T Friedman: NATOize the West Bank

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

>Thomas Friedman is nothing if not consistent - he presents here a 
>correct understanding of the nature of NATO interventionism: The 
>creation of imperial annexes.
>
>He also speaks of the "recklessness" of what he calls an "American 
>Jewish Right".  Substitute the incorrect term, "Jewish" for the 
>correct one, "Zionist" (and further correct by stating that the 
>settlements are the essence of Zionism, and are opposed, instead, to 
>the national interests of _Israelis_), and I almost feel like the 
>guy is reading my mind.  I actually felt a twinge of sympathy, if 
>only for his logical consistency, which holds a certain terrible 
>beauty.  The solution, of course, is to be refused.  (Today's 
>theoretical question:  How do we relate this to D & H's proposed 
>practice within Empire?)
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>AUG 24, 2001
>
>A Way Out of the Middle East
>Impasse
>
>By THOMAS FRIEDMAN
>
>The Middle East conflict has gotten so violent and
>depressing, you wonder how the two sides can ever
>find a way out. We need a new idea. I'd like to propose one
>— but first some background.
<snip>
>In short, Oslo was a test that failed, but was aborted before
>it was too late. The settlements are a continuing, long-term
>threat to the entire Zionist enterprise. So what to do?
>Staying in the West Bank and Gaza will slowly destroy
>Israel from within, but just leaving and putting up a wall
>could destroy Israel from without.
>
>The only solution may be for Israel and the U.S. to invite
>NATO to occupy the West Bank and Gaza and set up a
>NATO-run Palestinian state, à la Kosovo and Bosnia. I'm
>serious. Israel can't stay in the West Bank and Gaza and
>remain a Jewish democracy; but it can't unilaterally
>withdraw, put up a wall and leave an uncontrolled
>Palestinian entity there — without creating a permanent
>threat to Israel's existence. Nor, for that matter, can Israel
>trust Mr. Arafat anymore to administer these areas properly.
>What is needed is for Israel to turn these areas over to
>NATO or a NATO- like force. The Palestinians can have
>their state — but no army — under NATO's watchful eye.
>
>It's a long shot, but it addresses the real problem, and a
>future column will explain how it might work.

As Brad M. says, Friedman's consistency does clarify the nature of 
the beast: "How About Sending NATO Somewhere Important?" at 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/04/opinion/04FRIE.html?searchpv=day03>. 
Palestinians and their supporters do well to pay attention to the man.

Yoshie