Features
How populism becomes a setback in the quest for M-E peace
It needs to be stated right away that the Palestinians are a much wronged people. Their cause is eminently just and the international community needs to act now to rectify the injustices borne by the Palestinians before they suffer worse atrocities in the present mind-numbing violence that has been unleashed with impunity on them by the Israeli state and its armed forces.
However, it cannot be stressed enough that the Israelis too have been, to a great degree, unfortunate victims of history. They too have ‘a case’ and it would be unrealistic on the part of those quarters that matter to overlook this fact in an earnest attempt by them at putting things right in the Middle East. In other words, the world needs to be even-handed in its efforts at resolving the Middle East tangle. Unless and until this condition is met it would be futile to expect enduring stability and peace in the region.
The need for even-handedness merits emphasis because over the decades movements and organizations basically representative of the South have apparently preferred to overlook the needs of the Israeli people in their policy prescriptions on the Middle East. Sri Lanka, a leading member of NAM, has thought it best to take a pro-Palestinian perspective over the years as well.
A moral principle could very well be at the centre of this Sri Lankan policy stance but it could also be economic survival that is among the prime considerations for Sri Lanka. More specifically, the continuous need for Arab oil could be among the motivating factors behind Sri Lanka’s policy outlook on a Middle East settlement.
However, decades of unrelenting Middle East violence ought to convince Sri Lanka and the South of the short-sightedness of their policy stances on the region. If the world is to make some progress towards peace in the Middle East, populist policy prescriptions on the Middle East imbroglio, such as the recognition of only Palestinian rights, would need to be shunned. The pressing requirements of the Israelis too would need to be taken into consideration and their need for durable security is chief among these needs.
However, the Israeli state too should help out in this process by seeking a just solution in the region. It would need to adhere to international humanitarian law, for instance, and recognize the need to adhere to UN injunctions on territorial issues.
It could very well be that Sri Lankan governments over the years have been ignorant about the history of the Middle East or have glossed over important facts pertaining to the nations of the region. If that is so, they would need to consult the chronicles more studiously and acquire a comprehensive knowledge of the troubled history of the region.
Meanwhile, an instructive lesson on Middle East peace- making comes from Europe where tens of thousands of ordinary people are massing on the streets for peace in the region.
Recent reports said that marchers in Brussels called on the EU to play a constructive role in bringing a fair solution to the Middle East problem. The protesters also called for an end to war crimes, attacks on civilians and denounced anti-Semitism or racism.
The latter calls by the marchers are of particular significance. It is important that those sections of the South that are protesting issues in the Middle East currently, take the cue from the Brussels civilians and highlight the illegality and destructive nature of racism and anti-Semitism.
Palestinians should never be discriminated against on account of their ethnic identity or culture but the same goes for the Israelis.
Racism in whatever guise needs to be denounced by the civilized world and no section of the international community that is seeking to play a constructive role in the Middle East could afford to forget this. Ideally, Southern political movements, such as NAM, should be loud in their denunciation of racism in all its forms.
It augurs well for the South that some economic and political heavyweights of Africa are coming to the fore of NAM and allied formations. Some such states are South Africa, Nigeria and Uganda. They could be said to be at the forefront of a re-energized and rejuvenated African continent, which could no longer be described as ‘dark’ or backward. On the contrary, some of the most economically dynamic countries are currently hailing from Africa.
If the key programs of NAM are to be taken to their logical conclusion, the major economic and political powers of Africa would need to forge close links with their counterparts of Asia and Latin America, as often pointed out in this column.
Once such tasks are accomplished, NAM and its allies would need to be in the forefront of historic undertakings, such as bringing a just peace to the Middle East. However, as mentioned, these Southern organizations would need to sustain and bolster their credibility by working towards achieving the best interests of all major parties to the Middle East conflict. Hopefully, all populist tendencies would be shelved by them in the process.
India and those Arab states which are party to the Abraham Accords did right by establishing close diplomatic and economic links with Israel. In the case of India, it was as early as in the early nineties when such ties were fostered.
The above measures were apt and advisable. Currently, the EU is doing likewise by engaging the Palestinians and the Israeli state diplomatically with a view to de-escalating the confrontation in the Middle East.
Treating Israel as an international outcast has proved counterproductive in the sense that such approaches have only strengthened the Israeli resolve to conduct itself in hostile fashion towards those sections of the world community that it sees as antagonistic. Accordingly, considerable soul-searching is expected of the South and such a process could very well begin with NAM.