Why the new round of Middle East Peace Talks cannot succeed?

In the year1972, Richard Nixon’s visit to Chairman Mao was the defining event of the Cold War which led to China’s entry into Security Council and made it one of the key players of global politics. It was also under his administration that U.S.-Soviet relationship was able to adopt the policy of détente. But this was no sign of softness towards communism; rather, it was a manifestation that the task of reestablishing normal diplomatic relationships with the enemy always falls to its lifelong basher, in this case Nixon – whose anti communist credentials no one could question.

The latest episode in the Middle East peace talks is a display of the same principle; you can handicap a weak rival temporarily, but you can never wriggle your motive out of him. Resumption of peace talks in the absence of Israel’s willingness to make any concessions to a politically weak Palestinian govt. (which by the way is known to be pro Israel) will only aggravate the situation for the ruling Fatah group. Israel’s insistence on the continuing construction of Jewish settlements in the West Bank has helped paint Hamas as the only hope of the Palestinians in their struggle for survival. Every time Israel coerces the Fatah govt. into a compromise, it strengthens the hands of the very group it has worked so hard to declare as terrorists.

It is not rocket science to suggest that no solution to the Palestinian issue can materialize into reality unless the hardliners such as Hamas are taken on board. When Palestinian homes are bulldozed in West Bank, Hamas jumps on the opportunity by championing the cause of homeless while the Fatah moderates stand aside like silent spectators. If Israel wants to demonstrate the seriousness of its efforts, it should at least “pretend” to talk to those who are perceived as its real enemy, not to those who are seen as its accomplice in oppression.