Israeli scholar Dr. David Mendelsson, right, and Adath Israel’s Rabbi Daniel Grossman during a Jan. 29 program at the synagogue.
February 05, 2008
The most imposing obstacle to breakthrough in the Middle East peace process may have nothing to do with settlements, the status of refugees, or even borders.
More important, according to Israeli scholar Dr. David Mendelsson, are the problems George Bush, Ehud Olmert, and Mahmoud Abbas are encountering within their own constituencies.
Speaking in Lawrenceville — at an “Israel@60” event sponsored by United Jewish Federation of Princeton Mercer Bucks — Mendelsson said it will be exceedingly difficult for President George Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to implement a long-term strategy in the Middle East during the eighth and final year of the Bush presidency.
“President Bush,” said Mendelsson, head of Israel Studies at Hebrew Union College in Jerusalem, “is on the way out.”
Others may be on the way out as well. In the wake of the pointed criticism in a just-released report, Olmert’s government could be in danger of collapsing, Mendelsson said. The government-sanctioned probe, chaired by Eliyahu Winograd, charged that Israel’s 2006 war against Hizbullah in Lebanon was a “large and serious” failure.
Meanwhile, Palestinian Authority President Abbas has no control over Gaza, Mendelsson said, bringing into question his ability to implement any agreements that might be reached. “The fact is, many Israelis believe that there is no viable Palestinian partner with whom to negotiate.”
Mendelsson offered his view on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict during a Jan. 29 lecture at Adath Israel Congregation in Lawrenceville. The evening was a reunion of sorts for many of those in attendance; Mendelsson spoke to a group from Adath Israel during a synagogue-sponsored trip to Israel in 2006.
“My sense is that there will not be what might be termed ‘dramatic developments’ in the coming year,” said Mendelsson, a native of London who made aliya in 1980. “A more realistic scenario is that at least the process can be moved forward.”
Mendelsson warned against unilateral moves in the absence of a formal accord.
“In 2005, unilateral withdrawal from Gaza was an idea that was popular with the majority of the Israeli population,” he said. “But look what happened. Hamas is now in control of Gaza. Today, the majority of Israelis might prefer to make agreements instead of proceeding unilaterally.”
Many Israelis, Mendelsson said, feel that if Israel wants to make peace, they must make a commitment to Palestinian sovereignty. Others, convinced that the Palestinians’ goal is ultimately to dismantle Israel, are vehemently opposed to the notion of partition.
“It seems to be clear that it’s not just a question of solving a conflict. It’s about values; it’s about your view of what Israel represents."
Mendelsson dismissed calls for a “single-state solution,” in which Jews and Palestinians share power.
“All the trappings of a Jewish state — such as the Law of Return, ‘Hatikva,’ the special relationship with the Diaspora — would disappear,” he said. “Issues such as language, culture, and religion will be quite difficult to overcome. My impression is that such a solution would prove to be an injustice for both sides.”
He quickly added that there is no shortage of issues to consider in a two-state solution: among them territorial boundaries, the notion of moving an estimated 80,000 Jews from the territories, and the fact that the overwhelming majority of Israeli Arabs consider Israel to be their home and do not want to be part of a state governed by the Palestinian Authority.
“These are tremendously complicated issues,” Mendelsson said.
Probably too complicated, in fact, to settle in 2008.