Thomas Friedman, "Power With Purpose": First, Let's Get the Facts Right

Would-be Middle East expert, Thomas Friedman, has written another New York Times op-ed, "Power With Purpose" (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/23/opinion/friedman-power-with-purpose.html), explaining what Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu should do, with his expanded parliamentary coalition, to achieve peace. Friedman begins:

"Political power is always a double-edged sword. The more of it you amass, the more people expect you to use it to do big things, and, when you don’t, the more ineffectual you look."

This axiom would appear more applicable to Obama, particularly during his first two years as President, when the Democrats controlled the House and Senate, but instead, Friedman uses it to make demands of Netanyahu. More specifically, Friedman would have Netanyahu act in accordance with a notion termed "constructive unilateralism," which was advanced by Ami Ayalon and two colleagues in a guest April 24 opinion piece published by the Times (see: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/24/opinion/peace-without-partners.html). But let's start by looking at where Friedman is obfuscating the facts:

• First and foremost, Friedman nowhere mentions that Netanyahu has long since declared that he is in favor of a two-state solution (see: http://www.voanews.com/content/a-13-2009-07-05-voa12-68819962/413401.html).

• Notably, also no mention by Friedman of Israeli Prime Minister Sharon's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, which brought a hail storm of rockets and mortar shells upon southern Israel.

• Not a word from Friedman about Israeli Prime Minister Olmert's proposal to evacuate the West Bank and share Jerusalem with the Palestinians, a generous peace offer which was refused by Palestinian President Abbas.

• Friedman tells us: "Israel’s security wall keeps Palestinian suicide bombers out." In fact, Israel's 470-mile security barrier around the West Bank is more than 90% fence, and less than 10% wall. The walls exist where there is a need to prevent sniping at Israelis. The reference to the barrier as a "wall" is usually made by those who are implacably hostile to Israel and intent upon fostering the image of apartheid.

• Regarding "constructive unilateralism," the Ayalon opinion piece also makes provision for settlers to relocate "to adjacent settlement blocs that would likely become part of Israel in any land-swap agreement." Friedman ignores this point.

About the "constructive unilateralism" proposal, Friedman writes:

"Such an initiative would radically change Israel’s image in the world, dramatically increase Palestinian incentives to negotiate and create a pathway for securing Israel as a Jewish democracy. And Bibi could initiate it tomorrow."

Would such an initiative "radically change Israel’s image in the world"? Neither Sharon's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza nor Olmert's peace proposal changed Israel's image in the world. In recent related news, the International Olympic Committee is refusing to observe a moment of silence during this summer's London games to honor the memory of the Israeli athletes who were murdered during the 1972 Olympics in Munich (see: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/18/sports/olympics/ioc-rejects-israeli-request-for-moment-of-silence-at-london-games.html). In short, no matter what Israel does, it will not gain the world's affection.

Constructive unilaterilism will "dramatically increase Palestinian incentives to negotiate"? Rubbish. If the Palestinians could not bring themselves to accept the Olmert peace proposal, there is no reason to believe that Ayalon's proposal, which does not go nearly as far as that of Olmert, will suddenly facilitate Palestinian acceptance of Israel as a Jewish state.

Do I oppose Ayalon's constructive unilateralism? Given that I believe in a two-state solution, I believe that it makes much sense, but as noted in the opinion piece written by Ayalon, Petruschka and Sher, "We recognize that a comprehensive peace agreement is unattainable right now."

There are no simple, overnight solutions. Moreover, even if Israel undertakes constructive unilateralism, the world will not forgo its addiction to anti-Semitism.