Thursday, October 20, 2005

Dennis Ross and a Spin on the PLO-as-ANC Meme

In this morning's Times Dennis Ross, President Clinton's former envoy to the Middle East has a useful op-ed piece addressing the incomparably stupid Palestinians-as-ANC argument of which so many simpletons seem enamored. My favorite excerpt:


Why raise the South African comparison today? Because Palestinians respect the South African model but are not learning from it. For all of Arafat's comparisons to the African National Congress, it did not have an ideology of violence: although the congress attacked the military and economic underpinnings of apartheid, it forswore attacks on civilians and generally expelled those members who violated that policy.


In contrast, no Palestine Liberation Organization member has ever been drummed out for violence against Israelis. As the price of joining the Oslo process, Arafat renounced terrorism, but he never delegitimized it; he never called those who carried out terrorist acts against Israeli enemies of the Palestinian cause.



But more than just identifying a problem, Ross provides some direction for the Palesinians, and it seems like sage advice, albeit of such broad foundation as to be of limited applicability. Rather than just make a false analogy (the photonegative of PLO-as-ANC is of course Israel-as-Apartheid South Africa), Ross argues, why not instead look at the emulated situation -- the ANC's struggle against the apartheid state -- and try to draw something constructive from the example?:


I know from my conversations with members of South Africa's government in Pretoria this summer that they are interested in playing a role - an interest that they have signaled in several venues, including meetings with Palestinian and Israeli officials. Now is perhaps the time for a visit to Ramallah by Thabo Mbeki, South Africa's president, to share his country's experience and its lessons for the Palestinians.


No one can question whether South Africans struggled. No one can doubt the moral authority of their words. And no one can more forcefully offer a successful and nonviolent pathway to national liberation and a government of basic decency.


While it all seems obvious, this is a useful twist to the argument. More than that, however, it also gives an indication of South Africa's potential global role. African nations do not always have to be the recipients of foreign policy. South Africa is in a good position actually to conduct a constructive foreign program. Why assume that it must be limited to Africa? Of course some within South Africa will have to drop their almost knee-jerk antipathy to Israel, but there is no reason why South Africa should not be able to provide a model and mentor for the Palestinians without falling into the sinkhole of anti-Israel, anti-Zionist, or anti-Semitic drivel.


(And as long as we are dealing with Africa, the Times also has an editorial today about Mugabe. There is little substantively new here, but we still need to be reminded every so often.)

1 comment:

Mark said...

Just the same as the Israeli "apartheid state" doesn't work as an analogy. Honest Reporting has a comparison of Israel and apartheid-South Africa. While some of the points may be stretches, the fourth on "Opposition to Nation" is the most important. It's also the one that shatters the ANC-PLO analogy.