Before the trap springs shut on the Palestinian people, resign!
Let us shed our illusions: for decades, as governments have come and gone, the Palestinian question has been monopolized by political manoeuvering and diplomatic strategizing that have far more to do with symbolic management than with any true design or desire to bring about peace. Successive Israeli governments, like their counterparts in the West and in the Arab world, temporize, engage in egregious manipulation and outright lies, while with every passing day the situation on the ground for the Palestinian people grows worse.
We are like helpless spectators to an advertising campaign force-fed beyond satiation by catch phrases and slogans like “process”, “accords”, “peace”, “solution”, “Road Map” or “Quartet” whose only purpose is to score points and to gain time in the sole battle today deemed significant: that of the media.
Who can deny that Israel’s victory in this conflict has been total? That its success has been highlighted by political achievements worthy of the greatest military and diplomatic strategists? Since the Oslo Accords, followed by the Barcelona talks, and up to and including the “Road Map” (which was to have seen the creation of a Palestinian state in 2005!) the attentive observer can only conclude that, behind the virtual “peace process” lies another, hard-edged process that for the last fifteen years has deceived the Palestinians with false promises, has undermined their unity and their capacity to resist. Fifteen years later, the situation is worse than ever; Israel has set aside not a single of its prerogatives; it has respected not a single United Nations major resolution.
Yasser Arafat was prevailed upon to recognize Israel, to wind down opposition and to enter into an interminable “peace process” (while the Israeli government had already assumed responsibility for eliminating any of his overly combative and cumbersome collaborators). At each stage, Israeli negotiators played for, and gained, time. Recently, this strategy has been strikingly accelerated: Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza was accomplished at no cost. In fact, Ariel Sharon¹s chief of staff was later to describe it as a gambit for gaining – still more – time!
Settlement construction in the Occupied Territories and around Jerusalem has intensified, and been strategically expanded… far from the cameras. At the end of the day, Jerusalem will be quite simply, and almost entirely, “settled”… far from the cameras. Work on the apartheid – the so-called security – wall continues, penetrating deep into Palestinian lands (in total contradiction with the agreed-upon provisions of previous accords and United Nations resolutions), making the survival of a “Palestinian State” an impossibility… far from the cameras. Beneath the foundations of the Al-Aqsa Mosque, tunnelling goes on: slowly, but surely, its very existence is jeopardized… far from the cameras.
Seen from Tel Aviv, there is no such thing as a “peace process”, but rather the unchanged and identical policy of “discretely”, “indirectly”, “slowly and surely” asphyxiating its adversary, humiliating him, and in the end extinguishing even his most minimal claims prior to total eradication. Far from the cameras, as usual. Not to mention a regional policy that bears the hallmark of political genius. All the surrounding countries are ensnared by instability in varying degrees: from Iraq to Syria, from Lebanon to Iran, Israeli power is involved, to a greater or lesser degree, in shaping the outcome, sometimes as a simple observer (a falsely disinterested, friendly advisor to Americans and Europeans), or as a high-stakes player. Israeli military advisors are present in Iraq; Israel has a keen interest in neutralizing Lebanon (and Syria), home of Hezbollah resistance. The Israeli government has never concealed its desire to limit Tehran’s political and/or nuclear capacity. As these lines are written, this policy is proving its effectiveness: Washington tags along, Europe remains silent, and Palestinians perish.
Then came the recent Palestinian elections: free, fair and democratic. While such an outcome is unthinkable in the Arab world -and will be for decades to come- it suddenly became possible in the Occupied Palestinian territories. Call it a miracle, or call it a travesty. For years, Israeli has been working overtime to void “Palestinian power” of the remotest semblance of “authority”. Borders are under total control; check-points, with their accompanying humiliations, multiply; financial transactions are blocked; Israeli forces strike deep into the Occupied Territories; aerial bombardments are a daily occurrence. All eyes are focused on the all-too-real corruption of the Fatah establishment, overlooking the fact that the “Palestinian Authority” was and is an authority in name only.
The manoeuvre has been a purely verbal one from the start. Yet again, the manipulation of symbols has been designed to turn attention away from reality. The extraordinary accomplishment of Israeli political genius is to have allowed “totally democratic elections” to take place under the watchful gaze of the cameras in territories (not-really-so-occupied-after-all) after having broken off talks with Arafat, after having turned its back on Mahmoud Abbas, after having transformed the daily lives of Palestinians into a nightmare. To widespread astonishment -including that of the victors themselves – Hamas would now assume the direction of an “Authority” which possessed, in point of cold fact, no power whatsoever.
Internationally, the battle was once again one of symbols. The outcome was the worst possible: a victory for the “islamists”, the “terrorists” the “enemies of democracies and Israel” people who could never be recognized as negotiating partners, putting aside any question of support. While Hamas was indeed winning the elections within its minuscule Occupied Territories; the Israeli government was winning the case by promptly sweeping any interpretation conflicting with its own from the table and by imposing its management at the international level. In the end, the situation has simply been turned upside down: Hamas possesses nothing but the symbolic attributes of power, while Israel retains total control both of the game, and of the way in which it is to be played.
The United States and the European Union have decided to end their support for the “Palestinian Authority”. In so doing, they have implicity decreed that the Palestinian cause should become a strictly “humanitarian” one. The slippage is as serious as it is dangerous; it is also another feather – both symbolic and concrete – in the cap of the Israeli government. Arab governments, out of spinelessness and hypocrisy, and occasionally out of pure impotence, are paralyzed by the same decades-long, noisy indecisiveness: from them, nothing whatsoever can be expected.
The Palestinian cause is in crisis: the humanitarian institutions, the NGOs, the women and men who over the years have shown such deep sensitivity to the injustice suffered by the Palestinian people, now find themselves in an impasse, subjected to unprecedented pressures. The questions asked are becoming more pointed; now they are being forced to decide: who do they support? How are they to distinguish between the Palestinian people and its democratically chosen islamist “Authority”? What do they ultimately hope to achieve? With whom, and how, now that the sovereign Palestinian people has spoken?
In occupied Palestine, in the the Arab world, in the West, the situation has reached the point of no return. Israel continues to apply its policy of tiny increments, of facts on the ground. Funds are frozen or withheld; civil servants are no longer paid, unemployment is soaring, social and economic life is smothering. Palestinian society is on the verge of implosion. The Israeli government can only be satisfied with the reversal of priorities that has transformed the need for a political solution that would respect the legitimate rights of the Palestinians into a humanitarian emergency whose only aim is to assist the suffering population of Palestine. The cameras can soon return without risk…
It is time to bring this travesty to an end! Time is running out; the “Palestinian Authority” must resign at the earliest opportunity. It is a matter of utmost urgency that the Authority, acting collectively, bring its term to an end. In so doing, it must insist that President Mahmud Abbas and the Western governments that claim to support him assume their political responsibilities. The Palestinian people have rights that must be respected; enough of the word play! The “democratic process” in the Occupied Territories cannot be allowed to facilitate a global strategy designed to strip the Palestinian cause of its political character.
It is hardly surprising that the key concepts of the day are “fighting terrorism” and “humanitarian aid” The perversion could not be more complete: no more power, no more rights, no more resolutions… Nothing remains but an ill-defined sense of international compassion, empty of the political will to act! Before the jaws of this trap snap closed, terminally silencing and dividing the Palestinian people in full public view, it is necessary to abandon this shadow play, this travesty of an “Authority” and to confront the international community and the Arab regimes with their responsibilities, with their cowardice and their blindness. In perfect dignity.
There can be peace only if the rights of the Palestinians, including the fundamental right to live freely, in absolute autonomy and with full dignity, are respected. No amount of symbolic manipulation or tiny strategic victories can alter the situation in the slightest. Our voices, those of the entire world, must restate the obvious; because we reject violence in all its forms, we can accept no form of silence, whether imposed or guilty. The current Palestinian Authority should resign immediately; the international community must take immediate steps to exert pressure upon Israel, to remind it of its political obligations and the terms of binding international resolutions.
In Tel Aviv back-rooms, political decisions are being taken and applied daily – far from the cameras – that make any hope of peace illusory. We, the international community, the free citizens of the world will, by our silence, be responsible for this flagrant injustice, just as surely as we will share in the flare-up of violence that now seems inevitable. It is all too easy to assert that the Palestinian people has taken a wrong turn, that it has chosen the wrong representatives when, in the final analysis, it was impossible for them to imagine that there existed the barest indications of a way out, the faintest shadow of a choice.
Peace be with you!
The solution that you propose is dissapointingly not in sync with the excellent analysis that precedes it.
Instead of further humiliating the Palestinian people by subjecting them to this kind of blackmail, the international community must be forced to come to terms with the self-determination of a people.
The daily suffering of the Palestinian people will not end with the resumption of aid. It will only end when the international community is willing to treat the Palestinians as a people worthy of the freedom and dignity that the rest of humanity enjoys.
Perhaps the current plight, horrendous as it is, will serve as a catalyst towards this recognition.
Looking at things objectively.
Should the European Union continue to fund the Palestinians ? If other tactics come into play to further isolate and impoverish Palestinian society, what would be the result? Will it cause Palestinian society to rise up and say, No more Hamas, now we’ll turn back to Fatah? Or will it further radicalize Palestinian society? They want to punish them without causing a bloodbath.
Might the experience of-as someone puts it-“having to make sure that the garbage is collected” have a moderating influence on Hamas?
There is that hope or prediction, but it is far from a sure thing. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the new President of Iran, was not elected to deny the Holocaust, to make threatening overtures in the direction of Israel. That was not the main platform on which Iranians voted for him. They voted for him because they saw him as the anti-poverty, anti-corruption, social-services candidate. But he’s used his mandate the way he’s used his mandate. That said, without being softheaded about it, there is clearly debate going on within Hamas about what kind of language to use, how to pitch their rhetoric, how to play the political game vis-à-vis Israel.
Their first big move has been to promote one of their own, Ismail Haniyeh, as Prime Minister. Initially, they’d been talking about getting a Prime Minister who was, above all, an effective technocrat, someone who could make things work, But Haniyeh is not that. He’s simply the guy who was at the top of the national slate.
So they’re not backing off their victory.
What’s also of interest, speaking of Iran, is the degree to which Iran will act as a support to Hamas.
Observers have long believed that, in one way or another, Iran has been very helpful to Hamas. Now, again, it’s an interesting tactical question: If support diminishes from the West, will that allow Iran to fill a vacuum?
Ahmadinajead said to Hamas that Allah will help them, in the meantime, they put more trust in help from the EU and Abu Chirac.
More liberal heads are concerned above all with chaos with the infighting between the armed gangs. How many dead are there already?. How many bchildren injured in wild firing? The biggest danger is chaos, particularly in Gaza.
Al Qaeda feeds on chaotic situations. It did it in Afghanistan, and now it’s doing it in Iraq.
And Isrel what does she think?
There is a broad Israeli consensus on the following things: the real, final settlement with the Palestinians is off in the future; what Israelis need to do is separate from the Palestinians the best they can, to create a kind of rough peace, Israelis here, Palestinians over there, and it has to be accomplished more or less unilaterally, because the notion of a partnership has fallen through, with the collapse of the Oslo accords, the inability to deal with Arafat, and now the rise of Hamas; That is not going to leave the Palestinians with what they wanted, or even with what was on offer at Camp David in 2000, but it’s going to create a kind of disengagement from each other, and that’s what it’s going to be for a while.
The Israelis, or most of them, know that occupation is untenable: it is morally untenable, a financial and military sinkhole, a demographic disaster.
And if that Palestinian state is not democratic, if it’s a religious state-
I doubt it will be, but, one way or the other, Israel can’t dictate whether a Palestinian state becomes Islamist or not Islamist. What would they prefer? They’d of course prefer a peaceful, satisfied neighbor, but peace and satisfaction is not likely in the offing. This problem of two peoples contending for one land, the problem of how to form divisions, how to create a lasting peace, is a problem that’s going to go on for many years.
Hamas, which denies the legitimacy of Israel and any agreements that were made between Israel and the P.L.O. in years past, does little to enhance the prospects of a peceful settlement.
The game got a lot more complicated for everybody, Hamas included, on January 25th. And it’s an open question on all sides about how the various players are going to behave.
Just a few questions.
Question 1.
In whose interest is this Palestinian war on Israel?
No one’s. Yasser Arafat, its architect, thought it would be a Palestinian war of independence forcing Israel, from fear of terrorism and international pressure, to yield all the territories plus an unfettered « right » of Palestinian return in exchange for a paper promise of peace lasting until the next round of war against it.
Instead, the result has destroyed any basis for a compromise peace, set the Palestinian infrastructure back by many years, and caused a huge amount of pain and suffering to achieve absolutely nothing.
Question 2.
Does Israel want the territories?
While Israelis differ over proposed borders, the great majority wish to get rid of almost all these lands. Today the Palestinian leadership has created the main argument against doing so by showing that yielding territory increases attacks and claims against Israel.
Had Arafat at the time, accepted the Camp David or Clinton proposals as a basis, Israelis would have agreed, the occupation would be over, a Palestinian state would exist right now, and more than 5.000 people would be alive.
Question 3.
Does Israel want to dominate the Palestinians in permanent subjugation?
See question 2. Israel wants to end its control over Palestinians, as every public-opinion poll shows, in a way that brings real peace. Israelis don’t want to be colonial masters; they simply want to be left alone by their neighbors.
Question 4.
Has Israel won the war?
No one can be said to win a war so totally unnecessary and with such horrible costs. But Israel certainly has the upper hand militarily, economically, and politically. Palestinian goals cannot be met. More and more Palestinians see this. Now we are waiting for them to to choose a real peace and prosperity or be replaced.
Question 5.
Is HAMAS a partner for peace?
No, by his own decision. The current problem is that he refuses to be even a partner and makes war declarations.
Question 6.
Are there Palestinian leaders who genuinely want peace?
Yes. In private, they speak freely about the disastrous policy, the damage done by terrorism, and the desirability of accepting a compromise along the lines offered by prime minister Ehud Barak. The problem is that they don’t say these things in public.
Question 7.
Is Israel being brutal to the Palestinians?
Unquestionably there are some abuses and misdeeds. But if there were no imposed war there would be no roadblocks, no sieges, no killings or destruction. And Israel has been far more careful than any other country would be facing a similar situation.
Moreover, the Palestinians could easily have ended the occupation and removed settlements from their territory by reaching a peaceful solution years ago. Equally, they could have ended the fighting.
Question 9.
Isn’t restraint a measure of morality?
Yes. Israel could easily win a total military victory, inflict a huge number of Palestinian casualties in a single day, wipe out the leadership of all the Hamas Islamic Jihad and other militant groups, and destroy the Palestinian infrastructure in a matter of hours. It has chosen not to do so.
Question 10.
Can a Palestinian reform movement change Palestinian politics?
Maybe, given enough time and lots of pressure, including stopping aid.
Hi virginie,
Do you think Israel is partner of peace?
Do you think security of Isralien people is the main concern of Israel?
If so, why Isreal refused ONU forces to be
There and to help ensuring peace?
Isn’t that because they fear that other people see the real truth of atrocities made by the israeli ARMY?
Is that because of fear from honest people that can heard all over the world?
Please, be honest with yourself, Israel never want peace.
Even if the next palestian government will be led by the Angels? Israeli government will find a reason to not dialog with it.
What I hope is that next Isreali generations will be more wise and correct but for the moment no hope.
“My beloved countrymen, sons and daughters of Palestine, you defied the orders of the Living Dead, you dared the threats of his servants in Washington, London and Brussels.
You choose the party of faith and resistance. You manifested your spirit unbroken by oppression.
I feel so proud of your noble daring, of your steadfast belief in God, of your defiant rejection of Tel Aviv’s diktat. Even under the foreign military rule, you are the freest people in the world, the most unbending and resilient. You are freer than Americans who submitted to their Patriot Act, you are freer than Europeans who repeat the instructions of Washington and threaten Iran with sanctions and war.
”
[http://www.israelshamir.net/English/Vox_Populi.htm->http://www.israelshamir.net/English/Vox_Populi.htm]
3-159
«and consult them in affairs (of moment). Then, when thou hast taken a decision,
put thy trust in God.
For God loves those who put their trust (in Him).»
[160] If God helps you none can overcome you: if He forsakes you, who is there, after that, that can help you? In God, then, let Believers put their trust.
Had Arafat accepted the Camp David or Clinton proposals as a basis, Israelis would have agreed, the occupation would be over, a Palestinian state would exist right now, and more than 5000 people would be alive. Was Arafat a partner for peace? The answer is no, by his own decision. Is Israel being brutal to the Palestinians? Unquestionably there are some abuses and misdeeds. But if there were no imposed war, there would be no roadblocks, no sieges, no killings or destruction. And Israel has been far more careful than any other country would be facing a similar situation.
Moreover, the Palestinians could easily have ended the occupation and removed settlements from their territory by reaching a peaceful solution 6 years ago. Equally, they could have ended the fighting any time in the last 6 years by implementing a real cease-fire.
The Palestinians are paying an awful price for their decision to shut down negotiations at Camp David in July 2000 and the subsequent intifada have been . The Palestinian economy is stagnant mainly because of Arafat’s misdeeds (not to speak about rampant corruption). The governing institutions of the Palestinian Authority barely function. Arafat’s refusal to negotiate has cost him dearly in Washington (but not in Europe or the U.K.). The Palestinians have utterly lost the Israeli public; those who used to sympathize with the Palestinians and urge concessions are now quiet or shamefaced, and the center of the Israeli electorate has shifted behind Ariel Sharon.
Aselamalikum
Probably I misunderstand what you are saying Professor Remedan, but if you are seriously suggesting that Hamas resign so that a peace process continues or the international community acts in the interest of Palestenians, I really wonder how you get into this conclusion or recommendation based on your arguments earlier. Is there any reason to believe that this can possibly happen? Hasn’t Isreal refuse to uphold more than dozens of UN resolutions? Isn’t Isreal building the barbaric apharthid wall even when i write this lines by absolutly ignoring the suggestion of the court decision? Hasn’t the U.s been consistently supporting Isreal aggression. What makes you think that things will change now if Hamas resign after being democraticaly elected? Who in White House or in London listen to the general public anyway?
I am honestly bewildered about your conclusion/recomendation. It must be said in irony i guss and i just missed the point may be. It would be nice if you clarify your point
Peace
Assalam Alaikoum,
What is the alternative then? Phantom Authority or no Phatom Authority, will its resignation change anything at all? as to the international community exerting a pressure whatsoever on Israel am afraid to say that procastination as it always does, the time it shakes itself and decides to do take steps, it might be too late.
Fitèna
The only way to advance the chance for peace is, first, by defeating the terrorist regime. The training camps must be shut down; the weapons must be seized; the terrorists must be apprehended and brought to trial; and the areas controlled by the Palestinian Authority must be completely demilitarised. These actions must be followed by a lengthy period in which the Palestinian Authority’s culture of hatred is stamped out.
The only long-term hope for Middle East peace lies in permanently weaning the Palestinians off their diet of hatred. Terrorists, whether led by bin Laden or Arafat, or Ismail Haniyeh should be fought and defeated, not appeased with offers of statehood. Sending a message that terrorism pays is the worst possible move at a time when terrorists are threatening America, Israel, and the entire free world.
Israel is a democracy which recognizes the individual rights of its citizens (such as their right to liberty and freedom of speech). The Israeli government is the only regime in the Middle East that is elected by free citizens — including 1.2 million Arabs and Muslims.
The enemies of Israel, by contrast, are dictatorships and state sponsored terrorist organizations. They do not recognize the individual rights of their own subjects, much less those of the citizens of Israel. They initiate force indiscriminately in order to retain and expand their power.
In Lebanon, don’t try speaking out against the Syrian occupation. You won’t live long.
In Saudi Arabia, don’t try converting from Islam. You won’t live long.
In Iraq, don’t try saying the regime has got WMD. You won’t live long.
In Somalia, don’t try refusing sexual mutilation of your sister. She and you won’t live long.
In Tunisia, don’t try saying the government is corrupt. You won’t live long.
In Egypt, don’t try being a homosexual. You won’t live long.
In Sudan, don’t try being a separatist. You won’t live long.
In Iran, don’t try having an affair. You won’t live long.
In Algeria, don’t try fomenting revolutionary jihadism. You won’t live long.
In Libya, don’t try asking about her role in international terrorism. You won’t live long.
In Mauritania, don’t try helping a slave run away. He and you won’t live long.
In Syria, don’t try throwing stones at police. You won’t live long.
In Oman, don’t try demonstrating for women rights. You won’t live long.
In Morocco, don’t try saying Arab Saharawis have been displaced. You won’t live long.
In Yemen, don’t try apostasy. You won’t live long.
In the Palestinian Authority, don’t try supporting democratic Israel. You won’t live long.
No reason for outrage !!!
Remember a couple of years ago when Israel killed some Hamas honchos in an effort to prevent suicide bombings? That prompted world-wide outrage. This time, however, it was Arab terrorists killing other Arab terrorists. If any Jewish lives were saved in the process, it was purely incidental. Thus there is no cause for world-wide outrage.
Reuters sums up the confusion in Gaza caused by rival security forces with conflicting loyalties:
One elderly man wasn’t sure who was who. « Are you police or are you Hamas? » 65-year-old Abu Ahmed asked some gunmen.
« We are the executive force, » a bearded young man from Hamas replied, leaving 65-year-old Abu Ahmed little the wiser.
In the Daily Telegraph, Daniel Hannan argues that Palestinian dependency on Western aid only fuels their anger at the US and Europe:
To be fair, Eurocrats also think they can smother Palestinian terrorism under a landslide of euros. This aim is tacitly backed by many in Tel Aviv. An Israeli official told me, on condition of anonymity: « None of our politicians can argue for giving money to Palestine while Hamas is in charge. But we don’t want people to go hungry and fall into the hands of the jihadists. So if you guys can figure out how to get the money to ordinary Palestinians, you’ll be doing us a favour. »
This sounds reasonable, but it is based on a false premise, namely that political violence is caused by economic deprivation. This notion derives ultimately from Marx and, like many of his ideas, it looks plausible on the page, but turns out not to be true….
Easing these restrictions would not solve everything. Trade and investment would not, in themselves, end a conflict with ethnic, religious and territorial dimensions. But a capitalist Palestine, in which citizens looked to themselves rather than to the state, would be more stable. Its propertied classes would have a stake in civil order. Its businessmen would have an incentive to remain on cordial terms with their customers, including those in Israel.
None of this will happen, however, as long as Palestinians remain trapped in the squalor of dependency. The EU, in its well-intentioned but doltish way, is fuelling the conflict.
Salam Aleikum from Canada:
‘Playing Politics With a Scalpel’
The Toronto Star’s Mitch Potter visits the Kamal Adwan Hospital in Gaza and discovers a new meaning to triage as doctors struggle to treat the casualties of inter-Palestinian violence:
Medical workers, who remain among the 165,000 civil service staff going on three months without pay from the bankrupt and internationally boycotted Palestinian government, are operating under the assumption the battle may yet spill inside the hospital doors.
« We have to be afraid, » Abu Raya said.
To avoid such confrontations, doctors now are processing patients according to faction. One side’s casualties get the briefest of triage at Kamal Adwan before being moved to other hospitals, the rest are admitted for full treatment.
None appear interested in playing politics with a scalpel. They simply don’t know what else to do.
The Palestinians elected Hamas in the hope that it will improve their condition not worsen it. It is clear now that Hamas cannot deliver anything but rehtoric. the kind of rehtoric that bruoght down Iraq because of Saddam and brought defeat in 1956 and 1967.
The palestinains cannot afford the luxury of tribal wars and self destruction.
Tariq Ramdan is right Hamas should be booted out. The sooner the better.
Little is said about the choices the Palestinian people and their leaders made. The truth of the matter is that the Palestinians are more interested in destroying the Jewish State and killing its Jews than to have a functioning economy, economic progress, political and social justice, or harmony with their Jewish neighbors that benefits everyone particular themselves.
There is a remarkable bond between National Socialism (Nazis) in Germany and their successors in Europe today, and the Palestinian national movement and its leadership.
It is not merely the alliance between the Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin al-Houssaini and Adolph Hitler ( He hosted the Mufti in Berlin during WWII) and their combined deadly deeds against the Jews . It is the fact that since the 1947 partition plan Palestinians have, time and again, shown that they would rather forgo independence, economic stability and progress, than reach peace and accommodation with Israel and its Jews.
It is no secret that in the 1940’s during WWII, the Arab Middle East sympathized with the axis-powers and yearned for a Nazi victory against the allies. In Iraq, the pro-Nazi Rashid Ali coup sought to facilitate Nazi takeover of Iraq. In Syria, the French colonial occupiers were loyal to the Nazi collaborationist Marshal Petain and his Vichy government, and resisted the allies. Their Arab subjects in Syria modeled the future Renascence of the Arab nation on the Fascist and Nazi parties of Hitler and Mussolini. Today, that party, founded by Michel Aflaq and Salah al-Din Bitar in 1941 is known as the Ba’ath party led by the Assad’s in Syria and until 2003, by Saddam Hussein.
History it seems repeats itself, at least in the Middle East. Increasing Arab-Palestinian terrorism in the early 1920’s instigated by the Mufti of Jerusalem led to a call by the Jewish labor movement to rely on Hebrew labor. The Arab-Palestinian (Actually the Jews were called Palestinians at that time) riots and massacre of Jews in 1929, much like the terrorist acts of the mid-1990, led to increased restriction on Palestinian workers in Israel. And the Arab Revolt of 1936, much like the Intifadah of 2000, convinced the Jewish community in Palestine, as it has persuaded Israel since the year 2000-to separate completely from the Palestinians.
Just prior to the 2000 Intifadah, approximately 250,000-500,000 Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank worked in Israel. Their remittances fueled the Palestinian economy and raised their per capita income to the highest level in the Arab world. Arafat, like Haj Amin al-Husseini (a distant relative of his) preferred murdering Jews to continued economic prosperity.
The Oslo Accords in 1993 lay the ground for a Palestinian State within a specified period. The Israelis, eager to focus on the historical “breakthrough” ignored the Palestinians violations of the Accords. Incitement by Arafat to murder Jews and admission by Arafat himself that Oslo was more or less a “Trojan Horse” that would liberate all of Palestine from within, led ultimately to the current Intifadah.
The opportunity for huge U.S. and European investments in both Palestinian and Israeli projects was missed again.
In January 2006, the Palestinians people overwhelmingly elected the Islamic Hamas party to govern them. They knew all too well Hamas’ positions of: no compromise with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no end to the armed struggle against the Jewish State. In spite of their economic hardship stemming from a devastating five- year war against Israel, the Palestinians chose a terrorist government with a clear platform to replace the Jewish State-all of it, with an Islamic state.
The Western allies defeated Nazism in Europe and in the aftermath created liberal democracies. It is high time to defeat Islamo-Fascism among the Palestinians. Palestinians like German’s 60 years ago may resent their defeat, but that is the only path that would lead to a new worldview among the Palestinians, towards an orientation that places individual right, human rights, democracy and economic prosperity ahead of blind religious hatred.
We maintain that the pen is mightier than the sword.
But terrorists remain terrorists:
Fatah Gunmen Fight Media Bias
Three Al-Jazeera cars in Ramallah were torched over the weekend, apparently by Fatah gunmen.
The sources said the Fatah supporters were angry with al-Jazeera because it had not covered an anti-Hamas demonstration in the city by Fatah earlier in the day.
Arab hypocrisy!
Although Egypt signed the first peace accord with Israel and has played the role of mediator, its policy remains complex. Since a large part of the regime’s legitimacy is based on its support of the Palestinian cause, it is fully dedicated to the « legitimate » national armed resistance. So, while the Muslim Brotherhood is banned in Egypt, the regime gave full political recognition to Hamas — which is part of the Brotherhood’s transnational network — even before the Palestinian legislative elections were held.
Bravo to the Palestinians
The apt quote that, “The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity” has been attributed to Abba Eban.
It is no less true today than it was 58 years ago. In the days preceding the Gaza pullout, American
philanthropist Mort Zuckerman raised over $13 million in just three days to buy the Gaza greenhouses from
the soon-to-be-evacuated Israelis in order to give them as a gift to the Palestinians so they would have an
immediate source of income, not to mention 6000 new jobs. A logical, forward-thinking idea from a Jewish
mentch. The end result: only 10% of the first crop of 12,000 tons of fruits and vegetables – cherry
tomatoes, sweet and hot peppers, and strawberries, actually made it to market. The projected revenue of
$16 million became only $1 million. How did this happen? Continued threats and violence on the part of
Hamas and Jihad militants forced the closing of the Karni border crossing. The goods never made it to the
port. Instead of ending up in someone’s soup the produce ended up being dumped in the desert. The
militants’ goal was to shoot Israelis. They ended up shooting the Palestinian people in the foot. Bravo on
another missed opportunity. So much for applying well-meaning Western logic to Middle Eastern problems.
« walla, what did hamas expect, they should stop acting like children,
and then cry for the world to help them after they get themselves into
trouble. The people in gaza have enough troubles than to be occupied
again due to the stupid, irresponsible actions of hamas idiots. »
Another Al Arabiya comment