March
6, 2024
A
group of young people in Paris are enjoying a drink in a café on an
unseasonably warm evening. The conversation drifts into politics, but—as one
young woman says—“Let’s not talk about France.” The others nod their assent.
They focus on the U.S. presidential election, a slight bit of Gallic arrogance
at play as they mock the near certainty that the main candidates will be
President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump. Biden is 81 years old
and Trump is 77. A Special Counsel in the United States has called Biden an
“elderly man with a poor memory,” hardly the words required to inspire
confidence in the president. Trying to defend himself, Biden made the kind of
gaffe that is fodder for online memes and affirmed the report that he tried to
undermine: he called President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi of Egypt the “president of
Mexico.” No new evidence is required, meanwhile, to mock the candidacy of
Trump. “Is this the best that the United States can offer?” asks Claudine, a
young student at a prestigious Parisian college.
These
young people are aware enough that what appears to be comical on the other side
of the Atlantic—the U.S. presidential election—is no less ridiculous, and of
course less dangerous, in Europe. When I ask them what they think about the
main European leaders—Olaf Scholz of Germany and Emmanuel Macron of France—they
shrug, and the words “imbecilic” and “non-entity” enter the discussion. Near
Les Halles, these young people have just been at a demonstration to end the
Israeli bombing of the Rafah region of Gaza. “Rafah is the size of Heathrow
Airport,” says a young student from England who is spending 2024 in France.
That none of the European leaders have spoken plainly about the death and
destruction in Gaza troubles them, and they say that they are not alone in
these feelings. Many of their fellow students feel the same way.
The
approval ratings for Scholz and Macron decline with each week. Neither the
German nor the French public believes that these men can reverse the economic
decline or stop the wars in either Gaza or Ukraine. Claudine is upset that the
governments of the Global North have decided to cut their funding for the
United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), the UN Palestine agency,
although another young person, Oumar, interjects that Brazil’s President Lula
has said that his country will donate money to UNRWA. Everyone nods.
A
week later, news comes that a young soldier in the United States Airforce—Aaron
Bushnell—has decided to take his own life, saying that he will no longer be
complicit in the genocide against the Palestinians. When asked about the death
of Bushnell, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said that the
President is “aware” and that it is a “horrible tragedy.” But there was no
statement about why the young man took his life, and nothing to assuage a tense
public about the implications of this act.
Eating
an ice cream in New York, U.S. President Joe Biden said that he hoped that
there would be a ceasefire “by the beginning of the weekend” but then moved it
to “by next Monday.” The meandering statements, the pledge for a ceasefire
alongside the prevarication, and the arms deliveries do not raise the
confidence of anyone in Biden or his peers in Europe.
With
the Emir of Qatar beside him, France’s President Emmanuel Macron called for a
“lasting ceasefire.” These phrases—“lasting ceasefire” and “sustainable
ceasefire”—have been bandied about with these adjectives (lasting, sustainable)
designed to dilute the commitment to a ceasefire and to pretend that they are
actually in favor of an end to the war when they continue to say that they are
behind Israel’s bombing runs.
In
London, the UK Parliament had a comical collapse in the face of a Scottish
National Party (SNP) resolution for a ceasefire. Rather than allow a vote to
show the actual opinions of their members, both the Labour Party and the
Conservative Party went into a tailspin and the Parliament’s speaker broke
rules to ensure that the elected officials did not have to go on the record
against a ceasefire. Brendan O’Hara of the SNP put the issue plainly before the
Parliament before his words and the SNP resolution was set aside: “Some will
have to say that they chose to engage in a debate on semantics over
‘sustainable’ or ‘humanitarian’ pauses, while others will say that they chose
to give Netanyahu both the weapons and the political cover that he required to
prosecute his relentless war.”
Global
desire for an immediate stop to the Israeli bombing is now at an all-time high.
For the third time, the United States vetoed a UN resolution in the Security
Council to compel the Israelis to stop the bombing. That the United States and
its European allies continue to back Israel despite the widespread disgust at
this war—exemplified by the death of Aaron Bushnell—raises the frustration with
the leadership of the Global North.
What
is so particularly bewildering is that large sections of the population in the
countries of the North want an immediate ceasefire, and yet their leaders
disregard their opinions. One survey shows that two-thirds of voters in the
United States—including majorities of Democrats (77 percent), Independents (69
percent), and Republicans (56 percent)—are in favor of a ceasefire in Gaza.
Interestingly, 59 percent of U.S. voters say that Palestinians must be
guaranteed the right to return to their homes in Gaza, while 52 percent said
that peace talks must be held for a two-state solution. These are all positions
that are ignored by the main political class on both sides of the Atlantic
Ocean. The qualifications of “lasting” and “sustainable” only increase cynicism
among populations that watch their political leadership ignore their insistence
on an immediate ceasefire.
Clarity
is not to be sought in the White House, in No. 10 Downing Street, or in the
Élysée Palace. It is found in the words of ordinary people in these countries
who are heartsick regarding the violence. Protests seem to increase in
intensity as the death toll rises. What is the reaction to these protests? In
the United Kingdom, members of parliament complained that these protests are
putting the police under “sustained pressure.” That is perhaps the point of the
protests.
No comments:
Post a Comment