Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema

Responding to Haifa and Jerusalem suicide blasts the Israeli launched a massive attack on various targets in Palestinian killing many innocent civilians and destroying buildings. The Israelis attacked the Palestinian controlled areas with American built F-16 and Apache helicopters. The massive Israeli attacks on the civilian population have not deterred the Palestinian extremists who then ambushed an Israeli bus outside a Jewish settlement. It is not surprising that the Israelis, once again, responded disproportionately. Any yardstick would indeed consider the latest response of the Israelis as massive. The Israelis are always looking for opportunity to undertake punitive measures against the Palestinians. Such an attitude does not augur well for peaceful settlement if at all the intentions are directed towards securing a lasting peace.

The recent Israeli attack on Palestinian targets was perhaps fiercest air attack during the last 18 months of ongoing uneven contest between the stone throwing Palestinian kids and trained Israelis soldiers. Once again this time both the warplanes and attack helicopters were employed in order to undertake punish those responsible for the bomb blasts in various Israeli areas. Missiles were even fired at Yasir Arafat's west Bank offices as well as in Gaza killing many bystanders and injuring dozens of Palestinians. Many school children were badly wounded. Parents were desperately running in the streets looking for their children as the Israeli jets roared overhead.

Resort to the use of Apache gunship and sophisticated warplanes in order to send warnings to the Palestinian extremists in unlikely to pay the desired dividends. The ultimate objective of the Israelis is peace-or at least their leaders often proclaim this. Periodic wild killing sprees are unlikely to influence Palestinian to cooperate and respond in accordance with the dictates of Israeli wishes. On the contrary the Israeli punitive actions are contributing towards the undesired increase in the Palestinian extremists.

Unlike during the previous intifada, the position of the Israelis soldiers is relatively weaker in the current intifada, which is commonly referred as 'Aqsa Intifada'. During the first intifada the Palestinian had no home territory but this time they do have an area, which is supposed to be under the Palestinian authority. Besides Palestinians have also access to their own radio, television and press, which makes it easier for them to effectively, convey their point of view.

While the Israeli blame Ararfat for not taking effective measures to control the activities of extremists like Hamas, they do not realize that stronger and massive violent responses are likely to invoke more sympathetic responses for the extremists. The Palestinians whose children have died or wounded because of Israeli firings are prone to be more supportive of tactics like suicide bombings. However the Israelis argue that massive response are meant to convey the message that all such acts carry price and each time the price will increase. It seems that the Israeli don't believe in the age-old maxim that violence begets violence.

Reports indicate that this time Washington did not bother to give even its ceremonial cautionary statement for restraint on both sides. If this was a green light to the Israelis to undertake whatever measures they deem fit for responding to suicide bombing, then it is not a very wise approach. The wild nature of Israelis is too well known to be given a free hand. Israelis rarely care for any humanitarian value. The very election of Sharon, a known butcher of Sabra and Shatila camps, is reflective of their increasingly negative mood. Apart from the Americans the Israeli hardly listen to anyone. In fact they even disregard the American advice at times. In response to American restraint efforts, Sharon did not hesitate to taunt the Americans that Israel is not Czechoslovakia.

The Americans have recently banned a Texas based organization called Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Rehabilitation on the alleged grounds that it had collected $13 millions last year, which were used to finance Hamas activities. This move was made almost immediately after the suicide bombings in Haifa and Jerusalem reflecting the new hardening of Washington's attitude towards the Palestinian. While it is not too difficult to understand the American concerted efforts in their fight against terrorism and the banning of many suspected terrorist organizations could be viewed as part of their overall strategy, allowing Israelis totally free hand to indulge in killing spree is also not a stabilizing pursuit. At the least some sort of cautionary statement should have been issued especially when it is well known that the Israelis could still disregard their wise council.

Reports also generating the impression that both the US and the Israelis are somewhat fed up with Ararfat approach as well as his inability to handle the situation. The Israelis argue that Arafat is not undertaking enough strong measures to check the activities of the extremists. But what needs to be realized is that the Israeli punitive actions are making it extremely difficult for Arafat to check the extremists. To check the suicide bombings Arafat had launched a crack down on the extremists and arrested more than hundred activists. In addition, the Palestinian authority has now ordered the closure of all Hamas and Islamic Jihad offices. Yet the Israelis are continuing to blame Arafat for the increased Palestinian reactive attacks.

One should not overlook the fact that Arafat is handicapped in many ways yet he had done and continues to do whatever he could do under the operative conditions. Arafat's dilemma is how to control the extremists and not annoy the Palestinians. With each round of Israelis attacks, the sympathy level for the hardliners and extremists begin to rise rather rapidly. The more the intensity of raiding Israeli warplanes and attack helicopters more sympathy is aroused for violent reactions among the Palestinians. The massive Israeli response that followed the assassination of Israeli cabinet minister was condemned by almost everyone including by those who harbored sympathies for the Israelis.

The American disillusionment with Arafat seem to stem from their over expectations of dividends from him. The successive American administrations have pinned their hopes on Arafat to keep the peace process going. They seem to feel somewhat disappointed with Arafat's performance especially after Colin Powell's speech last month in which he had for the first time clearly expressed the Bush administrations opposition to Israeli occupation of Arab territories. Many saw this statement as a clear support gesture for the Palestinians position. The advent of latest round of suicide bombing came at such a time when the tolerance level was relatively down. Inability to check the violence in the Middle East seemed to have generated frustrations within some sections of the American administrations.

Cognizant of deep American involvement in their fight against terrorism, the Israelis are cleverly grinding their own axe and intensified their killing spree. Under the pretext of fight against terrorism they seem to be deeply engaged in linking Palestinians genuine freedom struggle to terrorism. It is indeed a matter of great satisfaction that for the first time the OIC in its extra-ordinary meeting of Foreign Ministers, which was held on 9th December 2001 at Doha categorically, rejected any link between the freedom struggle and terrorism.

Perhaps the best out of the vicious circle of violence is to reinvigorate the peace process. The UN general Assembly has recently adopted a resolution reflecting self-determination for the Palestinian and withdrawal of Israel from the Golan Heights and to end the small number of embassies in Al Quds. The resolution also called all concerned to 'ensure a successful and speedy resumption of negotiations and conclusion of the Middle East peace process. It was also stressed in the resolution that the Mitchell Committee's report be implemented.

The onus for the cycle of violence in the Middle East is the product of periodic use of military means. Efforts should be directed towards the elimination of military means and emphasis should be placed upon negotiations. Only few countries have influence and means to put the derailed peace process back on the right track and one such country that can make enormous contributions is the US. Being the sole super power it is indeed the responsibility of the US to make balanced efforts to secure effective reduction in violence and re-starting the negotiation process.