I'm much more interested to read descriptions of the situation from either non-stakeholders, or from the Palestinians themselves. I have no idea if Rubin's assessment is accurate or not, but it sounds reasonable, and I have no idea whether the things he describes are set in stone and that's just how it is, or whether they are theoretically changeable with a little effort. I would imagine changeable.
Assume for the moment that Rubin is accurate. Consider the implications. Do you think the Pals would think that Rubin's description would help the Pal cause if, say, Abu Mazen openly endorsed it? Who among the Palestinians could describe the Rules and not immediately be branded a traitor himself?
As for non-stakeholders, how many have enough of an interest to observe for years? Too many of the what passes for long-term observation is one inch deep and driven by assumptions that are false if Rubin is anywhere near right: assumptions that both sides must be equally to blame for the continuation of the conflict, assumptions that Israel as the more powerful entity is the one that must be blocking progress, assumptions that what the Pals tell western reporters in English is the same thing they tell their own people in Arabic.
For example, Rubin's description of the Taliban-led Afghanistan might have sounded similarly hopeless (all the moderate Afghanis get their heads chopped off, so they don't speak out!), but with some effort the situation there, while not yet stable, seems to have improved from the the Tals were in control. If that can be accomplished in far off mountainous Afghanistan, how set in stone can the right next door Palestinian leadership/rules be?
I don't know how accurate that analogy is, but let's suppose it's accurate. Aren't you missing a certain important event, a very large application of external force in the shape of an American/Nato invasion? Talk about your forcible rule reset!
If such an invasion were on the cards in the Israeli/Pal conflict, the Pals might find themselves with a different set of rules being violently imposed on them. But Rubin is talking about the current situation where Israel is constrained/doesn't want to try such a scenario. Things could change, if (heaven forbid) Hamas or Al Qaeda had a real lucky day in Tel Aviv. But not without that. |
