On Thursday, the mayor of Paris, Bertrand Delanoe, and leading figures in the Socialist Party, along with Israeli President Shimon Peres, will inaugurate Ben Gurion Square. Delanoe wrapped up a trip this week to Beirut, where he was warmly received. In Beirut, Delanoe was asked about the square, and responded by saying that for the sake of balance, he would also inaugurate a square bearing the name Mahmoud Darwish. Darwish deserves a square in his name in all of the world's cities, especially the French capital, where he resided. It was a city that he loved, and its beauty and culture astonished him. What does a square with the name Mahmoud Darwish have to do with one bearing the name of Ben Gurion, a founder of the state of Israel and the head of the Jewish Agency who was active in killing and expelling Arab Palestinians from their land, along with dispersing millions of Palestinian refugees to Arab countries. Delanoe and the city of Paris are searching for the support of Jewish voters in the French capital to aid them in municipal elections and in the presidential elections in 2012. What is the meaning of the timing of such an event, as the Israeli government headed by Benjamin Netanyahu is busying the world, and even its number one ally, the American administration, with disasters it creates thanks to its policies toward the Palestinians? What does it mean to inaugurate a square named after one of the leading Zionists, in a country like France, whose policy since the De Gaulle era has been more balanced and fair vis-à-vis the Arab-Israeli conflict? Did Delanoe establish a public square in the name of Yasser Arafat, who died in France? Doesn't Delanoe see Israel's current policy, its rejection of peace with the Palestinian people, and its rejection of halting settlements in all Arab territories? Doesn't he notice how Israeli policy weakens the president of the Palestinian Authority, which France plays a leading role in supporting, and to which it urges Europe and the United States to offer real support? Doesn't he see that Netanyahu does not listen to his friend, French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who advises him to change his policy? The entire world has acknowledged the reality that Netanyahu does not want peace. Even a few years ago, the European Commission carried out a poll that showed the majority of Europeans believe that Israel is most responsible for the absence of peace in the region and the world, although the result of the European poll has not been noticed. The initiative by the municipality of Paris and its mayor, Delanoe, is unacceptable and unfathomable in terms of its inappropriate timing by a state such as France, which is working for peace. Sarkozy is trying to convince Obama to abandon the mission of envoy George Mitchell and is advising him to convene an international conference that begins with compelling Israel to implement all international resolutions. Sarkozy's idea is that the conference should continue for a number of years, so that the resolutions are implemented, and so that peace is encouraged, since France does not believe in the success of Mitchell's mission. France truly wants to push the peace process forward, but symbolism is important. The inauguration of a Ben Gurion Square poses questions about France's stance, and its failure to approve a boycott of goods exported from Israeli settlements. On the pretext that boycotts are forbidden, the French Economy Ministry refused to even put stickers on goods exported from settlements, to differentiate them from those coming from Israel. How can France condemn the settlement policy and accept the marketing of exports from these settlements? In fact, Europe and the West bear a great responsibility for not pressuring Israel to change its policy. Instead, they reward it with symbolic initiatives, such as Ben Gurion Square, or selling settlement products in European markets. Meanwhile, the Israeli government does not want peace, whether with the Palestinians, Syria or Lebanon. In 2006, its bombs destroyed Lebanon on the pretext that it wanted to end the resistance, which had become stronger, as it did in Gaza, strengthening Hamas. Israeli policy is the motive for ending moderation and spreading extremism and its model is the Israeli government!
