the August before that, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, and Egypt. In October 2008, it was Syria and, in July, Tunisia. Since assuming the presidency in 2004, Abbas also has visited Chile, Mauritania, India, Sri Lanka, China, Japan, New Zealand, Pakistan, Senegal, Malta, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mali, Brunei, and more than a dozen European countries, not to mention the U.S.

Despite all this international travel, guess where Abbas had never set foot as President as of late last year -- the Palestinian cities of Hebron, Janin, Qalqiliya, and Tulkarem. Local leaders of his own Fatah party complain that he hasn't visited their districts and addressed the people there. Palestinian commentator Hani al-Masri says Abbas has "little to show" for his time as President and prefers to travel in order to avoid dealing with difficult domestic issues.

Abbas' defenders say international travel is key to winning broad support for the Palestinian cause. They are probably right, and it may help explain why the UN is so partial to Palestinian political positions.

Despite his jet-setting and criticism from his own people, Abbas remains the U.S. State Department's favorite child. Department spokesman Ian Kelly, on November 6, said of Abbas after his threatened resignation:

We have tremendous respect for him and we think he's an important player in the process, a voice of moderation, and we look forward to continuing to work with him.

"Tremendous" respect? Does he really deserve that? Besides win friends abroad, what has he done to help resolve his people's day-to-day problems or advance the peace process one bit? Rather, this statement reveals the desperation at the State Department to grab onto anything it can to resuscitate the peace process. It's pathetic and, more importantly, counter-productive.

By embracing a man who has done little to prepare his people for concessions necessary to bring peace or to resolve the domestic issues confronting his people, the State Department condemns the Palestinians to poor and ineffective leadership. The media are equally to blame. Point out one article in the press, ever, discussing Abbas's role in proposing or approving legislation addressing any Palestinian domestic issue or one article discussing Abbas's leadership style or how he governs or brokers solutions to domestic issues. Such responsibilities are not expected of the man, so the media doesn't cover it.

If Abbas continues to get a free ride -- and all indications are that he will -- then the Palestinians will continue to be cheated of responsible, effective leadership expected of democracies worldwide, and the Palestinians will never be able to develop the institutions necessary for self-governance and needed to help reassure Israelis that any further concessions would really bring peace.

State Dept Hypocrisy

For years, the U.S. State Department has refused to identify "Jerusalem, Israel" on the passports of Americans (mostly Jewish Americans) born there and who specifically request the designation. (Meanwhile, upon request, it has omitted or removed "Israel" from the passports of Arab-Americans born in Haifa or Tel Aviv.) State has done this because it could not stomach the thought of even tacitly acknowledging Jerusalem as Israel's capital.

A 2002 U.S. law required that State begin to identify "Jerusalem, Israel" on passports if asked to do so, but State has refused to comply. The US Court of Appeals recently refused to intervene in the matter, calling it a non-justiciable political question, according to an article in the July 19 Jerusalem Post online.

So, why do we write about this now?

Because for individuals traveling to the Palestinian Authority-administered areas only, Israel will now stamp passports with a "Palestinian Authority only" entry stamp. It's doing so for security reasons, to prevent individuals who are deemed security risks from wandering about Israel without business being there.

State, however, has deemed the new practice "unfair" to Palestinian and Arab-Americans and "not acceptable." State has told Israel it "expects all American citizens to be treated equally, regardless of their national origin or other citizenship."

It is hypocritical of State to refuse to apply this standard to its own practices, continuing to distinguish between Americans born in Jerusalem from those born in other parts of Israel and making special exceptions for Americans of Arab descent.

The Associated Press had more on the story here.