US, Israel using Palestinian cause to further own agenda

The current flurry of diplomatic activity designed to kick start direct peace negotiations between the Palestinians and Israelis is sadly reminiscent of the period from June 2002 onwards when President George W. Bush announced the details of the so-called "road map" plan.

In March 2003, while high-profile attempts to bring the two sides to the negotiating table were still ongoing, the US-led coalition invaded Iraq.

Israel and the US are once again clamouring for peace talks. They assured themselves of the backing of the co-operative Arab Peace Initiative Follow-up Committee when it met last week in Cairo and reversed its previous decision which stipulated certain essential preconditions for the resumption of direct negotiations.

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak welcomed his Israel counterpart Shimon Peres in Cairo on August 1, and echoed the latter's call for direct peace talks.

For the time being, Palestinian National Authority (PNA) leader, President Mahmoud Abbas, is sticking to his refusal to negotiate endorsed by both the PLO Executive Committee and Fatah's Central Committee. Statements cite the failure of ongoing ‘indirect talks' to establish terms of reference (on borders for example), a time-frame or a commitment to freeze colony construction.

The big mystery here is what prompted the Follow-up Committee and the Egyptian president to make such a U-turn. Spokespersons referred to regional "strategic interests", hinting at a desire to help the United States should it launch an attack on Iran.

It seems that the "moderate" Arab governments now employ the Palestinian cause not to pressure the United States and Israel, but to pressure Iran, and preserve their own interests and their grip on the reins of power.

These same Arab regimes are also looking to the US for their own security. Mohammad Baqer Zolghadr, Iran's deputy interior minister, warned that in the event of a strike, Iran would hit back at Israel and US interests in the Gulf. Its Shahab-3 missile with range of 2,000 km is certainly capable of this.

Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, recently announced that the US has long had a plan in place for a strike on Iran.

Meanwhile, President Barack Obama promised that all front-line US troops will leave Iraq by September. In the event of a war with Iran, American soldiers in Iraq would be more vulnerable, since in a great historical irony, the Iranians are the strongest contingent in today's US-sponsored Iraqi regime.

Pretexts for regional military interventions by Israel are also gathering momentum. The decision of the International Special Tribunal for Lebanon on the assassination of former prime minister Rafik Hariri will be issued next month.

Leaks suggest that Hezbollah will be implicated and its leader, Syed Hassan Nasrallah, has already insisted that he will not hand over any of the defendants (claiming that the tribunal is politicised, and that evidence has been fabricated). If Hezbollah stands condemned by the international community, this will effectively green-light an incursion by Israel into southern Lebanon.

Israel completed testing its anti-missile defence system, the Iron Dome, on July 20, as if in anticipation of hostilities — Syria was recently accused of supplying Hezbollah with Scud missiles. Meanwhile, rocket attacks from Gaza and the Sinai are paving the way for a new attack on Hamas.

Whilst it was once able to act with impunity, Israel is increasingly perceived as the bully of the region. The appalling massacre of peace activists in international waters on their Gaza-bound flotilla on May 31 and the earlier IDF (Israel Defence Forces) assault on Gaza in the winter of 2008-09 which killed more than 1,400 besieged Palestinians (most of them civilians) marked a sea change in global public opinion.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met Obama at the White House in early July and the two clearly agreed to force the Palestinians back to fruitless negotiations. Not because Israel wants peace but because Israel wants better public relations. Netanyahu would like to re-invent himself and his regime in dovish guise ... before launching fresh attacks.

Obama, too, could benefit from a perceived foreign policy triumph as November's mid-term elections approach. His administration faces defeat in Afghanistan and setbacks for its project in Iraq. The Europeans are reconsidering their special relationship with the US and are seeking new alliances with nascent major powers, such as India, Brazil, and China. Only in the Arab region can America still exert its former influence.

The Palestinians say that they have been under enormous US pressure to return to negotiations; Obama reportedly threatened to diplomatically isolate Abbas' PNA, stop financial aid, cease all efforts to extend the Israeli construction freeze beyond September and entirely give up sponsorship of the peace process.

Moderates in the PNA argue that the Palestinian position is weak and that they risk losing everything if they do not give in to America.

If internal conflict over the peace process led to the disintegration of the PNA, that might ultimately be in the national interest. Rather than allowing their very just cause to be hijacked as a smoke screen for new US and Israeli regional aggression, perhaps the Palestinians would reclaim it for themselves ... and be prepared to fight for it.

Abdel Bari Atwan is editor of the pan-Arab newspaper Al Quds Al Arabi.