Finkelstein demolishes Dennis Ross’ lies

If I were to be asked to give two words that summarize why there is no peace in Palestine, I could hardly think of any better candidates than “Dennis” and “Ross”.

This isn’t to say that this demented liar is the reason there is no peace; that would be giving a stupid minion like him too much credit. But what this says is that in a time when a despicable racist liar like Ross can get a job as a “mediator” of negotiations between Palestinians and Israelis; use that job as a mercenary for the Israelis; get a free pass in propagating outright lies about his role in the process and the process itself; have his lies published in a book that sells massively and is then used by “experts” to justify positions on the Middle East; and continue to make millions portraying himself as an honest peacemaker–no wonder there is no peace in the Middle East.

Ross is the “mediator” who was too upset that Barak offered too much concessions to the Palestinians, he even said: “If Barak offers anything more, I’ll be against this agreement.” Let’s remember that anything that Barak offered was at best a Bantustan solution that would’ve made the leaders of apartheid South Africa in the 1970’s look generous. Ross then made a career out of trumpeting these concessions as a “Generous Offer”.

I will write more when I have time about Ross and his lies and racist and fatal commitment to Israeli racist hegemony; but for now, I will leave you with this excellent, thorough and comprehensive demolition job carried out by Norman Finkelstein in the latest issue of the Journal of Palestine Studies.

This sentence from Finkelstein sums up perfectly the problem with Ross’ demented perception of the conflict:

“Palestinian demands appear maximal while Palestinian concessions appear minimal because Ross ignores international law.”

He goes on:

whether at Oslo or Camp David: the Israelis might have had to settle for much less than they wanted, but the Palestinians had to settle for much less than they were owed. To curb one’s desires is fundamentally different from surrendering one’s rights. In disregarding international law, Ross obscures this crucial distinction. Concomitantly, he obscures the fact that throughout the peace process, all the genuine concessions came from the Palestinian side.

Finkelstein ends his piece with this conclusion:

Judging from Ross’s account, Camp David failed because Palestinians stubbornly clung to the illusion that they had real needs. Had they understood that all they really needed was symbols, Palestinians would have leapt at the generous Israeli offer. The root of the problem, again, appears to be that Palestinian “sense of entitlement”: Camp David might have succeeded if only Palestinians grasped that they aren’t real, actual human beings.

Incidentally, the Journal of Palestine Studies is such an excellent scholarly resource for the conflict. One can only wish that people would read this journal instead of the bucket-loads of inimitable crap emanating from the likes of Ross, Thomas Friedman and Jeffrey Goldberg.