Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 3 (since 2010-08-29 14:07:14)

edmoloney

journalist

Showing comments 3 - 1
Page:

  • My nightmare is shadowed by Assange
  • Wikileaks 'Embassy cables' are now breaking...
    • edmoloney November 28, 2010 at 6:46 pm

      another juicy one - look at point six in this link: link to guardian.co.uk
      which reads:
      "He (Barak) explained that the GOI had consulted with Egypt and Fatah prior to Operation Cast Lead, asking if they were willing to assume control of Gaza once Israel defeated Hamas. Not surprisingly, Barak said, the GOI received negative answers from both." and one could presumably add, but neither did egypt or fatah object to the proposed military operation or try to stop it!

  • Abunimah on settler murders: security for all
    • edmoloney September 1, 2010 at 12:17 pm

      Readers may be interested to know that George Mitchell's role in the Irish peace process was not quite the single-handed triumph of diplomacy and patience that it is perceived here in America. The image of a brave and persistent peace-maker may be tempting but it is a perception that in no small measure was crafted and burnished by the man himself. The following article in the Jerusalem Post published at the time of his appointment to the middle east by Obama explains a little further: link to jpost.com
      Mitchell was working to a script written for him by the British and Irish governments who knew before the peace talks started where exactly they wanted to end up and what compromises on fundamental issues the major participants were ready to make. In particular Sinn Fein & the IRA leadership represented by Gerry Adams were ready to accept and help administer that which it come into being to overthrow by violence, viz the state of Northern Ireland. The Protestant Unionists had signalled their readiness to accept Sinn Fein as partners in government if the guns were put out of commission. Can anything similar be said about Obama's talks? Ali Abunimah is correct in pointing out the importance of a division within the Irish republican movement during the peace talks but they were more analogous to the split between Fatah and Hamas than to splits within Hamas itself. The Adams wing of the IRA/Sinn Fein embraced the peace process because the IRA had been effectively defeated by the British and because the ballot box offered a route out of a military cul-de-sac. A minority opposed what they regarded as a sell-out and split off. Adams' Sinn Fein & IRA remained by far the largest group while his opponents quarreled amongst themselves and there were further divisions and splits, weakening the resistance to Adams. Without this set of circumstances the peace process could not have worked. Equally a Unionist political bloc unwilling to do deals with Sinn Fein would have brought the whole edifice tumbling down. Do the same circumstances exist in the middle east now?

Showing comments 3 - 1
Page:

Comments are closed.