START A PETITION 27,000,000 members: the world's largest community for good
Mar 13, 2010

Palestinian Prime Minister to Israeli Audience: You Make Concessions, We Don't

Barry Rubin – 2010-02-04

Imagine this. You're prime minister of a regime that isn't yet a state. You are praised in the Western media as a great moderate man of peace. You represent a people who the U.S. president says is in an intolerable situation. You supposedly want a country of your own. Indeed you've announced you will get a state in two years, something conceivable only if your negotiating partner agrees. You're dependent on contributions from Western democratic countries that want you to make a deal. Your rivals have seized almost half the land you want to rule and work tirelessly to overthrow your regime and very possibly to kill you personally.

But here comes a big opportunity.

You are invited by your negotiating partner to its most important meeting of the year. All the other side's top leaders and opinionmakers are listening to you.

And that country's second most powerful leader has just made a very conciliatory speech praising you personally, urging peace, offering concessions, and telling his own people they must be ready to give you a lot.

What do you do?

Make a warm conciliatory, confidence-building speech, showing by substantial offers that you, too, are willing to compromise; stretching out your hand in order to build friendship and ensure you get a country?

Hey, we're talking about the Palestinians here! And as I say over and over again: anyone who thinks the Palestinian Authority (PA) is going to make peace hasn't been paying attention to what they say and do.

So here is what PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad told the audience at the Herzliya Conference, held at the Interdisciplinary Center (IDC), following Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak's conciliatory speech:

–Israel must immediately start pulling out of the rest of the West Bank, without getting anything in return.

–It must immediately stop all construction on settlements, including apartments now being completed.

–Israel's army should never enter PA-ruled areas. Even if the PA refuses to arrest those who have murdered Israelis or won't stop planned attacks, Israel's army must do nothing, despite the 1993 agreement between the two sides permitting this. Fayyad said this isn't necessary because the PA is taking care of these matters. But this makes no sense: when Israel sees that to be true it never orders incursions in the first place.

–Israel should end its blockade of the Gaza Strip, even though the Hamas movement ruling there refuses to make a deal with the PA, openly announces its goal of destroying Israel, and smuggles in as many weapons as possible. Moreover, as soon as it feels secure again, Hamas will launch new attacks on Israel. Fayyad claimed, however, that if Israel did so, the PA could then build government institutions in the Gaza Strip, though it has no control whatsoever there.

–He openly stated that his goal was to mobilize international support and create such a strong state apparatus that the world would pressure Israel to end any presence in the West Bank or east Jerusalem, apparently without the Palestinian side giving anything.

–While Barak said that the “roughness” of the region made it harder to give the Palestinians everything they wanted (for example, the PA could be overthrown by Hamas; subverted by Iran and Syria; unwilling or unable to stop cross-border attacks), Fayyad responded that once Israel left all of the West Bank the region would become more stable and peaceful. That's a rather questionable assertion.

It is true that he ended by saying:

“The Israeli people have a long history, they have pain, they have ambition, and like you, we Palestinians have our own history. Right now we are going through lots of pain and suffering. And we have one key aspiration, and that is once again to be able to live alongside you in peace, harmony and security.”

Yet he addressed none of the points in Israel's own peace plan: an official end to the conflict if there is an agreement; resettlement of Palestinian refugees in Palestine; an end to incitement (which would be easy to do) to kill Israelis; limits on the militarization of a Palestinian state; or recognition of Israel as a Jewish state alongside a Palestinian Arab Muslim state (the PA constitution says that Islam is the country's official religion).

This was not an extremist speech or one seeking conflict. Fayyad is probably the most moderate guy in the PA leadership. He was doing about the best he could. But that's the point. He has no base of support, isn't a member of Fatah, and doesn't really represent Palestinian thinking. He is in office for one reason only: the Western donors demand it. Fayyad, and arguably the PA leadership as a whole, don't want a new war with Israel. But Fatah will sponsor one if it thinks such a step is advantageous or needed to out-militant Hamas.

Equally, Fayyad couldn't go any further than he did because he knows that his Fatah bosses, Palestinian constituents, and Hamas enemies would throw him out if he offered the slightest concession to Israel and demanded any less than everything they want.

We will see how much progress Fayyad makes over the next two years in building strong and stable institutions. Yet it should be understood that what he is doing is not a way to convince Israel that both sides can reach a compromise peace but to persuade the world to force Israel to make compromises without the PA having to do so.

The irony is that it doesn't matter what Barak says, except to show the world that Israel wants real peace and to encourage Israeli voters to back Labor as a party that balances a strong desire for peace with a smart sense of security for the country.

Barak warned the right-wing in Israel that it would be a mistake to oppose a genuine two-state solution, an outcome that Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu-like Barak–has accepted. But the defense minister also urged the left-wing not to be naïve.

Here's a fascinating example of how the world generally interprets the situation. Read this paragraph from the Washington Post coverage carefully:

“But there was a common thread, too, with each acknowledging an international consensus on the idea of two nations. Barak said that Israel risks becoming 'an apartheid state par excellence' if it does not negotiate the terms of Palestinian statehood soon, and Fayyad said the work being done in the West Bank on governance needs to be matched by political progress.”

The two statements are supposed to be parallel. Barak says: Israel must get rid of the West Bank for its own good. Fayyad says: progress must be made in negotiations, in the context of a speech in which he asked for a long list of Israeli concessions and offered nothing in exchange. These statemens are not parallel. A parallel statement would be if Fayyad had said something like:

The Palestinians risk becoming permanently mired in violence and backwardness unless they negotiate terms for Israel feeling secure in giving up the territory.

Since 1993 not a single Palestinian leader has ever made a speech to his own people like Barak's, never said that they should have to give up something to get a state, never urged the media and public debate to become more moderate.

Four days before Fayyad's speech, here is the Friday prayer sermon given in Nablus by the imam appointed there by Fayyad and broadcast on the television Fayyad controls:

“The Jews are the enemies of Allah and [Muhammad], the enemies of humanity in general, and of the Palestinians in particular…. Jews will always be Jews. Even if donkeys cease to bray, dogs cease to bark, wolves cease to howl, and snakes cease to bite, the Jews will not cease to be hostile to the Muslims. The Prophet Muhammad said: 'Whenever two Jews find themselves alone with a Muslim, they think of killing him.' Oh Muslims, this land, these holy places, and these mosques will only be liberated when we return to the Book of Allah, and when all Muslims are prepared to become mujahideen for the sake of Allah, in support of Palestine, its people, its land, and its holy places.”

How can this be reconciled with Fayyad's claim that the sole aspiration is “to live alongside you in peace, harmony and security”?

Note that this is a Palestinian Authority, not a Hamas, cleric speaking. Note, too, that while Fayyad's speech is covered around the world, sermons like these are never quoted in the Western media. This is not to say that the sermon is real and Fayyad's views are fake, it is to say that the sermon is meant to shape Palestinian politics and public opinion and what Fayyad says is meant to shape Israeli and Western politics and public opinion. Fayyad, a figurehead, is not going to make anything change and he isn't even going to try. Nor does Fayyad have any control over the ruling party, Fatah, whose leadership is still hardline on goals and negotiations, though not on more immediate issues.

The Israeli audience applauded Fayyad because it does want peace and prefers him to all the worse alternatives, especially Hamas but also those in Fatah. Yet few have any illusions that peace is at hand or that Fayyad is going to deliver it.

* Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are Lebanon: Liberation, Conflict, and Crisis (Palgrave Macmillan), Conflict and Insurgency in the Contemporary Middle East (Routledge), The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition) (Viking-Penguin), the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan), A Chronological History of Terrorism (Sharpe), and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley).

Mar 12, 2010

Inter-Arab Violence!

(Reassessment of Middle East Policy)

 Straight from the Jerusalem Cloakroom #233

Feb. 5, 2010

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger

"Second Thought," Jerusalem

1.  An assessment of the politically- correct Western policy-making, media commentaries and conventional wisdom raises the following questions:

*Is the Palestinian issue the crux of Middle East turbulence?

*Is the Arab-Israeli conflict the core cause of anti-Western Islamic terrorism?*

*Are Arab leaders preoccupied with the Palestinian issue and with the Arab-Israeli conflict?

*Is the Arab-Israeli conflict "The Middle East Conflict"?

*How valid is the contention that, in the Middle East, on words one does not pay custom, hence the awesome gap between rhetoric and reality?!

2.  An analysis of Middle East politics during the last 1,400 years documents the following:

Since the 7th century, inter-Arab and inter-Muslim conflicts in the Muslim Middle East - between North Africa and the Persian Gulf - have been the role model of state-sponsored terrorism, hate-education, inherent domestic and regional violence, endemic unpredictability, instability, volatility, fragmentation, religious and political intolerance, suppression of human rights, nepotism and treachery.

3.  Aijaz Zaka Syed, the opinion editor of Dubai's "Khaleej Times," asserts (Al Aharam weekly, Jan. 20, 2010) that "more Muslims than non-Muslims have been killed in macabre attacks carried out in the name of Islam." Nearly 50 people were killed and 500 injured during the December 29, 2009 terrorist attack on a Karachi religious procession. But more than the loss of lives - "that has long become a daily mayhem" - it is the devastation wreaked on the country's biggest city that will haunt Pakistan for a long time to come. "Thousands of businesses, shops and commercial establishments were destroyed in no time, incurring losses worth billions of dollars, [in addition to] the attack on the heavily attended volleyball match in the troubled Northwest Pakistan, which killed 75 villagers and left scores maimed…"

"None of those watching the match, or attending the Karachi procession had anything to do with the wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan or Iraq.  They had no sympathy or affiliation whatsoever with the US and the West.  Then why have they been targeted?

"How does it help the cause of these so-called defenders of Islam, when they target innocent Muslims and non Muslims?  This death cult is the ultimate injustice…

4.  Jordanian economist, Yusuf Mansur writes ("Creative Jordan" website, July 25, 2009) that "Arabs are ruled by a cartel of authoritarian regimes, practiced in the arts of oppression.  Arab unity is as elusive as ever. Inter-Arab divisions are bitter…Hardly any of the 21 Arab states can plausibly claim to be a genuine democracy. Therefore, Arab regimes rely on repression in order to stay in power

"The political instability of the Arab world is in turn connected to another problem: the missing glue of nationhood…Egyptian diplomat, Tahsin Bashir, called the new Arab states of Middle East 'Tribes with Flags.'  In countries as different as Lebanon and Iraq, ethnic, confessional or sectarian differences have thwarted programs of nation-building. That is why Iraq fell apart into Sunni, Shia and Kurdish fragments after the removal of Saddam despite decades of patriotic indoctrination.  Syria could follow suit if the minority Alawi sect of the ruling Assad family were somehow to lose control of this largely Sunni country. Sudan has seen not one, but two, civil wars between its Arab-dominated centre and the non-Arab minorities in its south and west…

"Up to a million citizens of the Arab world may have perished violently since 1990… The disturbing point for the future is that none of the underlying causes of conflict enumerated above has disappeared.  On the contrary, each appears to be taking on the characteristics of a chronic condition…Political and social discontent is in danger of tipping into violence – even into revolution."

5.  The aforementioned facts, along with current Middle East events, produce the following observations:

*The Arab/Muslim Middle East is the abode of anti-Western values, irrespective of the Arab-Israeli conflict, independent of the Palestinian issue and regardless of Israel's policies and existence.

*Western values such as freedom of expression, religion, press, market and the Internet constitute a lethal threat to Arab/Muslim regimes.

*The Arab/Muslim Middle East constitutes a potent threat to vital Western interests.

*Anti-Western terrorism is a natural derivative of inter-Arab/Muslim terrorism and values. Why would terrorism against the infidel be less savage than terrorism against fellow-Muslims? !

*A strong Jewish State enhances deterrence in face of inherent Middle East violence, extending the strategic hand of the West, bolstering relatively-moderate regimes and restraining rogue regimes.

*Agreements concluded in the Arab/Muslim Middle East cannot be more credible and durable than the policies of Arab/Muslim regimes. Why would Arab/Muslim regimes comply with agreements signed with the infidel, while they do not comply with most agreements signed with fellow-Muslims? !

*The inherent instability, and the violent unpredictability, of Arab/Muslim Middle East regimes and policies feed the fragility of Middle East agreements. 

*Is it reasonable to assume that Arabs would accord the Jewish State a durable-peace, which they have not been able to accord one another?! 

*The proposed Palestinian state – against the backdrop of the 50 year track record of Fatah, PLO and Hamas – would merge naturally into the violent nature of the Middle East. A Palestinian state would constitute fuel – and not water – to Middle East turbulence.

*Inter-Arab/Muslim reality – of no comprehensive inter-Arab peace since the 7th century - dictates steep security requirements for the Jewish State.

*Inter-Arab/ Muslim reality dictates a thorough reassessment of Western policy toward the Middle East in general and the Arab-Israeli conflict and the Palestinian issue in particular.

Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted: Mar 12, 2010 5:33am
Mar 9, 2010

   I cannot help ask. Which other country did the accedemic community boycot other than the Israeli academics?  The stench of rasism must be questioned. As a child growing up in the UK I was led to beleive that Universities, collages and schools were to educate and not a political tool to push agenda's. This can hardly be said today where many universities take an active part in politics, racism, and anti semitism. They have become a place where the Jew is made to feel unwelcome at best, at worst he might be facing physical dangers due to incitment from the highest levels within the academic world. Had this been against the muslim community or black or gay community we would have heard the heuwen cry from all lobbies for human rights groups, but it is the Jew. Take note of the Hypocracy.

      Amnesty's Travesty

Martin Sherman - Jerusalem Post - Dec 5, 2009

The Israeli occupation changed local agriculture profoundly. It introduced modern technology, including mechanization, precision tillage, pest control, plastic covering of crops for temperature control, high yielding varieties, postharvest processing of produce,marketing and export outlets. It also introduced efficient methods of irrigation, including sprinkler and especially drip irrigation. Consequently, output increased greatly, and farming was transformed from a subsistence enterprise to a commercial
industry. — Daniel Hillel, Rivers of Eden, Oxford University Press, 1994

The above excerpt is sufficient to heap richly-deserved ridicule on the recent Amnesty International report claiming that Israel's avaricious water policy has gravely compromised Palestinians Arabs' human rights. Miraculously, the Amnesty report was published to coincide perfectly with a vicious crusade launched across US campuses by Omar Barghouti, a Tel Aviv University graduate student, campaigning for - among other things - the boycott of Tel Aviv University, together with the entire Israeli academic establishment (avowed leftists and all).
By some curious coincidence, one of the issues raised by Barghouti to justify the BDS (boycott-cum- divestment- cum-sanctions) campaign was Israel's alleged exploitation of water resources to implement a process of "ethnic cleansing" and "apartheid." Predictably - if not persuasively - Amnesty denied any hint of collusion with the Barghouti initiative, emotively entitled "Palestine: Thirsting for Justice."
The facts, however, paint a very different - indeed antithetical - picture to that painted by the A/B (Amnesty/Barghouti) duo. For by every conceivable measure of consumption of fresh water, the lot of the Palestinian Arabs has improved dramatically - indeed beyond all recognition - since 1967 under Israeli administration, whether it be overall consumption, per capita consumption, consumption relative to Israel/Israelis, conveyance of running water to households, area under agricultural cultivation or size of the agricultural product.

Martin Sherman has issued a public challenge to engage anyone in the BDS movement to an open debate. 
So far the challenge has not been taken up.

Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted: Mar 9, 2010 3:08am


Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.


Eli T.
, 5, 4 children
Israel, Non Us, Israel
Shares by Type:
All (23) | Blog (22) | Message (1)

Showing shares tagged with: politics [show all]
(1 comments  |  discussions )
\\nZEN was suspended by Eric with no warning. We don\\\'t know any reasons nor how long it will last....\\r\\nI asked about it on the forum but my post was immediately deleted. 2 threads and petitions about Zen also. And 2 her help-groups. :-(\\r\\nUntill to...
(2 comments  |  discussions )
\\nThe HORD has begun its own orphanage Primary School in March 2010 in the rural Bussiwa village in kamuli district.  People live in small grass hatched houses, often large families in one room.  The people who live in these rural villages a...
(0 comments  |  discussions )
\\nHELP orphans in Uganda !!!\\r\\n WHAT DO THESE KIDS EXPECT FROM THE WORLD ??!!! What can a helpless child under the age of 12 expect from his lonesome world, other than food, proper sleep, non-ragged cloths and quest for knowledge?... Also when the n...
(1 comments  |  discussions )
\\nCare2 ACTION: Free the Greenpeace Activists\\r\\n\\r\\n\\r\ \n Environment  (tags: greenpeace, arctic, activists ) Apolonia - 12 hours ago - \\r\\nWe need to let the Russian Government know that illegally boarding and seizing...
by Ge M.
(6 comments  |  discussions )
Recently a petition to request the deportation of extremists from the UK was put on to the petition site. Immediately, Kit objected to this and demanded its removal.Why was this petition removed? Was it racist? Had it called for the deportation of all...
(2 comments  |  discussions )
\\nPlease sign this petition to commemorate cptn Vitold Pilecki in USHM:\\r\\n 428/3559979\\n
(0 comments  |  discussions ) groups/petitionsforanimal rights/?fref=ts 
(0 comments  |  discussions )
HiI would like to share a video I made about a very cute sunbird family, was nesting on our balconyEnjoyhttps://www.y X7QKs 
by Cam V.
(2 comments  |  discussions )
\\n\\r\\nWhen Americans come knocking …\\r\\nSince the shootings took place in Tucson, I have heard the left ranting and raving against Governor Sarah Palin, talk radio and other conservative pundits in America. Liberals have been like bulldogs figh...
(1 comments  |  0 discussions )