|
January 31, 2009
A view not often heard in Australia, where the media generally follow the lead of the US media. Are things changing?
The dominant view is that of the Israel Lobby, which aims to marginalize and isolate Hamas, blocks the formation of a Palestinian state and fights Iran for regional hegemony.
Garland
A more realistic view that tries to find a way forward from the conflict by bringing Hamas in from the cold and beginning to negotiate with them.
An Ha'aretz editorial states that:
Israeli voters must know that the Obama government will be intolerant of construction in the settlements, as well as measures that hurt the Palestinians, such as closures and checkpoints. It will make every effort to bring about a two-state solution. Anyone for whom Israel's relations with the United States is important must vote for parties that support a peace agreement with the Palestinians, out of the recognition that the right-wing parties that support settlement expansion jeopardize Israel's international standing as well as its security, both of which are dependent on American support.
If the time is for some new thinking- (ie breaking from the outdated American strategy of dealing only with Fateh and its leader, Mahmoud Abbas), then it is going to have to deal with the way that the larger settlements now form an well established Jewish presence on Palestinian land. The settlements are there to stay. That is Israel's strategy. It points to a one-state solution.
|
This report, Will the cycle be unbroken by John Lyons in The Australian is different, as it adopts a humanitarian perspective on Gaza.