As Secretary of State John Kerry tries to revive a moribund "peace process," which the U.S. mediated for more than two decades, the prospects for a just resolution of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict are dim, and the situation has been made worse by the evolution of an Orwellian language employed by U.S. policymakers and the mainstream media.
However disingenuous diplomacy often is, no matter how debased political discourse may become, words wielded by diplomats and politicians define situations and determine outcomes. Few battles over terminology have been as intensely fought out as those concerning Palestine and Israel.
"Terrorism," "security," "self-determination," "autonomy," "honest broker" and "peace process" are terms common to the discourse. Each sets conditions for perceptions and possibilities. But consider how one-sided they have become. When the media and U.S. politics talk about "terrorism" in the Middle East, it inevitably refers to Arabs. Yet Palestinians live in terror from Israeli bombardments in the Gaza and from the brutality of Israeli settlers and troops in the West Bank.
Despite the use of "honest broker" to describe the self-proclaimed role of the U.S., American policy has consistently sided with Israel. Even as it brokered the "peace process," the U.S. has provided Israel with billions of dollars in aid, while allowing the number of illegal settlers in the occupied territories to triple.
The misuse of language masks the fact that American diplomacy since the end of World War II has made achieving peace even more difficult.
The pro-Israel lobby in Washington, D.C., has enjoyed success since the founding of the Jewish state, but its influence has often been secondary to other U.S. interests, in particular the Cold War with the Soviet Union and the drive for access to oil, especially from the absolute monarchies of the Persian Gulf.
At key historical moments, critical U.S. global interests allied with despots have worked to Israel's advantage, while they undermined the cause of nearly 10 million Palestinians living inside Israel, in the occupied territories and in the Palestinian diaspora.
Dishonest language masks the contradiction between democratic principles and realities across the Middle East. The unresolved fate of the Palestinian people, despite strong support by Arab and world public opinion, provides evidence that for all its influence, not just the Israel lobby drives U.S. Middle Eastern policy.
Equally crucial is the U.S. alliance with unpopular tyrants who depend on Washington's support and dare not pressure the U.S. on Palestine. U.S. complicity with authoritarian regimes angers citizens across the Arab world, who have no voice in deciding their futures. The survival of these U.S.–backed regimes is the dark secret of how American policy can be so biased in favor of Israel without incurring a price.
When — and if — democratization takes place in the key Arab states, there will ensue a day of reckoning for U.S. policy. The Arab Spring, now stalled, began a step down this road. That journey is far from over.
Were it truly interested in peace in the region, the U.S. would start by liberating language from its Orwellian bonds. Only then can there be change in the undemocratic and unjust policies that such language masks.