The consequences of the second Intifada in 2000 are still felt today | Opinion
Twenty years ago, the Second Intifada erupted, dramatically changing the relationship between Israelis and Palestinians. Some in Israel believe that it was a spontaneous event, sparked on Sept. 28, 2000 by the decision of then-Knesset member and later Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to visit Temple Mount. Others, like Gen. Shaul Mofaz, then-chief of staff of the Israeli Defense Forces, claim that Yasser Arafat had planned the Intifada beforehand, waiting for an excuse to launch it.
Blame game aside, it was a long, bloody event that cost the lives of more than 1,000 Israelis and more than 3,000 Palestinians. Unlike the first Intifada (1987-1993), which involved many Palestinian riots in Gaza and the West Bank, the second one wreaked havoc in Israel proper, with individuals carrying out suicide bombings. When, on March 27, 2002, 30 Israelis were killed while celebrating Passover in Netanya, Prime Minister Sharon had had enough and launched Operation Defensive Shield, which broke the back of Palestinian terror. Arafat’s death in 2004 added to the Intifada’s demise.
There were far-reaching consequences for both sides. For the Israelis, the Second Intifada only reinforced their conviction that there was no Palestinian partner for peace, initiated earlier in 2000 at Camp David, where President Bill Clinton and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak presented to Arafat the most generous offers, only to be rejected. So Israelis turned their backs to the Palestinians, and with the construction of the Separation Barrier and the pullout from Gaza in 2005, they could tell themselves that this wasn’t their problem anymore.
For the Palestinians, the Second Intifada brought economic devastation, loss of years of learning at schools and universities, many more family members in Israeli prisons and, above all, the loss of hope. No wonder that Hamas, the militant Islamist group, became ever more popular among Palestinians, convincing them that only by force could they wrest concessions from the Israelis.
Needless to say, nothing of the sort ever happened. Israeli settlements continued to grow, and President Trump’s “Deal of the Century,” followed by the Abraham Accords, signed at the White House recently, only emphasized to the Palestinians how irrelevant they have become. When Khalil Shikaki, director of the Ramallah-based Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR), asked Palestinians three weeks ago to pick a word to characterize the normalization between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, the most prevalent was “betrayal,” followed by “abandonment,” “insult” and “sadness.”
Except that the Palestinians are not going anywhere. They are stuck in Israel’s back yard, constantly reminding the Israelis that between the Jordan River and the Sea there are roughly the same number of Arabs and Jews, and that if Israel doesn’t do something about it, it will eventually become a one, bi-national state. In that case, if there is one-person-one-vote, then Israel loses its Jewish identity. If there isn’t, then Israel loses its democracy.
Being a sworn optimist and always looking for positive signs, I found them indeed in Shikaki’s poll: “74 percent of the Palestinians say they are worried that Israel will stop the transfer of clearance revenues, which would mean that the [Palestinian Authority] would not be able to pay the public sector; 75 percent say they are worried that patients would not be able to travel from the Gaza Strip to the West Bank or Israel for medical treatment; 77 percent are worried that they would soon witness shortages or complete cut-off in supplies of water and electricity from Israel.” And so on.
This is a starting point. While in our God’s little acre here everybody is absorbed in fighting COVID-19, Israel should be wise and signal to the Palestinians that it stands by them in safeguarding their basic needs. Such an attitude, enriched perhaps by a distant promise for future benefits for the Palestinians from the Abraham Accords, might create a basis for the resumption of peace talks.
For at the end of the day, it’s all about hope.
Uri Dromi was the spokesman of the Rabin and Peres governments, 1992-96.
Read more here: https://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/article240843376.html#storylink=cpy
