BY JOHN NAGENDA
What you ate long ago returns long afterward. Or more elegantly put in its original Luganda tongue: Okalya dda kadda dda. The returning is not always pleasant, indeed carries a whiff of revenge. The dish you ate long ago, and possibly much enjoyed, nevertheless returns to haunt you.
Reference, in this instance to what Israel ate, would be to the 61 years since that country was first formed (some would say, re-formed). Next would be to look at its often severe mistreatment of its neighbours, the Arabs (some would say the true owners of the land annexed by Mandate to the Israelites in 1948).
It is a notorious tale, although many, including this columnist, understand why the persecuted Jews had to be found a home near their original one. It is what followed, with scant regard to the rights of the expelled Arab Palestinians, that sticks in the craw. So what does Obamas raised fist mean, and is it feasible?
The USA is the strongest supporter of the State of Israel, financially and militarily, sinking big billions into its exchequer annually, and affording it military protection against all-comers. This has put a permanent sneer of massive proportions on Israels features towards its neighbours, and to the world. Now President Obama seeks to redress this wrong, without ever abandoning Israel. It is feasible, on the principle of who calls the tune, undoubtedly the US.
It is morally right because of the circumstances. It is elegant, because of the easily visible route taken: stopping all Israeli building in the resettled areas. Israel is stubbornly against; it would be great folly to underestimate the American fist. The Palestinian should take the same advice. It would be calamitous to both sides to ignore this route of minimum risk.
Obama, after a subdued start on the thorny Middle East conundrum, is hitting the ground running. Some of us questioned what we interpreted as tardiness. Some, excluding me, will now question his capacity to carry it through.
What you ate long ago returns long afterward. Or more elegantly put in its original Luganda tongue: Okalya dda kadda dda. The returning is not always pleasant, indeed carries a whiff of revenge. The dish you ate long ago, and possibly much enjoyed, nevertheless returns to haunt you.
Reference, in this instance to what Israel ate, would be to the 61 years since that country was first formed (some would say, re-formed). Next would be to look at its often severe mistreatment of its neighbours, the Arabs (some would say the true owners of the land annexed by Mandate to the Israelites in 1948).
It is a notorious tale, although many, including this columnist, understand why the persecuted Jews had to be found a home near their original one. It is what followed, with scant regard to the rights of the expelled Arab Palestinians, that sticks in the craw. So what does Obamas raised fist mean, and is it feasible?
The USA is the strongest supporter of the State of Israel, financially and militarily, sinking big billions into its exchequer annually, and affording it military protection against all-comers. This has put a permanent sneer of massive proportions on Israels features towards its neighbours, and to the world. Now President Obama seeks to redress this wrong, without ever abandoning Israel. It is feasible, on the principle of who calls the tune, undoubtedly the US.
It is morally right because of the circumstances. It is elegant, because of the easily visible route taken: stopping all Israeli building in the resettled areas. Israel is stubbornly against; it would be great folly to underestimate the American fist. The Palestinian should take the same advice. It would be calamitous to both sides to ignore this route of minimum risk.
Obama, after a subdued start on the thorny Middle East conundrum, is hitting the ground running. Some of us questioned what we interpreted as tardiness. Some, excluding me, will now question his capacity to carry it through.
