Despite all its efforts to retract the moment, the Obama Administration’s embrace of Netanyahu 2 weeks ago for "unprecedented" progress was hugely-clarifying to many of us. A shattering moment, it has liberated people to think about the failed peace process in new ways. It has made me vow not to be trusting about officials’ statements in the light of real conditions. Here is Mustafa Barghouti at the Wattan Center in Palestine (hat tip, Seham). My impression is that this eminently-reasonable and even-tempered man is now enraged, and who can blame him?
“We will be unable to freeze settlements expansion or any other Israeli policy of apartheid if we do not engage in a unified strategy against it. Towards this direction diplomatic action is fundamental but is not enough. Non violence resistance is the only means to revive a culture of collective activism among all sectors of the Palestinian people. Powerful models are already spread across several villages in the West Bank. Let’s follow the examples of those Palestinians who succeeded in breaking down sections of the Wall last week, in Ni’lin and Qalandya, marking the 20th Anniversary of Berlin Wall’s fall" went on Barghouti..
“We witness today the complete death of the so called peace process” concluded Barghouti “but nothing will prevent the Palestinian people from declaring their independent state. Israel does not respect the law and it contravenes Oslo agreements, increasing the number of illegal settlements in West Bank, perpetrating the siege on Gaza and stealing Palestinian land with the ongoing construction of the wall. Why should a declaration of an independent state on June 4 1967 borders, including east Jerusalem constitute a violation of the Oslo agreement?”
“We refuse to be slaves of occupation, slaves in ghettos.”
Related posts:
- Obama ‘drives peace process into ditch’
- ‘Peace Now’ suggests that election will stymie ‘peace process’
- Report: McCain to Do Nothing on Peace Process
- The Obama admin is selling the peace process, but the press is not buying it.
- Hope in Obama is ‘evaporating’ in the Middle East as the peace process goes nowhere
{ 50 comments }
Palestinians must adopt a new approach and support an appropriate national reconciliation strategy. In this framework, elections cannot become an instrument of further division: on the contrary fully democratic and transparent elections must be called for the Palestinian people as a whole.”
He seems to be talking about actually ending the war on Hamas, the only real “accomplishment” of the quisling Abbas regime.
cogit8 posted a very informative link today about the extent of the “Daytonisation” process in the WB. http://conflictsforum.org/2009/%e2%80%98businessmen-posing-as-revolutionaries%e2%80%99-general-dayton-and-the-%e2%80%9cnew-palestinian-breed%e2%80%9d/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email
It remains to be seen if this r/e/p/r/e/s/s/i/v/e security force would turn on its foreign masters and support a genuine Palestinian government, or whether it would be successfully used to wage a civil war against one.
Of course the US/Israeli priority will be to install some thug of their own as successor quisling to Abbas (Mohammed Dahlan comes to mind) in order to make sure such a thing doesn’t happen.
If I recall correctly Mustapha Barghouti was the information minister for the Palestinian unity government that was formed after Hamas won the elections, however, he resigned after Abbas fired Haniyeh as prime minister, breaking up the unity government.
If you can believe Amira Hass, Arafat’s security services were as politically repressive against other political parties, my take is that they were far less blatantly on the Israeli payroll (thru, of course, its proxy in the occupied territories the U.S.). They had been cooperating with Israel before the intifada, but when Israel began its shooting spree which included, of course, destroying pretty much every Palestinian police facility in the West Bank as well as killing large numbers of innocent civilians and protesters, this had the effect of both garnering Arafat’s forces much of the popularity he had lost and causing some of his forces to join the militant resistance. Arafat had lost considerable popularity due to his cooperation with the occupation, Israel’s increased closures and economic seige during the Oslo negotiations, and his own political repression.
As I recall events, Arafat was being boxed in by Israel on the one hand and the rising power of Hamas on the other. Hamas would have torpedoed any concessions they didn’t like, and Arafat knew it.
And of course, Israel knew all of this because for years they constricted funding to Arafat and Fatah while bolstering that going to Hamas. Israel has been trying to divide and conquer the Palestinians for a long, long time.
I suspect, however, Israel will merely end up reaping the whirlwind.
Still ONLY definitions of what one is against. I too am against settlement expansion, any.
But, in describing that I am FOR a viable Zionist Israel (Jewish AND democratic), next to a viable nationalist Palestine (Palestinian AND democratic), the majority that post here rant at me, and some call me “nazi”, without any censure by any others.
I OPPOSE the concept of an imposed “single-state”, whether by UN, by US, or by solidarity.
Why do you continually suppose that anyone cares what you are for or against? Why do you hijack every potentially important discussion to the subject of yourself?
“Ha,” Witty. “Ha.” :)
Fuckit.
Another important topic in the shitcan.
Hey, you replied to Witty first, not me. What about your mandate to avoid him?
Hey, Witty, have you been working for a Christian AND democratic state here?
Witty is all about establishing an Aryan race, it is just as delusional.
Citizen, Witty is a Jew, like me. He can’t possibly think he is white, can he?
Gosh, if that’s your brain on ziocaine, I don’t want any part of it.
“Hey, Witty, have you been working for a Christian AND democratic state here?”
Right on, Citizen! I mean, why should Christians in America deserve any less than the Jews in Israel! Of course, it might be a little tough on us Jews, being second class citizens and all, but why on earth would I want to offend the sensibilities of all those good Christians and not recognise America’s Christian heritage. And they know you can’t trust a group which remains, out of devilish obstinacy, “unshriven and unannealed”
Don’t be so harsh on Witty. He is the kind of guy who brings irreconcilable people together on shared values. White nationalists, black nationalists, and Jewish nationalists can all find common cause in a desire to separate their people from others according to Witty’s ideals. Witty is all about separation. If only South Africa had access to his counsel.
;-)
Gee, Mooser, I didn’t realize all Christians are white. Thanks for the that!
Ah, thanks all! Now I see why Witty is so hard on Phil, his boyhood buddy! It’s Phil’s wife–she’s no hope for continuity, the miserable creature. And she’s such a whiner!
A regular control freak! A huge walking heap of passive aggression!
Thats a misrepresentation, Citizen. You have an exagerated impression of the resentfulness of self-affirming and pro-Zionist Jews.
I’m not sure how you got so bitter.
Phil can make his personal choices on his marriage and children. If his relationship with his wife is a good one, that is preferable to one that would not be as fulfilling.
My argument with his anti-Zionism is that others have made different choices, which I believe that he should respect.
That, accepting is what constructs democracy.
“Still ONLY definitions of what one is against. I too am against settlement expansion, any.”
Yeah, Richard, we all remember how you lay down in front of the bulldozers to stop it.
I have got to get some of those new, longer lasting alkaline batteries for my flashlight, and I’ll need a change of barrels. I’m going looking for an honest Zionist.
You and the prophet Zephaniah (1:12), Mooser.
I posted a comment a few weeks ago in which I said you were “dead wrong” about the Hillel director who had invited an admitted racist to address the address the Jewish students who were members of that Hillel.
Today I will say without any hesitation you are “dead right”. I am personally disgusted with the personal attacks on you. I rarely agree with you, Richard. But you are entitled to your opinion. And sometimes I do agree with you.
“…a viable Zionist Israel (Jewish AND democratic)…”
Than apparently you agree with an oxymoron Don.
the jewish culture has been hijacked by zionism… personally i don’t agree with it which puts me in direct opposition to witty and here as well…..
here is a good book on this topic…”A Threat from Within: a Century of Jewish Opposition to Zionism”. by Yakov M. Rabkin
Richard Witty, if I agree that you aren’t a nazi, would you be willing to answer my question to you:
What compensation do you think is appropriate for permanent exile from one’s land of origin and having it given over to foreigners for their exclusive (and supremacist) rule, for denial of the right to visit the burial places of one’s ancestors or the churches and mosques where one’s ancestors worshipped, for hundreds of villages razed and society destroyed, for the confiscation of land, much of their worldly goods and livelihoods confiscated and consequent impoverishment, for those who were shot in mass, some blindfolded or bound, for the thousands who were mowed down by Israeli guns just for attempting to return, for lives spent in refugee camps without citizenship in any nation, often to be bombed by Israeli jets or mass murdered either by Israelis or at Israeli instigation there?
I love to read the comments, you are all great, but Witty, I skip over. Never have I heard anything but excuses from him. So he is against 1 state but for 2! So what! What has he done while his beloved Israel has continued to build settlements, imprison innocent Palestinians, bulldoze homes, support rabid settler movements, marginalize their own Palestinian citizens and worse. All in defiance of international law and basic morality. So please give me a break Don, he is entitled to his opinion and we all have a right to ignore him or call him out for what he is! A dangerous supporter of a aggressive Zionist state.
I’m glad someone else said it. I have a similar sentiment but expressing it generally earns me little more than grief. I suppose that is the one brilliant perk of Witty’s strategy — it’s so pathetic, it garners undeserved sympathy.
Chaos4700, you can’t argue with people who know the price of everything. And the Zionists know that 6 million buys you unlimited undeserved sympathy.
And of course, as the aphorism goes, they know the value of nothing.
Indeed Mooser, they use the Holocaust like a piece of bathroom tissue to wipe their fetid asses.
I have a lot of respect for Mustafa Barghouti. But I don’t really understand the movement to “unilaterally” declare a state. I mean, I’m genuinely interested: what does it accomplish?
My reservations are a few. First, it has been done before, has it not? And second, doesn’t it help hide the reality? I mean, it seems to me that Israel’s greatest weapon is the image (perpetuated significantly through the “peace process” as well as its two-state paradigm) of a conflict between two states, rather than a sovereign state interminably abusing a helpless “minority”. And, wouldn’t international comprehension of that reality be the Palestinians’ most powerful tool? Wouldn’t their best move be to say, “the PA is a farce, we are powerless in our own land”–in other words, to tell it like it is?
What really is the worth of security council backing (that will never come) for a state that Israel most definitely will not allow? It seems like, in effect, the most this could possibly accomplish would be another occasion for the diplomatic community to repeat its support for the idea of a Palestinian state.
But, I’m open to the possibility that there’s something here I’m not seeing. What is the purpose of declaring statehood?
They don’t have to just declare it, they have to get the UN to ratify it.
When this happens, Israel either has to clear out or declare war. Part of Israeli justification for the occupation is their claim that the land never actually belonged to any state since the Ottomans, so it’s free for the taking. Yet they’ve never officially claimed it. If Palestine gets there first, then Israel is more clearly in the wrong (not that their wrongness hasn’t been perfectly clear from the beginning.)
Palestine is also attempting to join the ICC. Being a recognized state would really help in that regard.
Ok – maybe we would get to see the hypocrisy of the ICC taken to a new level.
Barghouti wrote:
“nothing will prevent the Palestinian people from declaring their independent state….”
Well then why the hell don’t they? I realize that way back when the PLO kinda did so, but didn’t really push it and this is why it’s a threat again. But it is just being threatened again, so why should anyone regard Barghouti as just another one of those arab “leaders” who are pathetically in love with spouting stuff they can’t back up? Just as Saddam talked about the mother of all battles and these Iranians talking about setting the world on fire if attacked and Hamas talked about “winning” after the last Gaza incursion…. Even if such things are, amazingly, okay in the arab culture, don’t they have enough exposure to the rest of the world to realize how freaking stupid it makes ‘em all seem? Big mouths, it makes ‘em all seem, ready in an instant though to hoist their underwear up a flagpole when the shooting starts.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again; one’s sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians and indeed the arabs in general can rather easily be exasperated by their apparent love of blowhards.
It’s constantly “we’re gonna do this” and “we’re gonna do that” and then the Israelis come in and kick the shit out of them militarily or politically and one find’s oneself struggling to defend people who seem more interested in playing games and screwing each other over that fighting what they say is their fight.
Golda Meier had a point maybe after all saying there’s no such thing as Palestinians; there’s a bunch of people there sure, but they seem to have about as much feeling of true solidarity and kinsmanship as the mafia does.
Sin Nombre, if they really ant to make an impact they will play on the good will toward them which is presently there. They just went through a merciless massacre, what they need to do is rally all of the nations which represent their rhetorical votes every time the subject of their statehood and return is voted upon. They need to put into this mix those security council nations which voted for the Goldstone report.
So rather than a lone voice in the wilderness crying out, they become the voice of the majority in the represented world. They must begin to act like a people with a mandate, and if any in authority are reading this they need to follow suit with the recommendation. This way, if Israel wants a fight they can fight the entire world, and if the US wants to join them they can go down in a resounding defeat with them.
The Palestinians are definitely at a fork in the road. Obama gets a lot of abuse here but we should acknowledge that his speech in Cairo, his demand for Israel to freeze settlements and Netyahoos defiance of that demand has created the present situation.
The two choices are one state and two states. 1) If Abbas resigns and dissolves the PA he will have opened the one state road. 2) If he unilaterally declares a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders he will have chosen the two state road. The reasons should be clear to anyone who has followed these issues here. So what will it be. Let us consider the possibilities:
1) If Abbas dissolves the PA then civil control over the entire West Band and Gaza and responsibility for the welfare of occupied people will lie with the occupying power, namely Israel. That is according to international law on the occupations. This would immediately put much diplomatic and economic pressure on Israel. It would put them in a difficult position. What this would mean is the the hundreds of millions dollars that the EU and the US are now sending to the PA would cease. It would also mean that Abbas and his cronies would stop receiving those funds. I think we have all figured out by now that the PLO when it agreed to the Oslo process were basically bought off — play the “peace process” game with Israel and you will become very rich, but do not expect the Palestinian masses to get very much. Since all of Abbas’s power and prestige comes from those payments I think it is unlikely that he will carry out this threat of resigning. If he did resign he would have to accept personal poverty but could become a true leader of a Palestinian human rights movement. His choice — wealthy puppet or impoverished hero of the Palestinian people.
2) Declare a Palestinian state and Abbas would become an internationally recognized leader of a country and he would still qualify for all of that foreign money. This situation would obviously make it more difficult for Israel to expand its colonies, but they should be able to game the process into more interminable negotiations to avoid making any difficult choices.
From the way I have presented these choices I think pathway 2 is the most obvious . I really do not know what is going on in Abbas’s mind but from here he seems more like an opportunistic puppet type as opposed to a self sacrificing leader of his people. Of course, at some point Hamas’s opinions will have to be taken into account and we can be sure they will have a position on how to deal with either road. If history is any guide, Israel will try to provoke Hamas into performing some outrageous act of violence that can then be milked by the Israelis for sympathy in the west, much like they did throughout intifada II.
Fayyad has declared that he needs two more years for Palestine to be ready to be a viable and functioning state.
If that is true, and Palestine cannot realize what it proposes, then it will fail.
I respect Fayyad’s efforts to achieve viability through internal institution-building, which becomes undeniable.
If at the point that Palestine is confident that it can fuction fully as a state in the region that it regards as sovereign, then Israel’s options relative to that will be limited to fine tuning. If announced six months in advance, then Israel likely will undertake opportunistic end-games to acquire advantage, but will also have to recognize that cooperation in transition would leave Palestine a better neighbor than disruption.
If the two-state is preferable, which I strongly believe is the case, then the task at hand is to convince the Israeli populace that peace is a preferable solution to long-term annexation and Palestinian chaos, and Arab animosity.
Likud believes that once Israel achieves control over all of the areas of large settlement blocs, and most critically over East Jerusalem, that that will be an undeniable fact on the ground.
The giving up that single-state advocacy (in the cheap and fantastic way that the far left promotes), is a choice TO give Netanyahu the upper hand, and the reason to remain in power.
It is an irony of Hamas, and of the far left, that they routinely end up functionally electing likud.
If you were not so dense you would realize that the best way to preserve the two-state solution would be for the Palestinians to declare independence today. But you are so dense. Therefore, what you seem to be advocating is to wait another two or whatever years during which time more facts will be established on the ground making it even more difficult for a two-state solution.
Why do you spend so much time complaining about what the left in the west prefers or doesn’t prefer. Haven’t you figured it out yet that it quite irrelevant what any of us here in the west wishes for, the outcome of this struggle will be determined by the Israelis and Palestinians. And this is not a struggle between the left and the right, it is a struggle between Zionism and Arab nationalism. Your continuous complaining about what the “far left” thinks simply exposes your ignorance of the forces that are shaping this struggle.
Why do you think that declaring a state before they are ready will accomplish anything good?
Because as soon as they get close to ready, Israel will just send in the tanks, bulldozers and F-16 bombers. Again.
Witty replies:
Why do you think that declaring a state before they are ready will accomplish anything good?
If you paid any attention to my post you would realize that this is not my primary suggestion. But to answer your question if they wish to continue for the two-state solution, then they better do something different. The Oslo process put the two-state solution on the table. In 1992 there were about 220 thousand settlers in the WB and today there are over 400 thousand. And the Israelis have just announced they are going to accelerate the colonization and house demolition process. If the Abbas agrees to continue the “peace process” for another two years we can expect another 10 or 20 thousand colonist moving into the WB. They are losing at this game of “peace process” negotiations. Declaring a state now, even if they do not have a state to declare, would shake up the dynamics and maybe force some progress.
Actually, I think the whole two-state idea is impossible whatever tactic the Palestinians choose but what is important is that they move now and not wait another two or more years to discover this reality. Then they can start moving towards a more realistic one-state solution. After all that is what the Israelis desire but of course sans Palestinians by one means or another.
I certainly see the tension that you are referring to. Netanyahu is very opportunistic and savvy.
I would think that is time is of the essence, that the most important area to put emphasis would be to get prepared to act as quickly as possible, rather than to just act.
I know it from getting ready to introduce products to market. Timing is critical, but so is product viability. There is always competitive pressure to be first, as to be first gets you shelf real estate which has at least a six-month life (not easy in a new category). But, if your product introduction is of a mediocre product, or introduced with insufficient financial resources and to a wide enough product path, it will fail even if first to market.
The quality of the product is primary. There are successes of “if you build it they will come” in which the product itself sells itself. Usually, a product that could sell itself needs a little goosing to be successful and not be copied.
So, if you determine that in two years, the product field will be saturated, you increase the resources that you are putting into the product development and introduction, and get it to market in six months, rather than two years.
But, NOT today, not until the product is ready.
If Fatah can continue to improve its institution building to the point of viability, then Palestinian statehood would be undeniable. Again, as I stated earlier, Israel’s best policy choice in that environment would be to help it, to position its present to future relationship as a good neighbor (even if that wasn’t the past).
Thats not to say that Israel would make that good choice. But, the factor that makes it happen is the institution-building.
Those that firmly oppose a two-state solution (not just think that it is improbable), will do whatever they can to make the institution-building difficult, and to discredit those that are conducting the institution-building.
And, ironically, they will do so while asserting that they are pro-Palestinian.
Every new “fact on the ground” makes “institution-building [more] difficult; nothing has been real for a very long time now–except settlement expansion (and continued oppressive seige/occupation/and continued de facto second class citizenship of Israeli arabs). This seems to me at this moment an argument for ASAP proclaiming a Palestinian state and submitting that proclamation to the UN for ratification. The ever expanding settlements (despite the official opposition of the enabling superpower state through a whole series of POTUSs) is the only concrete reality, and its companion ingredient is always some version of “the Pals aren’t ready yet.”
“Netanyahu is very opportunistic and savvy.”
He is a murderer and a thief Witty, so is the entire system of Zionism.
Those Israelis that destroy Palestinian institution-building (none now militarily, at least in the West Bank, where they are actually undertaking it), are misguided, logic that I confront publicly.
Again, its time to actually argue, to present a thesis, rather than dismiss. Actually risk saying what you think is real (what occurred, context, significance) and what is best to pursue.
Okay, Witty. The thesis is, that as long as the Palestinians participate in the peace process, they have nothing to gain because Israel breaks its agreements without impunity. Since the Oslo Accords, thousands of Palestinian homes have been demolished and thousands of Jewish-exclusive settlement homes have gone up in the West Bank. Israeli citizens are allowed to attack the Palestinians — their homes, their farms, even the Palestinians themselves — with complete impunity because the IDF rarely takes action against the settlers. And when they do, the settlers take revenge on the Palestinians and simply do that more.
Hamas’ adherence to the cease fire was rewarded by an incursion on November 4th — timed perfectly with the US Election night, fancy that. At the conclusion of the cease fire, they were further rewarded for playing ball by Operation Cast Lead — of which, among many many targets, over 300 children and over 3,500 factories and workshops, twelve mosques, eight hospitals, the UNWRA headquarters and the American International School of Gaza were all attacked by the IDF. And that started after Christmas — Happy Holidays! — and continued until just before Obama’s inauguration night.
When the Palestinians answer with violence, Israel answers with more violence. When the Palestinians answer with peace, Israel answers with more violence. There is no evidence that Israel will ever not resort to violence unless there is active pressure from the United States (which their isn’t) and even then, it takes costly financial inducement to get Israel to agree to anything.
The fact is, Israel is an existential threat to Palestine. Israel itself. The Zionist philosophy that Jews must be the majority and that must be enforced by any means necessary. On top of that, Israel is an existential threat to world peace because they openly break international laws and bomb targets beyond their borders with impunity. This has happened every year for at least as long as I can remember, Witty (which isn’t hard to fathom, because since Israel is indulging in multi-generational military occupation, it’s troops can’t not be out waging war in other people’s countries).
How is that for a thesis?
An interesting one.
Except that there have been critical changes in the tenor of the relationship between Israel and Palestine, that resulted from the confidence of their responsible institution-building.
The changes that result from Palestinian institution-building are qualitative, in that they result in a status that is undeniable.
When interacting with Hamas or with an undisciplined and corrupted Fatah, Israel does have credibility in describing “there is no one to negotiate with”, and many of the events that you describe as brutal and unnecessary (I’m not sure if you said that) are rationalizable as defensive in some regard.
If/when the same actions occur relative to Palestine with the rule of law confidently in place, functioning effectively, then actions like annexation of land without due process are nakedly violations of law.
That Fayyad is proceeding on the path of viability, and that his achievements are undeniable and implausible to attack on any rationale of defense, demonstrate a FAR SUPERIOR and FAR MORE EFFECTIVE approach to realize a sovereign and viable Palestine, than the path of resistance.
It is proceeding, and needs help to continue. Moral support, solidarity strategy that doesn’t conflict with their goal.
One of the reasons that dissent is often accused of solidarity with Hamas, rather than solidarity with Palestine, is illustrated by this condition. So many here post condemning statements about Fatah and Fayyad, that ignore the great progress that they are making, through civil means.
In spite of Fatah actually achieving “victories”, radical dissent chooses the angry, rather than the successful.
Chaos,
That has to be one of the best summaries of the recent aspects of the conflict that I have ever read. If I condoned smoking, I would give you a cigar.
Witty, Vichey France eventually fell. What the US is trying to do in Afghanistan, that is, set up a puppet regime, is the same thing the US-Israel partnership is trying to do to the Palestininans. It’s a bet buttressed by real power, but in the long run a recipe that won’t muddle through–the cost to the Palestinians all along is obvious; and the cost to the US keeps increasing, day by day.
So, your contention is that Fayyad is a puppet, and not a skillful executive?
There is a Palestinian election coming up in January. Why would you not defer to their judgement?
And the Peace Process wins another one:
Comments on this entry are closed.