[WCUSP] NYT editorial on US assistance to Isr-Pal security...

Wed Jul 23 18:59:15 EDT 2008

I have long had problems with commentaries by Anthony Cordesman, as
he is actually a militarist.  Although he has long been looked to as an
advisor on governmental issues, I have found much of his advice to be
rather frightening.  I agree with Carol that there are other viewpoints
about how to solve this situation.  

I receive regular mailings from contacts in Brazil, some of which are
not available here.  A recent one of these indicated that Israel has been
pulling back from Gaza so that they can organize for further attacks.
They have no chance of "winning" there--whatever that means!?--and
they're not used to being in a losing position.  Perhaps the reason
they are not winning is because the Palestinians recognize that Hamas
is a legitimate leader, having won in the elections.  And this would
indicate that Abbas and his government are not the "address" to which
discussions of eventual peace should be addressed.

Barb Taft

--- On Wed, 7/23/08, Carol Urner <carol.disarm at gmail.com> wrote:

From: Carol Urner <carol.disarm at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [WCUSP] NYT editorial on US assistance to Isr-Pal security...
To: "C.J. Minster" <cjminster at gmail.com>
Cc: "Int ME Committee" <middle_east at wilpf.ch>, "National Middle East" <wcusp at wilpf.org>
Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2008, 2:30 PM

Hello C.J. and WCUSP list,

I saw your comment and editorial on the WCUSP list to which I have subscribed almost from its inception.  Just a comment:

I would think the WILPF position could include support for viable police forces in both Israel and Palestine, but not security forces (such as the U.S. seeks to build elsewhere) that could be used in aggressive warfare.  We would also support, I should think, training in the least violent methods of crowd control, etc. and restorative justice such as we support (but haven't achieved yet) in the United States.

Also I would think our position would be that the U.S. military forces should not participate in this training.  The U.S. military has not been operating in the Middle East with a peace keeping or peace building agenda and would certainly be distrusted in Palestine because of previous support for the harsh tactics of the Israeli occupation, and for known abuses arising from special forces and CIA covert actions.  Canada  (and even Britain) would be more trusted because of their own past records in training for peace keeping.

Surely WILPF would support moving Israel as well in the direction of disarmament, including nuclear disarmament under a no WMD treaty as already proposed.  That process must include an end to occupation and will be difficult and complex, but that is the direction in which we must go. Allowing U.S. soldiers to train Palestinian security forces would be a dangerous policy and extricating the U.S. from aggressive military cooperation with Israel is a necessary one.

DIscussion among those on the WCUSP list serve of this article (or other ones shared) and U.S. policies could be fruitful, I think, rather than just posting articles without active inter change of ideas in search of common directions and ways  to proceed.

in peace,
Carol Urner

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 10:38 AM, C.J. Minster <cjminster at gmail.com> wrote:

Does WILPF international, WILPF Palestine, or WILPF Israel have a position on American military personnel involvement, specifically in the use of American (or other international forces) to train Palestinian security forces?

A friend emailed me the following op-ed.

The New York Times
July 22, 2008
Op-Ed Contributor
Help the Palestinians Help Us
By ANTHONY H. CORDESMAN
Washington

HAVING just returned from the Middle East, I find it hard to have much
optimism about peace between Israel and the Palestinians.

Israel sees Hamas's control of Gaza as a situation it cannot do
anything about, a weak and divided Palestinian Authority on the West
Bank, increased arms smuggling and a growing threat from Israeli
Arabs. Palestinians see a steady growth in Israeli settlements and
restrictions, a weak Israeli government and faltering international
assistance. And all sides seem to see Secretary of State Condoleezza
Rice's visits as an end-of-administration effort in résumé building.

There is, however, one potential chance to move forward. It centers on
an American-led mission, based in Jerusalem, that is trying to build
new security forces on the West Bank that will support stabilization
efforts by the Palestinian Authority's president, Mahmoud Abbas,
prevent a Hamas takeover there and end the corruption and abuse of the
older intelligence forces, Yasir Arafat's Mukhabarat.

The importance of this effort cannot be overstated: unless there are
effective Palestinian security forces, Israel will never trust in a
Palestinian state or be able to act on the quiet progress being made
toward reaching a final settlement. And we've had some promising
signs. With assistance from Jordan, Britain and Canada, the Americans
have activated the first battalion of the so-called Presidential
Guard, and it's had some success in bringing order to the refugee camp
at Jenin. There are more battalions to come, and a real possibility
that this aid effort could create effective new security forces.

As became all too clear on my visit to Israel, however, this
American-led effort is being crippled by decisions within the State
Department. The small mission, called the office of the United States
Security Coordinator and under the leadership of Lt. Gen. Keith
Dayton, is effectively locked into a building in Jerusalem. While it's
a military mission, the State Department and the consulate in
Jerusalem are in charge of Palestinian affairs and General Dayton's
advisory teams.

There are several reasons for this — from not wanting the American
government to appear to be favoring any faction in a complicated
situation to good old-fashioned turf wars — but the result is that the
Dayton team has to rely on British and Canadian officials and private
contractors to do its work in the field and develop critical personal
relationships with Palestinian officers and officials. In fact, even
the American military attachés at the embassy are forbidden by the
State Department to go into the West Bank and Gaza to carry out
liaison efforts with Palestinians or develop human intelligence on the
threat of Hamas.

Admittedly, letting the American military take on a greater direct
role raises risks. All of those involved know they will be targets of
violence and may pay with their lives. Many in the Israeli forces and
government fear that any American military presence in the West Bank
would undermine Israel's status there and become, in effect, direct
military support for the Palestinians from Washington. And Mr. Abbas
has failed to abolish the older Palestinian security services like the
Mukhabarat, which specialize in corruption, repression and
incompetence, and will resist the new Palestinian units.

There is, however, no lack of courage among the American military
personnel, and they know they cannot succeed without freedom of
movement, embedding with fledgling Palestinian security units, and
forming personal relations with Mr. Abbas's officers.

It's a shame that at such a pivotal moment in the peace negotiations,
a key barrier to the first real step toward peace — and an effective
war on terrorism in the West Bank and Gaza — is a set of State
Department decisions.

Anthony H. Cordesman is a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic
and International Studies.

-- 
------------
C.J. Minster
Intl Communications Committee Convener
Women's International League for Peace and Freedom
railing against the military industrial complex since WWI
http://www.wilpf.org

~Social Upheaval~
political analysis from a feminist, activist perspective
http://www.socialupheaval.com

~angelheaded hipster~
cotton candy for the brain
http://www.angelheadedhipster.com 
_______________________________________________
Wcusp mailing list
Wcusp at wilpf.org
http://wilpf.org/mailman/listinfo/wcusp_wilpf.org
To post a message to all the list members, send email to Wcusp at wilpf.org.
To unsubscribe send a message to Wcusp-leave at wilpf.org

-- 
in peace, Carol Urner
cell: 503 320 9108 _______________________________________________
Wcusp mailing list
Wcusp at wilpf.org
http://wilpf.org/mailman/listinfo/wcusp_wilpf.org
To post a message to all the list members, send email to Wcusp at wilpf.org.
To unsubscribe send a message to Wcusp-leave at wilpf.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wilpf.org/pipermail/wcusp_wilpf.org/attachments/20080723/18c570cc/attachment-0001.html 