Saturday, 26 February 2005
An explosion took place at a popular Tel Aviv night club on Friday night, killing 4 civilian victims and injuring 49, an Israeli policeman announced.
The attack came less than three weeks after Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Palestinian Leader Mahmoud Abbas agreed to a cessation of hostilities between the two sides, following more than four years of violence in the country.
Israeli policemen and intelligence sources claimed that the attack was sudden and they have no prior knowledge of a “possible suicide attack”.
The first thing that comes to the minds is that some Palestinian groups are the prime suspects of such attacks. In this case, the story follows the same pattern. However this time the differences are all accused parties, in particular Lebanon based Hezbollah rejected the responsibility of such an attack. According Jerusalem Post, Hizbullah(Hezbollah) official in Beirut denied the involvement and said “As far as we are concerned, there is no need to respond to such lies that we have become used to it”
Both the Palestinian and Israeli authorities strongly condemned the attack. Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas has pledged to punish the perpetrators. It was the first attack since Israeli and Palestinian leaders agreed earlier this month to end violence. “The Palestinian Authority will not stand silent in the face of this act of sabotage,” Mr. Abbas said in a statement after meeting security chiefs. “We will follow and track down responsible and they will be punished accordingly.”
However there is a big burden on Palestinian authority. Israelis urged the Palestinians to take necessary precautions. But this is not as easy as it sounds. Mahmoud Abbas needs the credibility and support of Israeli government to achieve this. If this peace process must be achieved, responsibility lies on both parties as it was in Northern Ireland.
A terror attack resembling the latest Tel Aviv explosion was happened in Ireland (Omagh Bombing) on 16 August 1998. The comment published in The Times on 18 August 1998 put forwards very key points regarding the political path both parties’ must follow.
“As each individual story of human tragedy unfolds, the agony of the Omagh bombing intensifies. The evil that lies behind those who executed this outrage demands a security response and should receive one. But what response? The Republican fanatics who constitute the “Real IRA” would willingly see its whole membership put behind bars if that was the price of destroying political reconciliation. The outraged must resist the temptation to press for measures that sound suitably firm but may prove ineffective or even counter-productive in practice. The government must seek to suppress the activities of the terrorists who stand outside the peace process but must do so in a fashion that underpins not undermines the Good Friday agreement.” (The Times 18 August 1998)
Achieving a peace process requires hard work. It is not bed of roses for those involving in a peace process, both parties must merge on cooperation rather than confrontation and concentrate on the common benefits of their citizens and not to let hard liners to take control of their public’s future. Sometimes, it can be difficult to make a clear distinction between the hard line terrorist and the more moderate large communities who can be, at the same time, exploited by terrorist groups who cast themselves as their natural representatives. Hard line policies can miss their intended targets and end up counter-productive. It is time for Israeli authorities to be calmer, realist than ever not to endanger the peace process. Because that is what exactly the terrorists and hard liners from both communities wanted to achieve.
Friday night’s tragic event in Tel Aviv taught us again that fighting against terrorism is delicate and requires big patience. In particular, during at this stage when the hopes for peace process are high, there is a certain expectance of such terror attacks from the envies and enemies of the peace process. The times are hard for both Israelis and Palestinians. On one side Israel must show its citizens that it can maintain the security. On the other side, Palestinian leader must prevent further division and marginalization of the Palestinian groups inside. He must achieve in uniting the Palestinian groups and he must convince that the future hopes must be built on a peace process rather than violence.
A possible failure of a peace process is not the guilt of one party, but both parties. Therefore both parties must recognize their responsibilities, commitments to be made and sacrifices. Time and time again it has been proven that failure of hopes always played in to the hard liners hand and created more violence, more bloodshed and tears. So far, no one has argued that this is the desired end; however it came to this end many times.
Once for all, people in Israel, Middle East and through out the world wants to see hard work, more commitment, initiative and responsible policy making from Israeli and Palestinian authorities. “Winning a peace is harder than winning a war.”
Dr Ihsan BAL
Head of Security Studies, ISRO (www.isro.org.uk)
Journal of Turkish Weekly Special
Europe Says "Terrorism is Terrorism!"
