The latest killing of more than 60 Palestinians and injuries to more than 2,000 has prompted an international outcry against the brutal use of live munitions to target civilians.  

The violence coincided with the controversial step of moving the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Israel has squarely blamed Hamas for the bloodshed, while the U.S. has defended its ally by saying that Israel has a right to protect itself. 

Yet how can anybody agree with these justifications? A crowd of stone-throwing youth cannot pose any lethal threat to the state of Israel. Hence, the killings equate to a gross human rights violation against the Palestinians, and are not acceptable to the rest of the world.

Even the myth of "clashes" between Palestinians and Israeli forces is not to be believed. Where are the clashes? We see men in jeans plummeting to the ground from deadly bullets fired from a distance by the Israeli army. There is no physical contact between the army and the protestors. 

The place where the Gazan have often gathered to demonstrate against the occupation of their land is separated by a buffer zone. On the other side of that safe zone, Israeli tanks and snipers are perched in position to take on the protestors. 

There are no clashes. There are slogans and slingshots from one side, and tear gas shells and bullets from the other side. The people at the receiving end are not criminals but simply people who are demanding an independent, viable and contiguous state to exist side-by-side with Israel. 

At the highest level, the Palestinians already accepted in 1993 the right of the Jewish people to have a state with pre-1967 war borders. The same was endorsed by the international community and the UN. 

Hamas cannot reverse the decision of Palestinian people to have their own state in return for their acceptance of a Jewish state. After decades of fighting and protests, the Palestinians and their leaders came to the conclusion that the two-state solution was the only wise option in the given circumstances. 

So who or what is the hurdle to realizing the two-state solution?

Most Israeli men and women and their leaders have also accepted the idea, and will take it whenever the option is offered to them. But more hard-line Israelis and leaders like Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu want an Israel from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean, in return for a nominal and sub-divided Palestine.

Such a state of Palestine would not be able to exercise even the most fundamental functions without Israel's support and patronage. It is better to have no country than to have a truncated one that would be anything but an independent state.

To say that the Palestinians are a "hurdle to peace" is another myth -- and a highly misleading one. How can a dispossessed, divided, powerless and stateless people be a hurdle? They would be more than happy if meaningful talks were organized, and they could achieve what the international community has already promised them.

It is not easy to keep protesting for more than 70 years. It is not easy to let your teenage sons and daughter take on an army which has the license to shoot at will. Ask the mothers and fathers who have taken the dead bodies of their loved ones to their graves. 

The international community should ask Israel to hold negotiations and implement the UN resolutions on the two-state solution. The state of Israel should be held accountable for the delay and for the deadly violence. 

Donald Trump should be questioned over condoning crimes against civilians, especially because it was the untimely shifting of the embassy that promoted the latest violence. The move has changed nothing except taking away the last fig leaf that an American leader could have used to pose as a peace broker in the region.

The new situation demands that countries like China and Russia, and entities like the EU, come forward to calm the unrest and play an active role in bringing about a lasting solution to this long-standing problem.

Sajjad Malik is a columnist with China.org.cn. For more information please visit:

http://www.china.org.cn/opinion/SajjadMalik.htm

Opinion articles reflect the views of their authors, not necessarily those of China.org.cn.

Related

Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)