Former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, played down opportunities of peace between Arab and Israelis after Arab spring, saying that it is unlikely. I in turn also acknowledge what Blair says for the following reasons:
No one can sign a permanent peace deal with countries that are in a state of instability and chaos. The Arab world is now living a state of instability with many indicators that say that it is going to be long.
The Israelis are insisting on the occupied Arab territories so as to pressure the Arabs and take them for serving their interests. they had weakened them and destroyed most of their abilities, so it is not possible that they would abandon them in return for gratuitously unguaranteed peace, that would lift pressure from them and give them a chance to take their breath and rebuild themselves in serious situations in which Israel would be the major loser.
She finds nothing through which she can defend its strong position other than tenacity over the land and readiness for a new stage of aggression, that it can use for containing the new forces, in a similar way of circumventing the new forces that emerged after the independence of most of the Arab world countries after the second world war.
Israel will not make peace with the Arabs that would liberate their capacities and potentials that had been inhibited and crippled by the autocratic regimes , and which the current Arab spring promises with liberating them.
It is not possible that Israel would contribute to the process of liberating the fettered and trounced Arab capacities, because its liberation means the end of its existence in Palestinian territories, even if after a while. This will reveal the great difference in power between it and the Arabs.
Such case had made Israel grateful to the autocratic Arab regimes which have undertaken to crippling this difference through disabling their people and country's aptitudes and potentials.
It is known that the Zionists have announced through several of their prime ministers, and most recently through Netanyahu, that they will defend the Arab dictatorial regimes, and will not allow the establishment of any democratic governments that would free the Arab giant from its bottle, to put it with its full energy against them. They would not then be able to face it even if they have twice of what they possess of the deadliest weapons.
Israel won't allow overthrowing the regimes whose tyranny has held peace or led to the degrading deals that have gone too far in disabling the limited abilities that the Arabs were using in the wars against her as well as contributing to further disintegration of the Arab world.
Israel fears peace because it returns to Arabs their land and rights in Palestine due to the historic balance of power and the substantive difference in capacities already mentioned, which will break the existing military balance of power and make it to their advantage.
That is why it rejects the peace principals, because of its belief that it will create a substantive historical and military balance against its interests. it will result in an inevitable economic and military Arab approximation, which will definitely liberate the enormous Arab's capacity and enables them to build free regimes that will build effective relations with the great international powers, especially America. These Arab regimes will then be supported by invincible economic and political support.
Israel used always advocated peace, however it used to do that so as to win the western public opinion and to get more of their developed weapons, and not because it wants or seeks it.
Following the 1967 war, the defeated Arabs rushed for peace with her and accepted it with the degrading conditions that it desired. They accepted a deal that is fully in its favor, however it refused their peace in arrogance . It made those negotiating with it to believe that she prefers occupation with war to peace that lifts her sword from their throats and offer them a chance that enables them to catch up with the world and makes them to accomplish convergence that creates a unified, progressive and just Arab world. Israel was insistent that the soldiers' boots will not be lifted from their necks. It worked not to allow a serious change in the bases of reality, which pose serious threat to Israel's existence and may be the beginning to the end of its project.
So it wanted no peace with the Arabs, for peace will, by the elapse of time resurrect them from the ashes of history. It will provide them with opportunities to set right their distorted situations, catch up with the development that they had missed and to achieve historical changes in their affairs that the Zionists and their sympathizers will not be able to keep pace with, whatever they do.
It is notable that there is a belief that the Arabs should remain to be late, underdeveloped, and suffering from self-inhibition that disrupts and prevents them from achieving their objectives. Their objectives should also remain modest and limited as well as being run by governments that are strong in the face of their people and weak before the outside world.
The existing situation is unsustainable. This is a scaring problem to Israel, which puts it before the question of its foundation in 1948, and after the victory that surprised it herself more that the others in 1967.
How can it keep the Arabs weak, underdeveloped and torn? In other words Israel is not pleased with the developments that are going in the Arab world.
It is seeing the beginning of new communal, intellectual and spiritual trends that are different from those it used to know at the beginning of the fifties, and suffered a lot to defeat them.
Is it possible that she would hurry to make peace to spare her a new historical battle with the Arabs who are likely to be very different from those whom she fought and defeated.
Many indications point out that the results of such a battle will be fatal to her. Will she make peace of the sort that she admits in advance that it fail to be engaged in it because it will be and inevitable defeat to her, as long as it will not change the Arab's perspective towards the character of Palestine and their desire to recover it? What will Israel do if the Arabs refused to give her assurances that they will not return to the national unionist attitude which is the base for her occupation of Palestine.
There are no indicators that the Arab spring will make peace with Israel within reach. There are indicators however that it is preparing for a strike if it failed to circumvent it from within in its countries, where it started to be exposed to schisms, power challenges and serious differences.