Being neighbourly in the post-Mubarak Mid East

The current Netanyahu government is a firm believer in this doctrine. It does not fear that Islamists would assume political control of neighbouring Arab states, but rather that the status quo will change, and Israel will be forced to change the way she deals with the Palestinians and the Arab states.

The ‘Pali-leaks’ documents have severely discredited the Palestinian Authority and scuttled the existing Palestinian negotiation team. Saeb Erekat, the chief negotiator has resigned and the cabinet in the West Bank has been dissolved in preparation for elections in September 2011. Moreover, HAMAS’ role in negotiations is still unclear. At present, this uncertain state of affairs has resulted in a stalemate in negotiations between the Palestinians and the Israelis, which bodes well for those resistant to change in Israel.

International pressure to compel a change in Israeli mindset has already begun with several Latin American countries recognising a Palestinian state, which does not yet exist. The EU has recently urged Israel to take the lead in overcoming the negotiation stalemate with fresh and innovative proposals. The EU could well move unilaterally if it finds progress on this front severely wanting. Thus, it is clear that the international community expects Israel to take meaningful steps to resolve the longstanding conflict with the Palestinians and with her Arab neighbours.

To those who ask why it is always Israel that must make concessions, the answer is simple: Israel is no longer the underdog but the big dog in the yard, and as a major world power, is expected to act accordingly. As the “only democracy in the Middle East”, Israel should spearhead the campaign for a just and lasting peace in the region.

The Israeli-Palestinian and Israeli-Arab conflicts have lasted long enough. There are no prizes if these conflicts reach a centenary.