Acommonly repeated assertion since the 7 July attacks on London is that ‘there is no such thing as foreign policy’ any more. This used to be an academic catchphrase for the argument that foreign policy is only an extension of domestic policy, pursued by leaders for electoral advantage.
But now the phrase is increasingly employed to argue that in an interdependent and globalised age, there are no longer far-away countries and people of whom we know nothing – that no matter where they are taken, our military, diplomatic or economic actions affect us as profoundly at home as they do others abroad.
In the wake of 7/7, some have employed this argument to promote the idea that Western engagement with the rest of the globe was responsible for the suicide bombings on the London tube. According to this analysis, the west’s relationship with the Islamic world is the main driving force behind the threats we now face. The interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq are the most recent motivators in this narrative but, over all, the real issue is the longer-standing and more totemic problem of US and UK support for Israel.
Of course the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must be resolved with a just settlement based on a secure Israel living peacefully alongside a viable and democratic Palestine. But believing this is the one true path to world peace and neutralisation of terror is both naïve and counter-productive.
The ‘Israel-is-the-problem’ approach prevents serious analysis of the complex problems that the Middle East faces. Prospects for long-term solutions that bring political, social and economic development to millions of ordinary people are jeopardised when the region’s instability is analysed simply in terms of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Cause and effect become muddled, other disputes are ignored, and the efforts of reformists and progressives are undermined.
Seen in context, visceral hatred of the west and Israel incited by leaders throughout the region is a symptom of the problems and not their cause. Successive UN Arab human development reports make clear that it is in the hands of the states themselves to end poverty and improve education and opportunity for their populations. A truly progressive approach recognises the need to promote broad-based development in the region, draining support from the extremists and their twisted, violent ideology.
In the meantime, how events in the Middle East are interpreted in the UK has implications for our own society and citizens.
We must avoid simple explanations, such as those that hold Israel responsible for all the problems in the Middle East, and consequently terrorism in the UK. Otherwise, the attempt to contextualise events such as 7/7 too easily descends into scapegoating and demonisation. Hence, we had the extraordinarily worrying phenomenon of some politicians understanding and even justifying suicide bombings in other parts of the world while trying to condemn them here.
Not only does this undermine efforts for peace between Israelis and Palestinians directly, it can also drive a wedge between communities here in the UK for whom the Middle East is a political priority. (One can also only imagine the inspiration this provides for the viler fringes of our political system that seek to promote both antisemitism and Islamophobia).
The frustration is that the issue could be a source of unity. The desire to see a peaceful resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict should be an opportunity to bring communities together. It is incumbent on politicians to choose words carefully, take a balanced approach, engage constructively with both parties and appreciate the dilemmas that all sides face. Then they can lead support from all communities for the government’s positive engagement with the peace process.
At a time when the Israeli disengagement from Gaza provides new opportunities for peace, the UK’s continuing economic and political support could not be more important. As ever, it is the extremists who are seeking to undermine the process. Hamas is persistently attacking not just Israel but the Palestinian Authority.
For British progressives, the challenge is how to best support Israeli and Palestinian progressives. In a political and news culture that demands simplicity in narratives and certainty in explanations, employing responsible and measured approaches rather than quick rhetorical hits would be a good start.