Independent Palestine – End to Israeli Occupation and Jewish Settlements

October 25, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The Israeli-Palestinian peace process had tremendous potential for development and the recent impasse is primarily due to the lack of political will in leading the authorities to the desirable outcome.

Although the moratorium expiry on settlement expansion has contributed to the friction with the building permit issued for an estimated 534 homes in the Palestinian territory – West Bank, the United States less enthusiastic efforts to dissuade the controversial incursion predominantly derailed the progress.

Lately, the legitimate questions were raised through the panel on Israeli-Palestinian peace process:


Sara Roy, Senior Research Scholar – Harvard Center for Middle Eastern Studies – Thank you.

In the continued absence of a political resolution to the conflict,

1. Why must occupation be the default position?

Response – Occupation will no longer be the default position. The Israeli authorities are being misguided by the real forces behind the Middle-Eastern quagmire.

As long as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains unresolved the profiteering from the prolific arms trade continues debilitating the peace prospects and thereby exacerbating the Palestinian plight.

However, this situation will change in semblance to the historical facts that all illegal occupations and invasions eventually cease contrary to the false assumptions.

Moreover, the Palestinian and other oppressed states freedom are a top priority among the inevitable Change in the immediate future.

2. Why must Gaza be pauperized and the West Bank cantonized?

Response: Again, there is absolutely no reason for the status quo. If the strongest ally United States could influence Israel in every U.N vote on minor to major international issues,

It is incomprehensible that U.S. is unable to achieve similar consent from Israel on the settlements, territorial disputes, economic embargo on Gaza, East Jerusalem and West Bank militarization.

Israel is misled by the factions not necessarily pledged to its sovereignty or peace in the region. The coalition with the orthodox groups relying on self-determined course in promoting unlawful settlements are yet another impediment in the Israeli – Palestinian peace agreement.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appeared hopeful at the last month’s preliminary peace talks and even disassociated from the Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman’s views delivered at the U.N. General Assembly in September 2010.

Therefore, the subsequent setback conspicuously leads to the internal and external political pressure on Israeli leadership to procrastinate until the Palestinian conditions deteriorate to the point of no return forcing the beleaguered Palestinian residents in Gaza and other occupied territories to become the Israeli subjects on Palestinian homeland.

Imperialism in the twenty first century is a far-fetched aspiration for a democratic nation unnecessarily projecting the provocateur image to the international community.

Further, the provocation generates the requirement to stockpile weaponry not excluding nuclear arsenal pervading across the globe.

It would be fair to point out that Israeli leadership might not be overtly pursuing the agenda but the current occupation confirms the reality much to the global disappointment.

Israel must realize that with the rocket firing cessation and relatively isolated violence from Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem construction and series of human rights violation through unilateral economic sanctions against Gaza combined with the military deployment in the Palestinian territories are counterproductive placing the democratic nation in spotlight as the belligerent authority.

As a result, Israel is isolated from the rest of the world and made vulnerable with United States and the remnant Western nations as the few allies for normal relationship.

Additionally, the U.S. threat not ruling out the nuclear options against Israel’s adversary undermines the sovereignty and capability to defend itself despite Israel’s nuclear empowerment.

Israel is a free nation but has not demonstrated in the U.N. voting or Palestinian issue thus far.

Accordingly Israel is perceived as the United States Union territory rather than an independent state maintaining cordial relations with Arab and other nations around the world.

3. Why are Palestinians treated as a humanitarian problem rather than as people with political and national rights entitled to self-determination?

Response: The Palestinians have endured enormous pain and misery in the prolonged political stalemate.

Palestinians as people are entitled to political and national rights in every aspect.

Under the imminent free Palestine – the territories clearly demarcated prior to 1967 Israeli conquest would constitute the integral part of the liberated Palestine particularly the entire West Bank and Gaza comprising East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital.

With respect to the refugee population spread across Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Gaza – the new treaty enacting the right of return to the Palestinian expatriates would grant naturalization to the emigrants.

4. Why should Palestinians be forced to accept their own decay?

Response: Palestinians will not decay any more.

There is unanimous consensus among the majority in the global society to expedite the two states solution with independent Palestine co-existing alongside democratic Israel confined to the internationally recognized pre-1967 boundaries.

Jerusalem being the holy city for all three religions – Judaism, Christianity and Islam,

It is imperative that the leaderships establish peace and harmony between Palestinian and Israeli citizens for mutual social and economic benefits.

5. Why must they be punished for resisting?

All are born to be free with equal rights. Palestinian and fellow citizens around the world seeking independence are not deprived from it.

Unfortunately quelling dissent is increasingly accepted as the norm even in a democratic society let alone any other form of government.

History is testimony to the fact that one voice ultimately transforms into the universal representation prevailing against undemocratic rule and social injustice.

Since time immemorial, the unjust annexation or in the other extreme the unruly secessionism defying historical evidence is narcissism than serving the humanitarian cause.

Palestine and similar states liberation is not a hypothesis but a definitive reality.

If Israeli coalition partner is the obstacle in the Palestinian political resolution, then the Israeli authority could forge alliance with the party prioritizing Israel’s peaceful existence over personal ideology.

Hence, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas could seize the opportunity and proceed with the meaningful dialogue beginning upon settlement termination.

Settlement issue is not a pre-condition but rather a reasonable request to facilitate negotiations leading to the diplomacy success.

Two states solution is paramount to both Israel and Palestine for a long lasting relationship extending to other Arab neighbors as seen in Syria’s overture towards Israel at the 65th U.N. General Assembly session in September 2010.

Finally, regarding the two chilling responses from Palestinian Children during the survey on their wish list – “Get out of Gaza or Die,”

NO child in any part of the world should experience the frustration to leave their homeland or desire to end their precious life.

Palestine needs these brave and intelligent architects to build their nation with strong democratic principles vowed to peace, non-violence and solidarity within and outside the territory.

It is important for the Palestinians in Gaza, West Bank and East Jerusalem to come together as one nation in moving their country forward.

Likewise, setting the differences aside for a new partnership with their Israeli friend and neighbor is equally essential to sustain permanent peace.

It would ensure security, political stability and economic prosperity for the two states permeating to the entire region.

Palestinian liberty and Israeli security means a bright future for their people.

Peace to Palestine, Israel and throughout Middle East.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Peace Dawns on Palestine and Israel – Two States Solution

September 2, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

There is potential for a breakthrough in the ongoing Palestinian and Israeli meeting in Washington D.C.

The issue has received worldwide attention with several mediation attempts by the U.S. Presidents, European leaders and humanitarians from different nations in the past six decades.

People on both sides have suffered enormous casualties –

The rocket firing, suicide bombings including the recent killing of the Jewish settlers in Hebron, West Bank and,

On the other side – The military intervention with heavy artillery shelling against the Palestinians in Gaza, while the West Bank and East Jerusalem citizens denied normal existence through check posts, strong defense presence and above all the contentious settlement expansion in the Palestinian territories.

These actions inflicting pain and agony on each other are deeply regrettable with innocent civilians being the victims in the quagmire.

After years of unsuccessful negotiations, Palestinian and Israeli authorities’ willingness to recognize the two states solution is encouraging.

Although there are justified grievances on the prevalent attacks and disruption in daily life, the mainstream population in the respective states desire peaceful co-existence with mutual respect for sovereignty and national security.

In fact, the forces in opposition to peace are essentially against their own people and the nation they represent. The parallel provocation through violence and settlements promotes the proponents’ personal ideology and hinder the pragmatic course for peace.

Palestinians have been seeking independence for more than half a century and were not effectively led by the PLO in the initial phase due to the ‘intifadas,’ premised on ‘armed struggle,’ rather than peace and diplomacy. However, it was acknowledged later and now vigorously pursued by Fatah in the West Bank under Prime Minister Salam Fayyad and President Mahmoud Abbas leaderships.

On the Israeli side, the political leaderships’ earnest decisions for reconciliation thwarted by the hard liners’ overwhelming influence to embrace aggression and expand settlements that is proved detrimental largely affecting Israel’s image and credibility as a viable peace partner.

The violent retaliations became the bedrock for terrorism and enabled the peace opponents to gain political power in Gaza. As a result the beleaguered Gazans are currently held hostage in the political dilemma.

Considering the preconditions on both sides, the issues deserve fair evaluation.

Palestinian expectations apart from an independent state is predominantly focused on settlement freeze, Israeli troop withdrawal, border demarcation, Palestinian expatriates’ right to return and East Jerusalem as the state capital.

It’s in Israel’s best interest to accommodate the Palestinian requests and relinquish the territories held since 1967. Israel can then invest the resources for national growth and the armed personnel to safeguard its own borders.

Further, Israeli policies on the Palestinians right to return and Jewish settlements in West Bank, East Jerusalem would ultimately impact the settlers as the inevitable minorities given the evolving demography.

For instance, the documented population figure for 2005 in Golan Heights was 38,900 (in the Israeli-occupied part) 79,000 (in the Syrian- controlled part) and likely to be exponentially higher in 2010.

Even the one state proposal through settlement occupation would render Israeli citizens the minority status in the near future for similar reasons.

Therefore, Israel’s sovereignty and the majority rights are intact in Israel’s land prior to 1967 invasion.

With respect to Gaza, Israel’s concerns are understandable. Again the stark contrast in economic progress between West Bank at an impressive 11% growth in the last quarter and the lack luster Gaza economy under Hamas would lead the Gaza residents to a political transformation in the upcoming elections.

Palestinians in Gaza could democratically bring about the change for their own economic prosperity and political freedom. The choice is clear for them to renounce the militant statehood under Hamas and adopt the Fayyad-Abbas governance prospering on the democratic principles by maintaining peaceful relationship with Israel.

Israel’s sovereignty and security is the major factor – peace with independent Palestine would guarantee the global assurance in that regard. International support broadens the horizon for Israel in strengthening political and economic ties with nations other than the United States viz. Turkey, Arab neighbors and other democracies disappointed with the latest developments in Gaza, West Bank and East Jerusalem.

Any threats to Israel or Palestine would constitute a regional security issue with an appropriate global response.

The coalition members in the Israeli political system might challenge the initiatives as seen earlier.

Israel upon reflection would realize that living in peace is bliss compared to the eternal warfare and the lingering insecurity over the piece of land that has caused immense misery all around.

Not to mention the generational decline particularly the youth population – Israel and Palestine’s hope for a new beginning.

What belongs to Israel will remain with Israel and likewise for Palestine i.e. West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, the Palestinian state capital. Extending the same strategy on Golan heights with Syria would place Israel in a favorable situation as a thriving democracy that honors legitimacy in territorial disputes.

Israel and Palestine can foster a good relationship built on trust and ability to set their differences aside for a long lasting peace and security.

There is tremendous opportunity to exchange resources facilitating trade and commerce between free Palestine and democratic Israel.

People in Israel and Palestine have endured traumatic experience from the conflict. It’s time to move forward and let peace dawn on the region with a pledge to a bright future for all.

Good Luck and Best Wishes to President Barack Obama, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian leaderships – President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, President Hosni Mubarak and King Abdullah for a successful peace process.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Expansion of Jewish Settlements’ Impact on Mid-East Peace Process

September 9, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

Israeli authorities’ determination to expand Jewish Settlements in Palestinian West Bank along the borders and on the private Palestinian land as well as the colonization of East Jerusalem is provocative. Besides, it is reflective of the Likud Party hard line policy to disregard the universally applicable International treaty on territorial issues and the will of the Israeli democracy for a viable two state solution necessary to end the half-a-century old conflict.

Despite call from President Obama to cease settlements and the international condemnation of the illegal occupation of Palestinian land, under the guise of ‘Israeli security,’ the Israeli coalition government continues with the settlements in a business as usual gesture thumbing their strongest ally, the United States and antagonizing the tolerant international community.

Israeli Palestinian issue has had numerous international interventions with the United States in the active and passive role depending on the administrations in the White House, other than the Oslo proposal to resolve the contentious burgeoning crisis that has consumed several thousand innocent Palestinian and Israeli lives under varied leaderships from both sides.

The world has been tirelessly urging the leaderships to halt the belligerent ‘settlement expansion’ on the Israeli part and the incendiary barrage against Israel by the divided Palestinian governments, but to no avail. It is obvious to the rest of the world that neither authority is seriously committed towards emancipating their population and restore the respective lands within the confines of the clearly demarcated boundaries free of turmoil.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has a unique opportunity to demonstrate to the international community with whom Israel must co-exist as a democratic nation that his administration will prioritize peace over eternal battle with the neighbor Palestine. Now is the time for the Prime Minister to transform the pledge into action with a complete and not a partial freeze of Israeli settlements on the Palestinian land.

When the leadership is subject to test on the political front, the leader’s character revealed based on the decision whether or not to compromise national interest for personal survival in the aggressive political environment.

The interim minority might exalt the leadership acquiescing due to political pressure within. However, the long term world view on the missed occasion is noted in the reference to the authority as a ‘sheer politician’ and not a leader, a rare moment in life to deliver for humanitarian cause that ultimately matters in any sense.

All past wrongdoings inadvertently or otherwise easily reversed with one major accomplishment in the common goal for long lasting peace and security to benefit the Israeli and the Palestinian population.

The people on both sides deserve an atmosphere that is conducive for normal existence, only possible with the mutual recognition of similar rights comprising a settlement free and independent Palestine alongside Israel acknowledged as a sovereign state by all governing parties in Palestine.

Israeli leaderships’ credibility relies on the settlement abandonment in compliance of the International law and respect for the fellow human beings, the neighbor – the long-suffering Palestinian women, children and youth, who have waited over five decades for a place, they could call ‘home.’ It cannot happen sometime in the near future because the future is now and any further delay would be an affirmation of the Israeli occupation that would no longer fly under the security threat banner.

The forces behind such illegal occupation and invasion regardless of domicile share the consequences for an outrageous crime against humanity. Justifiably, the patience is wearing out even among the international allies and reliable intermediaries such as Jordan and Egypt in the Middle East.

It is incumbent on the Israeli government to contribute to peace and set precedence in the monumental challenge against global terrorism by voluntarily leaving the Palestinian land and granting the Palestinians their human right to freedom and life without the check posts and tunnels to move around their own state.

As for the Palestinian authorities – it is essential for Gaza and West Bank governments to display solidarity and work together in promoting peace between them and their neighbor Israel. Above all, the ruling factions, the FATAH and HAMAS should relinquish any plotting, verbal assaults and distortions against Israel, as it would unnecessarily jeopardize the peace and settlement evacuation deal.

Israeli settlers must unequivocally vacate the housing complexes built with the Israeli local and federal governments’ approval anywhere near or along the Palestinian private land. Any procrastination or evasion on the repatriation is unacceptable.

The consensus is if it was possible to allow the influx of settlers on foreign soil, the similar strategy should apply in receiving the exodus from the foreign land, as the authorities in Jerusalem should have realized that the rest of the world would no longer remain silent spectators to the oppression and persecution of the Palestinian population. It must end now to expedite the establishment of the two states with East Jerusalem rightfully allocated to Palestine as the state capital.

It is important to understand that in the Israeli settlers’ case, they are neither political nor economic refugees but unfortunately, they are the active and willful participants in the government sponsored housing program directly in violation of the international law.

No law-abiding citizens in any part of the world would agree to a stranger across the territory to encroach on their property line leave alone build an extension or a two story home of the residence they are currently residing in.

Failure to cooperate on the settlement issue will leave the settlers with ‘illegal’ status and deprive them of any citizen rights and legitimately regarded as the occupants with unauthorized entry. Therefore, forging identical immigration laws enforced in Western democracies against inappropriate or forced arrivals, often leading to deportations would be in accordance with the international migration law.

The peace accord should reflect that clause as a deterrence to prevent the status quo in the future.

Israeli settlements have attracted worldwide criticism across the spectrum of the many humanitarian groups including the Americans for Peace Now founded by the esteemed Professor Mark Rosenblum, History Professor and Director of the Jewish Studies Program, Queens College and within Israel – Shalom Achshav, the Israeli counterpart of the along with,

Columnist Ari Shavit wrote in Israeli daily Haaretz echoing similar sentiments –

“Figures provided by Peace Now show that 80 of the 100 outposts in the West Bank were built wholly or partly on private Palestinian land. Sixteen outposts are located entirely on private land, and more than half of the other outposts are on private land. This has to cause outrage.”

Ignoring international plea by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would exacerbate the thinning global support. Also, possibly accelerate the worldwide movement and resolve to free nations under foreign occupation, until the impending United Nations Security Council reconfiguration.

In conclusion, Israel and Palestine have lost a generation in the senseless violence and on-going dispute that could leave the economies without taxpayers to support the system – the baby boomers, soon to be the retirees for Israel and the desolate Palestinian youth population fallen victims to the political quagmire that has seen only despair and hopelessness as their future.

Not anymore, the people of Israel and Palestine must come together and urge their governments to disavow hatred and religious discord to enable the children and the younger generation, the torchbearers of a new peaceful legacy live in harmony alongside each other.

With the commencement of the ‘Holy Ramadan’ for the people of Islamic faith in Palestine and around the world, to be followed by the Jewish New Year for the fellow citizens of Jewish faith in Israel and elsewhere, the dawn of peace is on the horizon bringing joy and prosperity in abundance.

Ramaḍān Karīm رمضان كريم – Arabic for “Blessed Ramadan” and Rosh Hashanah (Hebrew: ראש השנה‎, for the approaching “Jewish New Year.”

Thank you

Padmini Arhant

U.S. Foreign Policy in the 20th and 21st Century

July 6, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The United States foreign policy in the twentieth and twenty first century viewed by allies and adversaries differently depending upon the U.S. engagement viz. modus operandi in the conflicts of the affected regions.

Throughout the twentieth century, the United States direct and indirect dominant role brought peace and chaos to the world order, ominously the Cuban crisis and the infamous Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos war combined with constant interventions in the Korean Peninsula, the Americas, the Middle East, Africa as well as South and South East Asia.

With the exception of sparing the world from Nazi and fascist rule in Europe and elsewhere – a significant contribution to the birth of democracies in Japan and Western Europe,

Ironically, the subsequent U.S. foreign policy mostly enabled the rise of brutal regimes and totalitarianism particularly in the under developed, poor and impoverished parts of the world.

The colonial British dethroned by the Imperial U.S. foreign policy primarily responsible for the status quo in the Middle East, while other European and Mediterranean colonialists – France, Netherlands, Spain, Greece and Portugal leaving their trademark in Africa, Asia and the Americas.

World witnessed the emergence of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Theocracy in Iran following the overthrow of U.S. backed monarchy Shah of Iran including the predecessors and the successors in the entire Middle East aided by the contrived U.S. foreign policy driven by selective internal and external political interests focused on personal agenda.

Much to the operators’ surprise, their misguided policies led to the formation of terror organization such as Al Qaeda and the coronation of its leader Osama Bin Laden, a former Mujahedeen trained by CIA and the U.S. professional armed forces during the confrontation with the Afghanistan invaders, the former Soviet Union.

Given the track record of military aggression and perpetual violence by the profiteers representing the military industrial complex successfully causing carnage and destruction around the world up until now,

The cold war era might have curbed huge conventional and nuclear clashes between the two Superpowers in the 60’s and the 70’s but certainly facilitated the lucrative arms race specifically the nuclear arsenal between the rich and poor nations.

Late twentieth century comprising the Soviet Union disintegration along with nuclear fragmentation in that politically unstable vast region left the field open for U.S. foreign policy dominance in the world.

The United States foreign policy architects wasted no time in the invasions and occupations on the national security pretext and supporting their ‘ally’ Israel in the highly volatile Middle East or promoting ill-conceived democracies in the Western hemisphere through military coups.

The United States reputation until the 2008 Presidential election, as the leader of the free world and the Superpower tarnished because of the failed U.S. foreign policies for most part of the twentieth century and well into the twenty first century. Again, U.S blunders complemented with Iraqi invasion contributed to the neglect of the U.S. mission in Afghanistan to eliminate the strengthening Al Qaeda and Taliban forces from the northwestern Pakistani turf.

Further in the Middle East, as a defense surrogate the United States’ sworn allegiance to Israel against potential threats and attacks from Iran, Syria, Lebanon through Hezbollah, and Palestinian Gaza through Hamas is another factor for skepticism towards the ‘Western partner, USA’ among the Arab nations controlling the ‘oil’, the world’s most required natural resource.

Although, the strange predicament of U.S. surrogacy towards Israel and platonic relationship with the Arab world defended by declaring energy independence to undermine Arab stance in this matter, the reality of it is at least a decade away if not longer considering the Washington stalemate in the energy bill pending Senate approval.

The existing Israeli illegal invasion and occupation of Palestinian territories through settlements expansion must end to resolve the relic Israeli-Palestinian issue.

Meanwhile, in the Iranian political crisis and nuclear program, the recent rhetoric from the key White House representatives is not helpful as it creates unnecessary obstacles on the path towards democracy and stability in the Middle East such as Iraq and inevitably Iran.

Aside from pursuing the independent Palestinian state free of Israeli control in any form or shape and ensuring Israel’s safety and security as a sovereign state, it is paramount for Iran to free itself from the repressive theocratic regime for long lasting peace in the Middle East.

Fortunately, the current developments by the Iranian dissent galvanizing pro-reformist movements and the moderate clerics’ defiance to validate the rigged June 12 election results are optimistic and encouraging in terms of the possible democratic Iran evolving amidst reprehensible pro-democracy crackdown and human rights violation.

Any assertion by the United States proclaiming Israel’s sovereignty as a precursor for military strikes against Iranian hypothetical nuclear proliferation could be immensely detrimental to the United States, Israel, Iraq, and the remaining international security.

Why United States must refrain from controversial political posturing in an effort to defend Israel against alleged Iranian nuclear threat?


Why Israel should abandon any military option against Iran?

1. Firstly, Iran embroiled in the political crisis following the courageous decision by the pro-democratic Iranian population to seek twenty first century governance that guarantees fundamental human rights and economic relief with jobs, distribution of oil revenues through investment in common national growth and development.

2. Iranian theocracy fractured from the political turmoil delineating the moderate clerics from the hardliners with respect to unlawful killings, arrests and clamp down in the wake of forming the theocratic rule with their nominee Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, an unpopular choice even among the
Ayatollahs representing the theocracy.

3. During the political transitioning in Iran any such statements by the United States – “Israel has a sovereign right to strike Iran’s apparent nuclear site and that the United States will not interfere in Israeli mission with the reaffirmation from the State Department that strike against Israel will be an attack against the United States” sever than serve the purpose.

ABC’S SUNDAY TALK ON JUNE 5, 2009: “This Week” Host George Stephanopoulos

Three times, I asked Biden if the Obama Administration would stand in the way of an Israeli military strike. Three times, he repeated that Israel was free to do what it needed to do. “If the Netanyahu government decides to take a course of action different than the one being pursued now, that is their sovereign right to do that. That is not our choice.”

A subsequent interview with the Secretary of State – Hillary Clinton.

“CLINTON: I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States.


STEPHANOPOULOS: Is it U.S. policy now?

CLINTON: I think it is U.S. policy to the extent that we have alliances and understandings with a number of nations. They may not be formal, as it is with NATO, but I don’t think there is any doubt in anyone’s mind that, were Israel to suffer a nuclear attack by Iran, there would be retaliation.

STEPHANOPOULOS: By the United States?

CLINTON: Well, I think there would be retaliation. And I think part of what is clear is, we want to avoid a — a Middle East arms race which leads to nuclear weapons being in the possession of other countries in the Middle East, and we want to make clear that there are consequences and costs.”
Analysis – By Padmini Arhant

President Obama’s candidacy pledged towards relentless diplomacy and peaceful negotiations in all foreign policy matters including the Middle East, assuring a dramatic shift from the Bush administration’s formula involving military action to resolve any political crisis.

The commitment reversal in the Iranian matter would deeply hurt the administration’s credibility in the Middle East as well as among the nations, the President is attempting to outreach for better international relations i.e. Russia and its allies.

United States and Israeli positions could also be misconstrued as provocative and derail the ‘behind the scenes’ progress developing in Iran. Besides fomenting fear and concern among the Iranian population already mortified from the latest violence, it could escalate tension in the neighboring Iraq adjusting to the gradual U.S. troops withdrawal from its cities with the hope of seeing complete timeline withdrawal by 2011.

United States will be officially presenting itself complicit in the catastrophic event with similar overtures not barring double standards in anything related to Israel.

Above all, the economic impact is even greater with respect to crude oil stocks superficially skyrocketing based on the speculative ramifications of Israeli strike against Iran (an OPEC member and one of the leading oil producers) on United States watch.

Moreover, Israel’s unilateral action against Iran would isolate Israel and exacerbate Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s status as a hardliner even though the Prime Minister now appearing to reconcile terms with the two states solutions vital for the Israeli-Palestinian future and,

Notwithstanding the proposed Israeli military action jeopardizing the Arab states’ recognition of Israel as a sovereign state and a viable peace partner in the Middle East.

As for the rest of the world, the terror attacks will substantially increase by default, embolden the weakened Al Qaeda in Iraq and Pakistan with vigorous recruitments through mere propaganda that U.S, and ally Israel preparing yet another military action against an Islamic nation Iran after the prolonged occupation in Iraq.

In light of the projected precarious scenarios, United States being the world leader has a moral responsibility to prioritize diplomacy and non-violence over military attacks either directly or by proxy.

It’s time for the United States to make a conscientious departure from the disastrous old ways proven counterproductive and write a new chapter in history by remaining a trustworthy partner and a reliable negotiator for all nations in the establishment of global peace.

Opportunities are rare and power guided by wisdom produce positive outcome.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant