The American policy towards new road map: approving the ethnic cleansing in Palestine

Arabs find it difficult to understand the wisdom of Bush language (if there is any) by which he agitates Arabs against Arabs, dividing them into a moderate camp and a radical camp, and in agitating Palestinians against Palestinians, Lebanese against Lebanese and Arabs against Iran.

If this has been the living bread of the Zionist state since its plantation the question is what America benefits from agitating Arabs against Arabs and Arabs against Iran? The paradox about all this is that it comes in a period where the USA tries to fix its picture for the Arabs while in reality Bush never save the chance to make it even darker.

This should naturally enforce the question how long Americans would tolerate a policy which not only in their interest but rather damaging them. How long Americans will accept putting the interest of Israel before the interest of their own country, and how long Americans will accept to be played off by pro Zionists?

Bush has no moral authority to ask Palestinians to forget their ancestral home, in the same way that Balfour did in 1917 when he promised Zionist of a state for them in Palestine which resulted in a cycle of violence which yet to finish. Alongside the Belfour language Bush call to obstruct the international justice by demanding from Palestinians to forget their country and by accepting the Zionist settlements which the UN considers as illegal. This policy not only put the USA in defiance with Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims but also in defiance with the international community.

The USA which itself was a colonial project struggled much to free its conscious from past atrocities committed against the Native Americans. Earlier colonists in the new world and Africa made major revises towards recognizing past atrocities committed against the native peoples.

The east European Zionist colonists in Palestine are the exception. Not only did they not recognize past and the current atrocities they committed against native Palestinians, they move towards more extremism, not surprisingly they allied themselves with Bush whose policy has made the USA the less popular country in the world.

It is no wonder that Israelis received him very well, why should they not when they colonize Palestine by the American tax payer money, why should they not when America under Bush goes into wars for the service of Israel. The Zionist state views the American position as an ideal position. Americans financing the Zionist colonial project, American soldiers die for wars that serve only the Zionist colonial project, what else they want more? Yet if this fits Israel the question is does this situation fit the interest of Americans? This question should be answered by the Americans especially to the democrats who seek to have a better picture for their country.

The Arab position has been always clear. Arabs simply have no historical rival towards the United States. The vast majority of Arabs would appreciate a balanced position for the USA. The challenge for the Democratic Party which likely will run the USA after Bush is to choose between a Bushian policy in democratic copy or breaking with Bush policy and look at the region with different angle.


*Dr. Salim Nazzal is a Palestinian-Norwegian historian in the Middle East, who has written extensively on social and political issues in the region. He can be contacted at: [email protected].