Israel Matzav

What the P.L.O. Has to Offer

Continuing their apologetics for the 'Palestinians,' the New York Times today publishes an op-ed by 'Palestinian negotiator' Saeb Erekat in which he attempts to turn the results of the 'Palestinian elections' on their head. Erekat (after blaming Israel - of course - for Fatah's loss) argues that with the election of Hamas to head the 'Palestinian Authority' we are 'closer than ever' to 'peace.' If only it were so.

Mr. Abbas, however, is not ultimately to blame. When he called on Israel to lift restrictions on Palestinian movement and trade within and between Palestinian areas, Israel refused — despite similar calls from the World Bank, the United Nations, the European Union and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. The restrictions translated not just into more poverty but also into less security, for Mr. Abbas could not even move police forces within Palestinian territory. [If Abbas Abu Mazen had dismantled the terrorist organizations - as he committed to do and as is called for as Phase I of the road map - there would be no restrictions. CiJ]

President Abbas did deliver, and largely maintained, a "tahdia" — a "period of calm" between the Palestinian factions and Israel. And he was able to do this despite scores of Palestinian deaths and several thousand military raids and arrests that Israel conducted in violation of its agreement not to undertake such activities. Israel also tightened its control over key territory, resources and markets — primarily occupied East Jerusalem — that we will need to build an economically viable state. ['Occupied East Jerusalem' is landlocked and sits on high ground. It's very significant militarily and religiously. It has nothing to do with the economic viability of any 'Palestinian state reichlet. CiJ]

So, President Abbas, the leader of the Fatah party, made a set of campaign promises; the opposite came to fruition; therefore, Palestinians elected the only alternative: Hamas. [Notice how Erekat totally ignores what Hamas is and what it stands for. As if the 'poor Palestinians' were forced to elect Hamas. CiJ].

In reality, however, the vote was neither a rejection of President Abbas and his peace program nor an endorsement of the Hamas charter. According to recent polls, nearly 70 percent of Palestinians still support Mr. Abbas as president. And 84 percent of Palestinians still want a negotiated peace agreement with Israel. Even among Hamas voters, more than 60 percent of those polled support an "immediate" resumption of negotiations.

The apparent contradiction between Palestinian support for peace and Hamas's electoral victory is most easily explained by popular anger at the perceived corruption of the never-before-challenged Fatah. Whereas Hamas will now have to accept that the majority of its own voters reject its core ideology, Fatah must now undertake a long-overdue housecleaning to eradicate corruption and regain the trust of the electorate. [Of course. If you're angry at the Democrats, you vote for the Socialist Workers' Party. If you're angry at Meretz, you vote for Hadash. Not.... CiJ]

...

The Hamas victory cannot be allowed to obscure the reality: the Palestinian people want a negotiated peace, and in Mr. Abbas they have a Palestinian Authority president and P.L.O. chairman who shares their view, enjoys a mandate to act and has the ability to deliver. For those committed to reaching a two-state solution, public support on both sides of the conflict likely provides the last opportunity to see our vision materialize. Now we all have a duty to respond immediately to our peoples' demands for a negotiated peace. [ Abbas Abu Mazen is weak and irrelevant (yes, for once I agree with Tzippi Livni). Hamas has made it very clear that they have no intention of making peace with Israel until the Jews are R"L driven into the sea. That is the reality. The 'Palestinians' chose and now they must pay for their choice. CiJ].

If you can stomach it, read the rest of it.

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 6:54 PM