lifted from aftenposten.no (bad google translate)
The victim host
20 years after the Oslo Accords were signed , Oslo has become a dirty word on both the Israeli and the Palestinian side .
Harald Stanghelle political editor
Published: 13.sep . 2013 11:57 Updated : 13.sep . 2013 1:38 p.m.
Today it is exactly 20 years since the Oslo Accords were signed. On the lawn in front of the White House hitting a hesitant Yitzhak Rabin PLO leader Yasir Arafat’s outstretched hand . A whole world felt the story wing beats . And in this country we rode on an international wave of enthusiasm that we as rapidly as uncritically adopted as our own peace feat .
Two decades later, Oslo has become a dirty word on both the Israeli and the Palestinian side . In any case, when minds come to the boil . And it happens often.
Then it is tempting to throw a myopic look at ourselves on an anniversary like this. For Oslo Accords represented something entirely new. Not only in the Middle East , but also in the Norwegian – Israeli relations .
In the Middle East implied agreement that the exile displaced PLO was recognized Israel’s peace partner. To great applause did Arafat made his first foray on Palestinian land . And the hope of a new and peaceful Middle East took shape.
For Norway, the announcement of the deal a triumph of the great. It was a small group of Norwegians who had organized the secret channel. Quickly got these political hero both in Norway and internationally. The then Foreign Minister Johan Jørgen Holst stood on the podium in the garden outside the White House when the formal agreement was signed . A clear signal and appreciative of the role of Norway had played .
There and then represented the Oslo accords a major breakthrough. On 20th anniversary , it can be summarized as a failure – at least if measured by their own ambisjonerSovjetimperiets breakdown, the PLO’s weakness after the first Gulf War, the Madrid process, the Palestinian intifada and Israel’s own problems , it was necessary and heavy historical framework. There is still no reason to deprive the Oslo channel Norwegian architects the creativity and dedication that was needed to stimulate the political courage required to add the old enemy images aside.
Mutual goodwill was the wintry Borregaard distributed as a completely new tool to crack in the firm foundations of mistrust separating the two parties.
There and then represented the Oslo accords a major breakthrough. On 20th anniversary , it can be summarized as a failure – at least if measured by their own ambitions. The proclaimed confidence road is long closed by distrust. The proposed Palestinian nation-building is faltering . And the difficult questions as to the naive optimism pushed ahead, remains as unresolved .
On the rock
Oslo Accords built on concepts like hope and confidence. But nowhere else has such words tend to fall on deaf ears as just in the Middle East today .
There are many complex reasons why it went as it went. After the assassination of Prime Minister Rabin in autumn 1995 and the right-wing Likud alliance’s election victory the following year, died Oslo process slowly . It did not happen by a dramatic magic, but by an infinite number of broken promises , lack of will and conflicting interests.
Oslo Agreement’s collapse has been of crucial importance for the development of the Norwegians’ view of the state of Israel . Such was also the shortcomings of the agreement becoming more visible. Its basic take was that time would contribute to robust confidence building between the parties. Then the opposite happened . It was not good enough taken into account .
Oslo Agreement’s collapse has been of crucial importance for the development of the Norwegians’ view of the state of Israel . Few were the doubts that the continued Israeli occupation was the most basic prerequisite for a promising peace process collapsed. Palestinian terrorism and Arafat’s uselessness as a nation builds undoubtedly played important supporting roles , but with all the desired clarity was demonstrated that 90’s Netanyahu government did not intend to give up settlements and creating the basis for a viable Palestinian state .
This was the opinion in Norway too. Perhaps it also sneaked into an irrational feeling of being betrayed by a country many had high expectations . In many ways, the Oslo process “our” deal, “our” pride and ” our ” contribution to peace in the world’s most volatile region . Just here in Norway it was attached so much hope to the Oslo Accords that were steep downturn .
All this is more or less rational , but political moods of a people is also a matter of feelings. And it’s not just the intense Middle East, but also in Norway cool .
Our political feelings
There have been some significant changes of mood in Norwegians’ feelings towards Israel , which one of the most obvious is that which emerged before and after the turn of the millennium – following the Oslo process breakdown.
As part when Israel also our political feelings . Although we do well to remind ourselves that wounded pride is often a lousy basis for sober analysis Israel ‘s largest newspaper, Yediot Ahronot , quoted at the time the Israeli government sources that ” Norway is the world’s most Israel – hostile country .” And late Jo Benkow expressed as follows in 2006 here in Aftenposten : ” Even relatively moderate Israeli politicians believe that the Norwegian media is the most critical of Israel in the Western world , and I mean well. ”
Scholar Sven Egil Omdahl said to him then, so in his column in Stavanger Aftenblad : ” It is we who are angry , but it was Israel who betrayed . ”
Strong words – written with strong emotions. As part when Israel also our political feelings . Although we do well to remind ourselves that wounded pride is often a lousy basis for sober analysis. The role of the victim host , we can at least safely put off .