3 Middle East Myths That, Though Exposed, Refuse To Die

Mohammad Bouazizi didn’t set himself on fire in December, thereby triggering Tunisia’s Jasmine Revolution, to express solidarity with Palestinians. Instead, his suicide was a direct response to the economic and social strictures in his own country…..The conventional wisdom that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is the mother of all problems in the region has now been exposed as nothing but a myth.
Emanuele Ottolenghi, The Great Myth of Palestinian Statehood

Of course, it is one thing to expose a myth; it is another matter altogether for people to finally recognize the myth for what it is and let it go--we're still working on that last part.

It is that much more difficult to abandon myths these days, considering the fact that a number of cherished beliefs about the Middle East have in fact been proven false. David Harris of the American Jewish Committee, writes that in fact there are 3 myths about the Middle East that have been disproved.


Myth 1: Linkage between Iran and Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking
But WikiLeaks took care of that:

Lo and behold, the cables revealed that from Saudi Arabia to Bahrain, from the United Arab Emirates to Egypt, Arab leaders were imploring the United States to stiffen its spine and confront the Iranians. Linkage to the Palestinian question? Not even close. No mention whatsoever.

To the contrary, several Arab countries have looked to Israel, with or without a peace agreement, as a stealth ally in the face-off with Iran.

Myth 2: Peace talks would end because of Israel's building within settlements
This time, it was PaliLeaks that knocked this myth out of the water:

The documents showed there was indeed tacit agreement on certain land swaps, including, yes, Jewish areas of eastern Jerusalem. The papers showed that the gap between the two sides was less than imagined, but, sadly, the uproar over the leaked documents proved that the Palestinian Authority has failed even to attempt to prepare its population for the concessions needed for an end of conflict and lasting peace.

Myth 3: As Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan likes to insist--the root of all of the problems in the Middle East are a result of Israel’s intransigence.
You don't need leaks to disprove this one; just read the papers:

To accept the Turkish leader’s premise means throwing truth to the wind. Even a cursory study of the Arab world reveals deep-rooted problems having nothing to do with Israel and everything to do with political, economic, and social stasis. But that would have spoiled the appealing narrative.

...The streets of Tunisia, Egypt, and Yemen filled with crowds rising up against domestic repression, the absence of opportunity, and the culture of cronyism and corruption.

None of this is going to stop the the West from continuing to insist that one way or another the Middle East peace process is key. Here is an excerpt of a statement British Prime Minister David Cameron made to the House of Commons on Monday:

While it is not for us to dictate how each country should meet the aspirations of its people, we must not remain silent in our belief that freedom and the rule of law are what best guarantee human progress and economic success. Freedom of expression, a free press, freedom of assembly, the right to demonstrate peacefully: these are basic rights. And they are as much the rights of people in Tahrir Square as Trafalgar Square. They are not British or western values – but the values of human beings everywhere.

...We should be clear too that now is not the time to park the Middle East peace process – quite the opposite. This is a problem that is long overdue for resolution, and we should use developments in the region to drive forward progress, not hold it up.

In short, reform, not repression, is the way to lasting stability. No one pretends that democracy and open societies can be built overnight.

...What is happening in the wider Middle East is one of those once in a generation opportunities, a moment when history turns a page. That next page is not yet written. It falls to all of us to seize this chance to fashion a better future for this region, to build a better relationship between our peoples, to make a new start.

Which "developments in the region" does the British Prime Minister intend to use?
Is Great Britain going to insist that reforms and elections be carried out in the West Bank?
Will Great Britain insist on Hamas abandoning terrorism, releasing Gilad Shalit and providing basic freedoms to Gazans?
Or does Mr. Cameron have in mind focusing instead on Israel to once again make unilateral concessions.

According to Mr. Cameron, democracy and open societies cannot be built overnight.
Does he think that creating states is any easier?

Maybe.

Michael Horesh warns that contrary to Cameron's suggested caution, Great Britain is looking to take shortcuts in the Middle East:

According to a report in the Israeli newspaper, Yediot, the British Foreign Minister is considering recognising the state of Palestine, even if this is in direct contradiction to the commitment of both parties not to take unilateral one-sided measures.

Old habits die hard--and established myths are even harder to kill.

Hat tip: DF

Technorati Tag: Mideast Peace.