Hypocrisy and Israel

Earlier this month I wrote that Benjamin Netanyahu’s resumption of the war of genocide in Gaza was never a matter of “if”, but “when.” The early morning massacres of over 1000 injured or murdered civilians on March 18 and 19 was described as an Israeli “tactic to force” the Palestinian Resistance to renegotiate the terms of the existing ceasefire agreement.

Throughout modern history, treaties and agreements have served as the foundation of international diplomacy, establishing a framework of mutual commitments. However, Israel has uniquely positioned itself as the only nation that consistently renegotiates agreements — often unilaterally — while blaming the other party for refusing to accept its ever-changing terms.

Israel’s approach has been marked by a predictable strategy: secure an agreement, later insist on altering its terms, and then accuse the Palestinians of obstruction when they refuse to comply with the revised conditions. This tactic has been a recurring feature in nearly every accord brokered by the US between Israel and other parties.

Take, for example, the 1993 Oslo Accords, which were meant to establish a framework for a two-state solution, with Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) recognizing each other. However, Israel has since unilaterally altered its commitments — expanding illegal Jewish-only colonies and imposing restrictions that undermine the agreement’s original intent. For over 30 years since Oslo, successive Israeli governments have repeatedly insisted on re-negotiating previously agreed-upon issues after every election. When Palestinian leaders refuse to concede, they are labeled as obstacles to peace, perpetuating an endless cycle of negotiations with no end in sight.

In fact, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir openly admitted this strategy in a 1992 interview, stating that he would stall negotiations while expanding Jewish-only colonies on Palestinian land, creating irreversible facts on the ground, and ultimately altering the demographics of the West Bank.

The same when American President George W Bush proposed a so-called Roadmap to Peace in 2003, adopted by the United States, United Nations, European Union, Russia and was accepted by the Palestinian Authority. The plan outlined a phased approach to ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Yet, Israel imposed new preconditions demanding Palestinians to recognize Israel, yet again, but now as a Jewish state. When Palestinians objected to the new Israeli demands, they were blamed for the lack of progress on the Roadmap.

Most recently, Israel did the same in Lebanon when refusing to withdraw fully within the stipulated 60 days under the US- and French-mediated agreement. Ditto when it violated existing agreements with Syria in the north.

The Israeli strategy extends beyond merely altering agreements — it is a calculated effort left unchallenged by Western Media and governments — to shift blame onto the Palestinians and other negotiating parties. This diplomatic gaslighting serves two primary functions: justifying Israeli breaches of agreements and delegitimizing the opposing side’s grievances.

Israel’s ability to repeatedly violate agreements while deflecting blame is largely enabled by unconditional US support and a complacent international community. As a result, Israel pursues its objectives with little regard for consequences.

Excerpted: ‘Trump’s Hypocrisy: Peacemaker in Ukraine, Genocide Enabler in Gaza’.

Courtesy: Counterpunch.org