The US Presidential Candidates and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict

In the Middle East, most of the people are following the presidential elections with great interest. They view the elections from the point of view as to which candidate serves their interests better. Will it be the Republican candidate, John McCain or the Democrat’s Barrack Obama? My gut feeling is that most Israelis would like to see John McCain elected the new president of the United States. Many believe that he is more pro-Israel than Obama. Both candidates have made many pro-Israel statements in the hope of capturing the Jewish vote. Perhaps the edge on pro-Israelism lies in McCain. Much remains to be seen as to the tactics used and the speeches that will be made by the two presidential candidates in order to capture the Jewish vote.

Possibly in the short run, from Israel’s point of view, McCain’s election as president would serve its interests, judging his statements on the Middle East. In the end, we must remember that he will be representing conservative Bush policy continuity. Bush’s record in the Middle East is poor. He has blundered in Iraq, Afghanistan and he has brought US prestige to a low. Iraq is in a total mess. There is no control and the country is in the process of self-destruction, with suicide bombings an everyday occurrence. The US armed forces will remain in Iraq for a long time if McCain and his Bush legacy wins the presidential elections. The Iraqi people are subjected to the cruelest violence between Sunni and Shiite Moslems which shows no signs of abating. Bush has created the US’s “second Vietnam” and the hell that goes with it. The US dollar has weakened against most world currencies and the US economy is in the doldrums. The Bush legacy has nothing to offer anywhere at any place at any time. The US is in great need of change before it can regain its prestige and act as an honest broker in peace-making in the Middle East. McCain is not the man who can take on that role.

The new US president will have to renew US efforts in being an honest broker once again. Bush never fulfilled that role and only showed interest in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict towards the end of his presidency with his hype-filled Annapolis Conference that has been forgotten like a momentary blip of news on the TV screen. Lately Israel’s legally beleaguered PM Ehud Olmert and George Bush, whose popularity ratings are at the lowest ebb possible, have become strange bedfellows in the twilight of their political careers. One must bear in mind that McCain, being a Republican, will somehow continue the Bush legacy which will not achieve peace in the Middle East. He will cause the US to sink further into the quagmire. Barack Obama’s record is clean as far as the Arab states and Palestinians are concerned. Apart from his speech at the influential AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) which did upset Arab nations, he still has support from the Arab nations. Hopefully, he will be more successful in negotiations than his predecessor Bush assuming that he is elected to the presidency. His sense of balance in this conflict can only be to the advantage of all parties to the conflict when it comes to getting the peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians back on track.

It is incumbent on the American people to make a change. They have an opportunity to elect a president who could cease US involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan and return it to its former status of being a world power. This can influence the peace process between the Israelis and Palestinians positively.

The chances of the US withdrawing its armed forces from Iraq are greater under an Obama than under a McCain presidency. Obama is an impressive and charismatic politician. He shows promise that could ring in changes that the US needs so desperately. The old Republican order will ensure the same Bush legacy which would be bad for US interests and the interests of peace in the Middle East.

Obama has promised the electorate that he will make withdrawal of US troops from Iraq a top priority as well as a renewal of peace negotiations between Israel and its Palestinian neighbours. We have not heard this commitment so strongly from McCane. A new vision that will be acceptable to both Israel and its Arab neighbours including the Palestinians is overdue. If Obama wins the election, there is a greater chance of achieving peace on these tracks than ever before. This is conditional, of course, on whether Obama is prepared to become more involved than his predecessor who left it far too late. The Palestinians see Obama more receptive to their suffering than Bush, despite his declared support for Israel and this is an advantage.

It is still a long haul before the Presidential elections. Observers here who show a great interest in the Middle East situation will be assessing every statement that is made by the two presidential candidates concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. There have been so many attempts at peace making over the years and the results have been poor.

It remains to be seen how the candidates will get the process on track especially now with Hamas being a major player. There are no signs coming from the Hamas camp of any form of rapprochement with Israel or any change in their anti-US attitudes. Their rhetoric remains uncompromising and this does not bode well for the future of peace between Israel and the Palestinians. If Hamas gains the upper hand in the West Bank then there will be a very big problem for the future of peace between Israel and the Palestinians no matter who wins the presidential elections in the US.

If Hamas gains strength over Fatah in the West Bank and does not change its attitude it will result in Iran increasing its influence in the area and could result in a nuclear arms race. Hamas is a very dangerous obstacle towards peace and it is unlikely that they will succeed in unifying the Palestinian people. They will heap destruction and havoc on the Palestinian people which will encourage Iran under Mahmoud Ahmadinajad to become involved in arming Hamas. He will use the Palestinians in order to spread his influence and try to rule the Middle East. It is hoped that the moderating influences in the Palestinian camp would unite in order to prevent this development. A nuclear arms race is a great threat to all peoples of the Middle East and not only to Israel. Nuclear fallout kills everybody! Hopefully this realization would unite all peoples of the Middle East to resist Iran which is a potential enemy to all peace loving peoples of the Middle East. Obama, with his clean slate from the Arab point of view, has the potential of applying pressure on Hamas and preventing Iran’s meddling in Palestinian affairs if he plays his cards right assuming that he wins the presidential elections.

Unjustifiable Shortsightedness with a Xenophobic Touch

While PM Ehud Olmert is wallowing in his legal problems because of his love of good living and millionaires who can feather his nest of influence, there are certain injustices happening in the south of Israel. It is not only the Qassam rockets that Hamas terrorists are firing into Israel which is in itself despicable and justifies retaliation, but also the way the retaliation is being carried out.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu (a Nobel Prize Laureate and ex Archbishop of Cape Town) was appointed to head the special committee by the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva to investigate the deaths of 19 Palestinians in Bet Hanun in November 2006 killed by Israel fire. The Israeli authorities refused to grant him a visa for this purpose. In the end he arrived with his team via the Rafah crossing from Egypt. Had Israel granted him a visa for this purpose, it would have proved that Israel had nothing to hide and that there is a desire for openness of what really happened on that fateful day. By refusing to grant permission, Israel is held suspect of hiding information on this incident in the eyes of the world. Apart from that, Tutu also intended to pay a visit to Sderot to see the damage done by Qassam rockets and to interview the victims. This was also denied him. This is unfortunate and Tutu was unable to see both sides of the conflict in an impartial fashion. Apart from gaining entry into Gaza and interviewing Gazan families in Bet Hanun about the incident in question, he was unable to see the Sderot side of events. Surely this must be viewed as a tactical blunder on the part of Israel. It serves no purpose apart from denting Israel’s credibility in the eyes of the world.

According to an Agence France Press Report, a tearful Palestinian family recounted losing loved ones in an Israeli attack and the ruling Hamas movement expounded its hard-line stance.

Archbishop Tutu listened to members of the Assamna family tell of a 2006 Israeli shelling of their village that killed 19 civilians, including eight children, while they were sleeping.

"I was here with my son. I was holding his hand when he died. Can you imagine a mother holding the intestines of her own son," said Tahini al-Assamna through her tears, describing the scene after the attack.

Tutu commented that the purpose of the visit was to gather information to write a report for the UN Human Rights Council, "but we wanted to say that we are quite devastated."

The Palestinian woman told Tutu and his UN team that she also lost three brothers-in-law in the attack. And her husband was killed two days before the bombing during an Israeli army operation against rocket firings from Gaza.

Imad Okal, a UN representative in northern Gaza, looked around the Assamna house and commented that it was "very evident that this building was a residential home."

Leaning against a scorched wall of the house, Saad Abdallah Assamna, 52, said he only hoped that "there will be an inquiry and those responsible will be judged before an international tribunal.

It appears that what happened on that fateful day, was conveniently swept under the carpet like many other incidents that should not have occurred. After an internal investigation, Israel concluded that shelling the civilians' homes was "a rare and grave technical error of the artillery radar system."

Another incident disconnected with the UN Human Rights Council investigation under Archbishop Tutu, is Israel’s refusal to allow 8 Palestinian students who had received prestigious Fulbright Fellowships from US academic institutions to study in the US.

It is unjustifiable to prevent Gaza students who have received scholarships to further their studies in the US. Students are the potential leaders of their people in the future. If they are denied the right to study because of the Hamas regime, this is a form of xenophobia. Students who have the ability must be given every opportunity. It does not serve the interests of Israel or the Palestinians if all doors are closed to them. It will further encourage extremism and hate. Denying a student the right to study overseas will not end terrorism or result in Hamas recognizing Israel’s right to exist. It will take away Palestinian hopes of a better life and will exacerbate the relationship between Israel and the Palestinians even further. Everything must be done to allow these Gaza students to receive their Fulbright Scholarships to study. This is typical of Israel’s self righteous shortsightedness and fears.

According to a report in Haaretz 30th May 2008, The U.S. State Department said Friday it was pressing Israel's government to allow eight Palestinians who live in the Gaza Strip to travel to the United States to study on coveted Fulbright fellowships.

"We are trying to revisit this issue with the Israeli government," State Department spokesman Tom Casey told reporters, referring to Israel's failure to grant exit visas for the students.

"Frankly, a decision to let people that have been vetted for what is perhaps the most prestigious foreign educational program run by the United States ... it ought to be [as easy as] falling off a log for them to be able to do this."

Earlier Friday, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she would investigate a report that the State Department had withdrawn Fulbright Scholarship grants to the Palestinian students because they were denied exit visas by Israel.

Hadeel Abu Kawik, 23, a computer engineering student, received her scholarship after a lengthy process that included interviews, exams and an English test.

"I was building my hope on this scholarship," she said Friday.

Israel has sealed off the Gaza Strip in an effort to protect bordering Israeli towns and punish the Hamas militants who took over Gaza last June. Israel controls movement in and out of the territory as well as utilities for about 1.3 million Palestinian residents in Gaza.

Abdulrahman Abdullah, one of the eight Gazans who received the letter, was shocked.

"If we are talking about peace and mutual understanding, it means investing in people who will later contribute to Palestinian society," he said. "I am against Hamas. Their acts and policies are wrong. Israel talks about a Palestinian state. But who will build that state if we can get no training?"

Some Israeli lawmakers, who held a hearing Wednesday on the issue of student movement out of Gaza, expressed anger that their government was failing to promote educational and civil development in a future Palestine. This is an encouraging sign that not all in Israel agree with the policy to prevent Gaza’s students from studying in the US.

"This could be interpreted as collective punishment," said Rabbi Michael Melchior, chairman of the Education Committee in Parliament, during the hearing. "This policy is not in keeping with international standards or with the moral standards of Jews, who have been subjected to the deprivation of higher education in the past. Even in war, there are rules." Melchior is a member of Meimad, a small party allied to the Labor Party.

Jewish Refugees and Palestinian Refugees – both are Victims!

Some of my friends approached me stating that I should write about Jewish refugees as I always seem to be laying emphasis on the plight of the Palestinian refugees in my writings. I have decided to follow their advice and attempt to give a sense of balance to both sides within my severe limitations. It is very difficult to maintain 100 per cent objectivity as this subject is very emotional and is bound to upset many people.

When the State of Israel was declared on 15^th May 1948, Jewish Communities in Arab lands were persecuted even though they were not instrumental in Israel’s declaration of independence. Jewish communities had lived in the Arab countries even before the advent of Islam in the 7^th Century A.D. Until the 10^th Century A.D, 90 per cent of world Jewry lived in Arab countries. There has been an uninterrupted presence of large Jewish communities in the Middle East from time immemorial. The ancient Jewish communities of the Middle East and North Africa (including in the Land of Israel) has existed for over 2,500 years before the birth of the modern Arab states.

When the United Nations resolution on the partition of Israel and Palestine in November 1947 was passed with an overwhelming majority Arab riots broke out against many Jewish communities in the Arab world. Jewish shops, homes and synagogues were burned and looted; hundreds of Jews were murdered, thousands were imprisoned, their movement was restricted, emigration to Israel banned and many Jews were deprived of their citizenship. Jews who at one time were influential in commerce suddenly lost their holdings; bank accounts belonging to Jews were frozen, and property valued at millions of dollars was confiscated. As in previous centuries, Jews were further removed from government agencies and their admission to public office was severely restricted. They lost their means of survival and became hostages in their own countries of birth and origin. Consequently, they could no longer remain there. Where once Jewish communities flourished and thrived, their traces have been erased as Jews in large numbers were compelled to uproot and displace themselves and to leave all their property behind. This resulted in a large Jewish refugee problem.

In 1948 there were over 850 000 Jews living in the Arab countries of the Middle East and North Africa. When the State of Israel was declared as an independent Jewish state in 1948, there was an intensification of anti-Jewish measures against the ancient Jewish communities in many Arab countries.

Country		Date of Jewish Community
	Algeria	1st-2nd century CE
	Egypt
	Iraq	6th century BCE
	Lebanon	1st century BCE
	Libya	3rd century BCE
	Morocco	1st century CE
	Syria	1st century CE
	Tunisia	200 CE
	Yemen	3rd century BCE

From Justice for Jews Website.

As one can see from these tables, there are hardly any Jews left in the Arab countries today.

In order to understand the origins of the Palestinian – Israeli conflict, it is important to see both sides of the conflict and acknowledge that both peoples were victims of injustices.

Much research has been done on the plight of Palestinian refugees but very little has been researched on the Jewish refugee problem. The former has come to world attention because of research done by the “new historians” such as Dr. Ilan Pappe, lecturer at Exeter University, England (formerly of Haifa University), Benny Morris of University of the Negev, Beersheba, Israel, Professor Avi Shlain and Tom Segev, a writer for Haaretz newspaper. This is a positive development as certain truths about the Palestinian Refugee problem and a greater understanding of it has been the result. At the same time, acceptance of the Jewish refugee problem is also very important as what happened to the one side is a result of what happened to the other side.

A more objective and balanced approach to the tragedies of both Jews from Arab countries and Palestinians could have a moderating effect on both populations. Jews from Arab countries would have their history and heritage restored and would become more open to a peaceful arrangement. In turn, the Palestinians would realize that they are not the only ones who have suffered, making them more prone to reconciliation. This conciliatory effect could provide a key to a peace treaty between Israel and the Palestinians whether it be a two-state solution or a binational state solution depending on the will of both peoples in a plebiscite. I have dealt at length on this subject in previous articles and do not intend to discuss this here.

The Arab states that had sizeable Jewish communities must be held responsible for the creation of a Jewish refugee problem as well as increasing the flow of Jewish refugees into Israel. This Jewish refugee problem would not have occurred had the Arab states not created a situation whereby the Jewish citizens of their respective countries were forced to leave. The Arab leadership should never have adopted discriminatory measures against their Jewish communities and made them into “personae non gratae”. The Arab states in 1948 were responsible for the increase of the population of Israel by default. They were also against partition into a Jewish state and a Palestinian state. Perhaps a parallel to the destruction of the two-state solution was also caused by the illegal settlers many years later in the occupied territories captured in the 1967 June War. Somehow the tactics on the Israeli, Palestinian and Arab sides have been disastrous and ill timed. Many Jewish refugees were absorbed into Israel and the Jewish refugee problem was solved. Also many Jewish refugees were also absorbed in other countries such as the US, Canada, England and France where many of them built flourishing Jewish communities and became citizens of their adopted countries.

The Palestinian refugee problem was never addressed and these unfortunate Palestinian refugees remained in refugee camps for at least three generations in the most appalling sub-human conditions. There was no motivation on the part of the neighbouring Arab states to absorb the Palestinian Arab refugees into their countries. They felt that by not solving the tragic Palestinian refugee problem, they could continue to delegitimize Israel’s right to exist and blame Israel for Palestinian suffering.

The tragic history of Palestinian suffering is never forgotten because this history is spread by word of mouth from generation to generation by elders in the Palestinian community, many of whom still have the keys and title deeds to their original homes before they were evicted.

The only way that this conflict can be solved is by engaging in grass roots reconciliation between Palestinians and Israelis. A gross injustice has been inflicted on both sides. Both sides must acknowledge these injustices towards each other. Both sides are victims of these injustices which have resulted in the stronger side oppressing the weaker side and causing the occupation.

Jewish Populations of Arab Countries: 1948 and 2001/2008
Country or territory	1948 Jewish population	Jewish % of total population, 1948	Estimated Jewish population 2001[9]	Estimated Jewish population 2008
Aden	8,000[10]		~0
Algeria	140,000[10][11]	1.6%	~0
Bahrain	550-600[12]	0.5%	36	around 30 people. See [13].
Egypt	75,000[10]-80,000[11]	0.4%	~100	Less than a hundred remain. See[14]
Iraq	135,000[10]-140,000[11]	2.6%	~200	20 in Baghdad and fewer than 100 remain. See [15].
Lebanon	5,000[10]-20,000[16]	0.4-1.5%	<>	around 40 in Beirut. See [17]
Libya	35,000[11]-38,000[10]	3.6%	0
Morocco	250,000[11]-265,000[10]	2.8%	5,230	less than 7,000. See [18]
Qatar	?	?	?	a few Jews are reported. See [19]
Syria	15,000[11]-30,000[10]	0.4-0.9%	~100	fewer than 30 remain. See [20]
Tunisia	50,000[11]-105,000[10]	1.4-3.0%	~1,000	in 2004 estimated 1,500 remain. See [21]
Yemen	45,000[11]-55,000[10]	1.0%	~200	a few hundred remain. See [22]
Total	758,000 - 881,000		<6,500	<8,600+

Jewish Populations of non-Arab Muslim Countries: 1948 and 2001
Country or territory	1948 Jewish population	Estimated Jewish population 2001	Estimated Jewish population 2008
Afghanistan	5,000	1[23]
Iran	70,000-120,000,[24] 100,000, 140,000–150,000	11,000-40,000	less than 40,000 remain. See [25].
Pakistan	2,000	N/A
Turkey	80,000[26]	18,000-30,000[27]

From Wikipedia