Skip to main content

Moderates are important, they are the often the pragmatic ones who make the right choices even if it breaks ideology or comes at a cost. As Jon Stewart said, they're often not paid attention to by the media or politicians, because "moderates never take to the streets, shouting 'Be Reasonable!'"

Ignoring them, sidelining them, de-legitimizing them is how extremists of any sort get their way. When you ignore the moderates, you empower the hawks. The hawks give the opposing side justification to steamroll everyone to carry out your plans.

Let's explain this point with 3 examples from history, before we look at the current Israel-Palestine conflict on the news

In 2003, Iranian President Khatami made an offer to George W. Bush. Iran offered recognition of Israel within 1967 borders, to put pressure on Hizbullah and the Palestinians to moderate, signing the additional protocols of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to outlaw weapons development, and full cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency. What the Iranians wanted in return was an end to U.S. hostility and sanctions, and recognition of Iran as a legitimate power in the region. Everything Bush was demanding Iran do, it was all on the table.

What did Bush do?

He reprimanded the Swiss embassy, which takes care of US affairs in Iran, for daring to forward this proposal to the State Department.


Bush and his various supporters (the military-industrial complex, the Christian Right, the Zionist Lobby, and Big Oil) do not want peace with Iran.

President Mohammad Khatami was seen as a moderate who was cozy with Iranian liberals, and was trying to bring Iran back into the international community and reduce tensions. When his policies of negotiating with the US failed to show any success, voters forced him out. How delighted Bush and his constituents must have been when the buffoon Mahmoud Ahmadinejad replaced Khatami and the hardliners took control, after the Bush administration had done what it could to sabotage the Iranian reform movement.

Bush (and his backers) put Iran right where he wanted it, in the sights of an ICBM.

Pushing Iranian moderates away and gave Republicans ammo to claim that Iran was a world threat, that its president was a Holocaust-denier, and must be militarily attacked to protect Israel. Back in 2006 the Likud party's backers in America started a campaign to paint Iran as the Fourth Reich. AIPAC and the neocons and the Saudi king were all itching for war with Iran, and getting rid of the moderate voices helped sell their case that Iranians were evil. 

This is merely an example of a how extremists of any sort get their way. When you ignore the moderates, you empower the hawks. The hawks give you justification to steamroll everyone to carry out your plans.

Martin Luther King was another example. You have a prominent African-American leader who is well-spoken and religious, and announces non-violent policies to bring about racial peace. Racists utterly despised him, and tried propagandizing against him in every way they could, because they saw him as a threat to their interests. They had been trying to paint civil rights workers as agitators, subversives, and racists of the Malcolm X 50's sort, and King broke that narrative for them. The fact that King was meeting with President Johnson and racking up a string of victories made them terrified, he had to be taken out. J. Edgar Hoover, the head of the FBI, created a classified COINTELPRO campaign to harass him, blackmail him, and pressure him to suicide. Eventually someone assassinated him, and the moderates in the Civil Rights campaign were dealt a strong blow. (Malcolm was also assassinated after making it clear he was no longer advocating racial conflict) What was the result? Hawks and hardliners all ascended to power in their absence; Stokely Carmichael, the Black Panther party, Lewis Farrakhan, the rise of the Black Power movement, etc. The Ku Klux Klan and Strom Thurmond had to have been secretly overjoyed by this, it gave them far more talking points and the ability to fearmonger their way to more support.    

We see this today in the American and European Muslim communities too. There are millions of patriotic law-abiding Muslims who are struggling for their Civil Liberties; an end to discrimination, and free practice of their religion, while Islamophobes try to sow fear and mistrust and even hate crimes. How do islamophobes do this? Since they can't appeal to racism or bald religious bigotry (in public anyway), they do this portraying the Muslim community at large all as terrorists or terrorism-supporters.  We have overwhelming evidence that terrorism and its ideologies are not mainstream, but they want people to forget this inconvenient fact. This is why islamophobes like Pamela Gellar and Robert Spencer devote a LOT of time trying to attack moderate Muslim leaders like CAIR or ICNA or ISNA. They spend more time writing long diatribes against scholars like Hamza Yusuf or Tariq Ramadan, picking apart and overanalyzing every sentence they make, than they do paying attention to actual extremists. Robert Spencer devotes far more time arguing against Tariq Ramadan's calls for patriotism than Bin Laden's actual speeches against Western ideas. Clearly Ramadan is a bigger threat to Spencer's goals than bin Laden was; 9/11 made Spencer rich. 

This came to mind today, because Israel has put itself into a position where the moderates are not in power in Gaza, and are now stuck with no solutions. When Arafat was in power, Israel refused to deal with him, so Israelis elected Mahmoud Abbas, a moderate who promised he could work with Israel and Palestinians and negotiate a peace. Israel's right-wing government didn't like the idea of an actual compromise, so worked hard to marginalize him, first by badmouthing him and then funding his opponents. The Israeli government destroyed police stations and government buildings in airstrikes, which became one of the talking points in the 2005 Palestinian election; "why vote for Abbas when Israel clearly shows him no respect, his policy of talking to Israel is not working, let's vote for a group that can actually force Israel to stop rather than a politician who likes to appear in front of cameras." The result was people voted for Hamas. Just like Iranians, people in desperation turned to someone who promised action after words and dialogue failed.

There is no doubt that Israel's government under Likud leadership has been working very hard to give moderates the runaround, and steer all media focus on the hardline Palestinian opponents. First of all, Benjamin Netanyahu said he couldn’t talk to Abbas because he didn’t also represent Hamas. Then when Abbas formed a unity government, Netanyahu said he couldn’t talk to Abbas because he had unified himself with the “terrorist” Hamas. Now he says he can only talk to him if he breaks with Hamas – even though he won’t then represent Hamas. It's an odd irony since Israel cultivated religious groups in Palestine decades ago in order to foment opposition to Arafat and the secular PLO. With Palestinians dividing into factions, they were weakened for Israel's benefit. This isn't a conspiracy theory, Mossad admits that this was one of their mistakes in hindsight.

The Israeli government froze the scheduled tariffs and duties that were promised under the Oslo accords, making the PLO go too broke to pay its police force, meaning they couldn't suppress Hamas (and driving many more disgruntled workers to support Hamas) or prevent attacks on Israel. This article from a few days ago pointed out a few other examples of how Israel keeps refusing to help Abbas even when it's in Israel's best interests. Also, the Palestine Papers leak showed that Abbas offered to give away all of Jerusalem in exchange for any two state solution and Israel's government turned down the offer with no counter-offer. When this leak hit the media, public opinion of Palestinians turned sharply away against Abbas. People called him a useless sell-out for offering to give away their most precious assets (Jerusalem) and in exchange getting nothing in return.

What can we do? Stick with the goal of peace, no matter what. Obama resisted the neocons and war hawks and insisted on talks with Iran before any further sanctions. He strengthened moderate Iranians by reducing some sanctions as a reward for engaging in talks in the first place. The reason the White Power movement didn't take root in MLK's absence was because there were still moderates left to continue the fight; President Johnson barely passed the Civil Rights Act when King was alive, but used King's death as motivation to pass Voting Rights Act, despite charged rhetoric and threats from both directions. 

In the case of Palestine, the proper course of action, according to many experts, would be for Israel to strengthen moderate Palestinian factions and use them as part of the effort to eradicate terrorism in Palestine, if that was Israel's actual goal. Abbas bet his career on the idea that security cooperation with Israel and public recognition of Israel’s right to exist are more likely to bring the Palestinians peace than Hamas' tactics of rockets, but it’s not working out so well for him. It’s hard for Abbas to convince Palestinians that forming a state through nonviolence is succeeding when Israeli settlements gobble up more and more of the land on which Palestinians might build their state. Abbas has frequently complained to the media about this, saying it's the equivalent of two people negotiating over how to split an ice cream, but one keeps eating it while they're discussing how much each person should get.

Abbas CAN be strengthened, but Netanyahu deliberately refuses to do so. Some say it's because as a right-winger, he does not see Abbas and Hamas as fundamentally different; the Israeli Foreign Ministry called Abbas' plan to join the UN "diplomatic terrorism." Others say that it's a Machiavellian tactic because keeping Palestinians divided and fighting one another means Israel can continue it's settlements and provide an excuse why he won't reach out for a deal with Palestinians. (Also, Israel has a long policy of killing or jailing anyone who could be the Palestinian Mandela

"So how do you suggest Abbas be strengthened if you feel that the Palestinian people have lost faith in him?" is what some asked me in response. Simple; give him something. Here's one hypothetical news headline: "Abbas successfully negotiates the release of 10 year olds from Israeli prisons." Or "Abbas convinces Israel to allow limited number of Palestinians in West Bank to visit relatives in Gaza for the first time in a decade. " It isn't hard, the public originally elected him thinking he was a guy who could replace Arafat (whom Israel flat-out refused to talk to) and successfully get Israel to recognize their grievances and work for peace. When the Likud party and Israeli government decided to try the same runaround with Abbas as they did with his predecessors, the public gave up and concluded that Israelis only respect force.

Like I said, if Israel's government actually cared about pursuing peace, they'd cultivate him as an ally and offer carrots and sticks. They have shown Abbas zero carrots and hit him with many sticks, causing him to go back to his people in disgrace, and Hamas was strengthened. You have an Israeli government that absolutely does not care about hearts and minds, and shows they aren't legitimately looking for solutions. The Likud party in its greed wants all the land, and is not willing to settle for peace. (In this, they are Hamas' mirror image; they want to drive the Arabs into the sea or Egypt, they have no problem inflicting violence on civilians, either in Gaza or lynching farmers on the West Bank, and are just as maximalist in their demands and fascist in their rhetoric to the point where they praise Jewish terrorists like Yigal Amir and Baruch Goldstein and build shrines to them. The biggest difference in many Arab eyes is that they have better PR.)

The only way out of this conflict is to dump the right-wingers running Israel and actually sit down with Palestinian leaders to negotiate a Two-state solution. (I'd do the same with Palestine, if Israel hadn't assassinated the moderates recently.) Abbas has asked for an end to settlement construction, they should grant it as a show of good faith, then Abbas will reciprocate with enforcing a cease-fire, and Israel will restrain the settler violence AND actually hold up their own end of the ceasefire (Israel broke the last 2, in 2012 by assassinating a Hamas negotiator, and in 2008 by crossing the border and killing 6, and the unprovoked shelling of a beach in 2006, killing several Palestinian children and triggering reprisal attacks).

When you take away hope, people will turn to militant groups. Abbas' position today is weak because it shows how completely powerless he is; his goals and strategy for dealing may sound nice but the public no longer believes Israel will hear him nor will he be able to get anything done. Change that and you'll see actual movement to peace.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Fantastic diary. You may want to modify the title (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elwior, AaronInSanDiego, HoundDog, need pr

    as people here will jump in thinking it's about political centrists in the US, which it is not.

    While you dream of Utopia, we're here on Earth, getting things done.

    by GoGoGoEverton on Sat Jul 26, 2014 at 03:24:45 PM PDT

  •  excellent article (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    but you examples sound more like how it's bad to allow right wing extremists to get away with sabotaging or even killing moderates rather than just failing to listen to them.

  •  Saeb Erekat said way back in 2000, when the (6+ / 0-)

    hope for a just solution and for a permanent peace was still alive, that the two parties in this conflict are those who want peace and those who do not.
       Sad to say, those who want for the bloodshed to continue have emerged victorious. Those of us who want peace can only watch in horror, mourn the lost opportunity, remain hopeful, and wait for the madness to play itself out.

    "We the People of the United States...." -U.S. Constitution

    by elwior on Sat Jul 26, 2014 at 03:44:03 PM PDT

  •  This is a terrific diary, BTW. (5+ / 0-)

    "We the People of the United States...." -U.S. Constitution

    by elwior on Sat Jul 26, 2014 at 03:45:59 PM PDT

  •  Except the same has happened in Israel too. (7+ / 0-)

    The moderates are being jeered and spat at as they call for dialogue instead of missiles.

    "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

    by zenbassoon on Sat Jul 26, 2014 at 03:51:07 PM PDT

  •  Neither the Panthers nor the Black (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elwior, corvo

    Power Movement were Hawks. I don't think I've ever heard the later characterized that way before, and most of what one hears about the Panthers is/was propaganda.

    That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

    by enhydra lutris on Sat Jul 26, 2014 at 03:55:18 PM PDT

    •  POW status (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      elwior, corvo

      Sure much of it was propaganda, but I'm trying to think of someone other than Malcom X who advocated armed struggle.
      The Panther 21 trial involved the group demanding POW status as a militia in wartime if I recall correctly. Do you have any other suggestion of who I can use? Huey Newton?

      •  Eldridge Cleaver? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        "We the People of the United States...." -U.S. Constitution

        by elwior on Sat Jul 26, 2014 at 04:23:30 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Read their entire history, especially the (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        early days. They didn't initially advocate armed struggle, but practiced armed deterrence/self-defence. They provided assorted services like breakfasts for children, escorts, etc, and, additionally became a visibly armed presence to (successfully) serve as a deterrence against crimes, violence &  attacks within their communities.

        Meanwhile, Black Power was simply about who would organize and administer black civil rights activities and organizations, blacks or whites.

        That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

        by enhydra lutris on Sat Jul 26, 2014 at 06:30:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  seriously great (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SulaymanF, corvo

    I just sucks that even if all of Palestine became a Mandella, they would still be abused by the Israelis.

  •  Well said and well written. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elwior, SulaymanF, YucatanMan

    The idea of supporting and strengthening moderates who advocate peace such as Abbas is excellent.

    1. My proposal is that as many of the 148 countries that voted to admit Palestine as a member of the UN do so bilaterally immediattely.

    2. That the U.S. immediately recognized Palestine as a state with Abbas as its leader and announce we will not block Palestine's admission to the UN with our S.C. veto.

    3. The UN admit Palestine as a member.

    Such action would do much to improve President Abbas' credibility with all Palestinians and give him more power to prevent rockets from being fired in Gaza

    4. Recognition should be consistent with current U.S. and U.N. policy of the 1967 borders subject to any mutually agreeable swaps Palestine and Israel wish to minimize problems of illegal settlers.

    5. The U.S. UN and others recognize that at the moment Israel is illegally occupying much of Palestinian territory so Abbas can only call for UN Security assistance at first for those areas that Israel is not in. All parties should call for Israeli withdrawal from all Palestinian land, but we do not realistically expect them to comply without more serious pressures which will follow.

    6. The US and UN make clear that if mutually agreed upon swaps do not lead to modified 1967 borders, Israel will be pressured to withdraw zone by zone with escalating sanctions, perhaps even global BDS.

    7. Once Israel has totally withdrawn from Palestinian land, Abbas and PA will be held responsible and penalized for any firing of rockets from Palestinian territory. UN Peacekeeping forces will replace IDF in all Palestinian positions.

    8. Abbas can allow exiled Palestinians to return of immigrate to Palestinian lands.

    Such measures should improve Abbas' and other moderates and also demonstrate non-violence is rewarded.

    With a more powerful and legitimate role Abbas and Israel's leadership can negotiate all other issues, or not taking as long as they like.

    We can not, and should not try to force either to sign a peace treaty they do not wish to sign, but the world can and should separate these parties to their appropriate border and must do so if international law is to have any meaning.

    In retrospect, our biggest strategic blunder has been to give Netanyahu and his predecessors veto power over the creation of the Palestinian state. We did not give the Palestinians veto power over the creation of the Israeli state  and should not have.

    Netanyahu and predecessors have exploited this assymetry and double standard to play a boa constrictor game of pushing the Palestinians off their lands and establishing illegal settlements.

    Just as we can not allow or reward terrorism without encouraging it and getting more of it, the same should be true of international law.  The illegal  plans of the Greater  Israel expansionists should not be rewarded or we will encourage others to violate international law.


    Humor Alert! No statement from this UID is intended to be true, including this one. Intended for recreational purposes only. Unauthorized interpretations may lead to unexpected results. This waiver void where prohibited. Artistic License - 420420

    by HoundDog on Sat Jul 26, 2014 at 04:19:47 PM PDT

  •  But this is about Gaza, not the West Bank. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Zornorph, harrylimelives

    The moderates in Gaza were exterminated by Hamas in 2007.  You can look it up.

    It's not the side effects of the cocaine/I'm thinking that it must be love

    by Rich in PA on Sat Jul 26, 2014 at 04:25:02 PM PDT

  •  The Arms Industry is too big to fail, and (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    too big for peace. If moderates want to pursue peace here and abroad, we are going to have to stand up to the power of money, together.

    They, in Gaza and in Israel, are depending on the moderates in the US, because we can move about, make signs, blog and protest, and vote. If we fail, they will continue to pay the price.

    Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

    by OregonOak on Sat Jul 26, 2014 at 05:10:37 PM PDT

  •  How does a diary get to Spotlight? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jan4insight, SulaymanF

    Should've been on reclist.

    While you dream of Utopia, we're here on Earth, getting things done.

    by GoGoGoEverton on Sat Jul 26, 2014 at 05:54:02 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site