The British government is desperate. And, as desperate people often do, it seems to be losing its common sense and leaving behind its dignity as well.
When it became clear that war was inevitable in Iraq, the British prime minister, Tony Blair, and his foreign secretary, Jack Straw, began issuing statements designed to placate Arab opinion. They argued that, once the war was over, they would pursue the Palestinian-Israeli Road Map with vigour, in earnest.
They did not attempt to conceal their real aim. Tony Blair said it more than once: Britain was trying to be even-handed.
Nobody asked him a simple question: Even-handed between which parties?
Never mind.
Even a staunch supporter of Israel could have understood why, in the light of Britain’s role in the war, the British government deemed it necessary to demonstrate to Arab public opinion, as well as to some European opinion-makers, that it was not oblivious to Arab concerns in the Middle East.
It seemed as though this was a rhetorical device – sincere though it may have been – aimed at moderating opposition to Britain’s participation in the war.
But then, Blair and Straw went even further. They thought they had to show the Arab world that they meant what they said. They were not being cynical about it, they contended. And to demonstrate it, they simply went overboard.
To begin with, the British prime minister declared that in view of all of his conversations with “the American president, he believes, rightly, that this [the Israeli-Palestinian conflict] is a vital issue to resolve, because it is, probably more than anything else, the issue that keeps the Arab-Muslim world on one hand, and the Western world on the other, apart.”
And then came his foreign secretary who told the BBC World Service that he understood Arab concern about what he described as “injustice against the Palestinians.”
“There is a real concern too that the West has been guilty of double standards – on the one hand saying the United Nations Security Council resolutions on Iraq must be implemented; on the other hand, sometimes appearing rather quixotic over the implementation of resolutions about Israel and Palestine.”
Asked if he would plead guilty to double standards, Straw said: “To a degree yes … and we’re going to deal with it.”
One would expect a serious country like Britain to argue its case more cogently and truthfully. The ignorance displayed by both Blair and Straw, as well as the cynicism entailed in the blunt attempt at currying favor with the Arabs, are a sign of desperation more than anything else.
Israel and the conflict with the Palestinians is what keeps the Arab-Muslim world apart from the Western world?
One ought merely to recount a few contemporary historical events to prove the falsehood of this facile argument.
Are the United States and Britain fighting Iraq because of Israel? If Israel did not exist, would Arab opinion be more favorable to this war? Has the Iranian revolution caused a split with the United States and Britain due to Israel? Is Osama bin Laden a product of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or the result of United States presence in Saudi Arabia and a pathological hatred of the United States and what it represents?
True, some leaders in the Mulsim-Arab world refer to Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as an excuse and a means to incite public opinion. But such crude attempts should not be taken at face value. One should not confuse excuse with motive.
The statement made by Straw on the BBC is a travesty of the truth. There is an implied comparison between Iraq and Israel which is mind-boggling. His reference to Security Council resolutions is merely a feeble exercise, so much in vogue, at drawing incorrect and distorted comparisons between the Iraqi and Israeli cases.
The resolutions that apply to Iraq are binding and unilateral in nature. Iraq has to abide by them wihout conditions. Resolutions 242 and 338, which apply to the Arab-Israeli dispute, call on all sides concerned to implement them; there is no unilateral call on Israel to do anything except in the context of a quid pro quo on the part of the Arabs. Israel has fully implemented that resolution in its peace agreements with Egypt, Jordan and by withdrawing from all Palestinian towns in the West Bank and Gaza, as a result of the Oslo Accords.
Indeed, it was the Palestinian side that, by launching an unprecedented campaign of terror against Israeli civilians, has violated U.N. resolutions.
The question should be posed the other way around.
The resolutions concerned call on the Arab side to recognize Israel and live in peace with it. Why has not the British government called on the Arabs to fully implement them? Why have not the Palestinians been castigated for ignoring U.N. resolutions?
Britain may win the war, but its government has already lost its dignity.
Dr. Yoav J. Tenembaum is a journalist and political analyst based in Israel. He has been published in a variety of newspapers and holds a doctorate degree in Modern History from Oxford University, where his doctoral thesis was on the international relations of the Middle East. Additionally he holds a masters degree in International Relations from Cambridge University and obtained his first degree in History at Tel Aviv University.
