The chickens of Western-backed 'Palestinian' intransigence come home to roost
The chickens created by years of Western-backed 'Palestinian' intransigence are coming home to roost.
In the 23 years since the 'Palestinian Authority' was created, we continually heard the claim that they had to be armed in order to be the only law enforcement authority in the 'Palestinian territories.' But the 'Palestinian Authority' never chose to assert control, instead allowing all kinds of lawless gangs to arm themselves and inflict terror on Israelis. Now, those armed gangs are turning their guns on the 'Palestinian Authority.' And like in Gaza in 2007, Abu Mazen is losing control.
Hours after his security officers lynched a detainee, Palestinian
Authority President Mahmoud Abbas urged Palestinian businessmen living
abroad to support the Palestinian economy by investing in the
Palestinian territories. The Palestinian Authority (PA), he asserted,
was "working to provide security and safety to encourage investment."
According
to Abbas, "The Palestinian territories are living in a state of
security stability, which we are working to provide for residents and
investors alike by enforcing the rule of law and enhancing transparency
and accountability."
Funny that he never speaks that way in front of the 'international community.' And this time it's really a lie.
In his speech before the businessmen, Abbas neglected any reference
to the latest wave of "security chaos" in PA-controlled areas in the
West Bank, specifically Nablus, the largest Palestinian city.
Five Palestinians, including two PA police officers, were killed in
the worst scenes of internecine violence to hit the West Bank in recent
years. Abbas was either playing the businessmen for fools or hoping that
they share his deaf and blind state.
The violence in Nablus did not come as a surprise to those who have
been monitoring the situation in the West Bank in recent months.
In fact, scenes of lawlessness and "security chaos" have become part
of the norm in many Palestinian cities, villages and refugee camps -- a
sign that the PA may be losing control to armed gangs and militias.
Palestinians refer to the situation as falatan amni, or "security chaos." An article published in Gatestone
in June referred to the growing instances of anarchy and lawlessness in
PA-controlled areas in the West Bank, first and foremost Nablus.
The chickens of years of Western-backed 'Palestinian' intransigence and weapons supplies are coming home to roost. And the 81-year old 'Abbas' - the 'moderate' hope of the Leftist West - may not last much longer.
The Palestinian Authority is now paying the price for harboring,
funding and inciting gang members and militiamen who until recently were
hailed by many Palestinians as "heroes" and "resistance fighters."
Unsurprisingly, most of these "outlaws" and "criminals" (as the PA
describes them) are affiliated in one way or another with Mahmoud
Abbas's Fatah faction.
Nablus, the so-called Mountain of Fire, is now threatening to turn
into a volcano that is set to erupt in the face of Abbas and his PA
government.
The situation in Nablus the past few days raises serious questions
about the ability of the PA to perform basic security measures and rein
in armed gangs and militiamen.
Moreover, the unprecedented violence has
further shattered Palestinian confidence in the PA and its leaders ahead
of the local and municipal elections, scheduled to take place on
October 8.
And guess who is stepping into the vacuum....
Hamas's dream of extending its control to the West Bank now seems more
realistic than ever. Under the current circumstances, Abbas would be
offering the West Bank to Hamas on a silver platter -- unless he wakes
up and realizes that he made a big mistake by authorizing the local and
municipal elections.
The Hamas-Fatah marriage may once again be over before it starts. 'Moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud AbbasAbu Mazen is making some noises about not trusting Hamas.
“We won’t accept the continuation of the situation with Hamas as it is now and in this shape,” he said. “There must be one authority and one regime.”
Abbas accused Hamas of running its own “shadow government” in the Gaza Strip. “They have 27 directors-general of ministries and they are running the Gaza Strip,” he said. “The national consensus government can’t do anything on the ground.”
Egyptian news website al-Dostor reported that Abbas will make an announcement on Sunday to the Arab League regarding the agreement.
JPost also has a slightly different version of the casualty report I cited earlier.
Abbas claimed that Hamas lost “only” 50 of its men during the war, while 861 men belonging to his Fatah faction were killed. He did not say how the Fatah men were killed and by who.
Either way the result is the same - over 850 terrorists killed not counting Islamic Jihad.
"[I]f the government will not be unified, (in terms of) the weapons and
laws in the West Bank and Gaza, there won't be any partnership or
discussion with the (Hamas) organization."
"I don't trust Hamas much because they change their words all the
time. There must be a unified Palestinian Authority," remarked Abbas.
The PA chairman also confirmed reports of a stormy meeting he
had with Hamas politburo chief Khaled Mashaal in Qatar on August 21, in
which he slammed the Hamas leader for his organization's coup attempt against Abbas in Judea and Samaria.
"You are smuggling weapons, explosives and money to the (West) Bank - and not to fight Israel, but to hold a coup against the (Palestinian) Authority," Abbas reportedly said in his tirade on Mashaal.
Commenting on the meeting Saturday night, Abbas remarked "Hamas has been trying to cause the Palestinian Authority to fail since the day it was formed."
Hamas said that more than 40 of its members and supporters have been rounded up by the PA since the end of Operation protective Edge.
Another 30 Hamas activists were also summoned for interrogation, Hamas said.
On Saturday, Hamas representative Hussam Badran condemned the PA clampdown and called on all those who have been summoned for interrogation not to report.
Badran said that the crackdown was “unjustified” and constituted a “blow to the blood of Palestinian martyrs and unity."
The PA has refused to comment on the current crackdown on Hamas in the West Bank.
And I'm sure the fact that the latest poll that shows that Hamas would win a 'Palestinian election' has nothing to do with the coming collapse of the 'unity government.' Faster... faster...
PSR observes that, “as we saw in previous instances during and
immediately after Israeli wars with Hamas, findings show a spike in the
popularity of Hamas and its leaders.” PSR adds:
It is worth noting that the size of the change in favor
of Hamas is unprecedented since 2006. Indeed, if presidential elections
were to take place today, Ismail Haniyeh would easily win over Abbas and
Hamas would win the largest percentage of the popular vote in
parliamentary elections. … Indeed, an overwhelming majority of West
Bankers wants to transfer “Hamas’ way” to the West Bank and rejects the
demand to disarm the Islamist group or to disband the other Gazan armed
groups. Findings also indicate that the public see Iran, Turkey, and
Qatar as the most instrumental in supporting Hamas and helping Gazans
remain steadfast against the Israeli attacks. By contrast, Egypt’s role
is seen as week and unhelpful. Indeed, a majority believes that Egypt
played a negative role in the ceasefire negotiations.
That change is clear in the approval ratings given to
Hamas and its leaders compared to those given to the Palestinian
Authority. Hamas received 88% approval for its performance during the
war, and its political chief Khaled Mashaal won 78% approval. The
Palestinian Authority came in significantly lower, with just 36%
approval; its leaders, President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Rami
Hamdallah, received 39% and 35%, respectively. …
Paradoxically, and worryingly for Israel, Hamas received higher
support in the PA-controlled West Bank than it did in Gaza. The poll
found that if elections were held today, former Hamas prime minister
Ismail Haniyeh would easily defeat Abbas with 61% of the popular vote
versus 32%. Sixty-six percent of respondents in the West Bank said they
supported Haniyeh, compared to 53% in the Gaza Strip. In the West Bank,
Abbas received just 25% approval, as opposed to 43% in Gaza. Overall
support for the Palestinian Authority president plummeted 11% points in
two months, from 50% in June to 39% in August, the poll found
The Times also notes that this is the first time that Hamas leader
Ismail Haniyeh outpolled convicted terrorist Marwan Barghouti, with the
former favored by 49% to 45% for the presidency of the Palestinian
Authority.
Well, at least this ensures that there won't be 'Palestinian elections' for a while.
The poll, was conducted by the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion
(PCPO) among 1015 residents of Judea, Samaria and Gaza with a 3% margin
of error.
Barghouti is currently serving multiple life sentences in an
Israeli prison for his role planning numerous deadly terrorist attacks.
The poll found that if he was free, he would enjoy an advantage in the
race for president, regardless of who he was matched against.
When posed against Palestinian Authority (PA) Chairman Mahmoud
Abbas, 33% said they would vote for Barghouti with 29% going for Abbas.
Likewise, when compared against Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, Barghouti
bagged almost 50%, with Haniyeh at a mere 16%.
PCPO president and founder Nabil Kukali, ignoring Barghouti's lethal terrorism, remarked "it's time that Mr. Barghouti should be released from prison to give him the opportunity to contest the elections."
Abbas in March demanded Barghouti's release as a condition of the
peace talks, in what was speculated as indicating that Abbas, whose term
in office ended in January 2009, saw the arch-terrorist as his successor.
The poll also compared Fatah, the faction of Abbas and Barghouti, and Hamas, which violently forced Fatah out of Gaza in 2007.
According to the results Fatah would get 39% of the vote, with Hamas
far behind at 15%. 80% of respondents felt elections would "certainly"
or "likely" be held within six months of the unity government's
formation.
It's surreal to even be talking about this as if it's going to happen. What could go wrong?
'Moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud AbbasAbu Mazen recently started the tenth year of his four-year term in office. Aside from the fact that this isn't a whole lot different than anyplace else in the Arab world, why does it matter?
By remaining in power beyond his term, Abbas has given Hamas and
other Palestinians a good excuse to argue that he is in no way
authorized to sign a peace agreement with Israel.
"Mahmoud Abbas's term in office expired a long time ago," said Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri. "He has lost his legitimacy. He does not have a mandate to negotiate or sign an agreement."
What this basically means is that Hamas and other Palestinian groups
are not going to accept any deal between the Palestinian Authority and
Israel, even if it includes far-reaching concessions on the part of
Israel.
Abbas was recently quoted
as saying once again that any deal he signs with Israel would apply not
only to the West Bank, which is under his control, but to the Gaza
Strip as well.
One can understand why Abbas is speaking on behalf of his
constituents in the West Bank. But how exactly does Abbas intend to
enforce a peace agreement in the Gaza Strip when he cannot even visit
his private residence there?
...
The only way to find out what Palestinians really want is by allowing
them to head to the ballot boxes. Palestinians representing all groups,
including Hamas and Islamic Jihad, should be allowed to run in such an
election.
A victory for the radicals would mean that a majority of Palestinians
do not want peace and continue to dream about the destruction of
Israel. If Abbas and his political allies win, that would be great news
for the peace process and Kerry's efforts to achieve a two-state
solution.
Yet Kerry does not seem to care whether Abbas is a "rightful"
president or not. He is so desperate for a diplomatic achievement that
he is prepared to ignore fundamental facts.
How can Kerry expect Abbas to sign any document declaring the end of
the conflict with Israel when many Palestinians are already pointing out
that their president does not even have a mandate to act or speak on
their behalf?
As Hillary Clinton would say, what difference does it make?
Great news: Hamas and Fatah terror groups agree to unity
The 'Palestinian' news agency Maan is reporting that the Fatah and Hamas terror groups have agreed to 'unity' before the next 'Palestinian elections.'
Hamas has officially notified Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas of the
movement's decision to join a national unity government which will
prepare for upcoming presidential and parliamentarian elections, sources
told Ma’an on Tuesday.
The sources, allegedly privy to the
details, said that Abbas had previously received two phone calls from
Hamas' chief Khalid Mashaal and from prime minister of the Hamas-run
government in Gaza Ismail Haniyeh.
The two allegedly confirmed to Abbas that Hamas had agreed to join a national unity government with Fatah.
The
sources pointed out that Hamas requested that the national unity
government serve for six months instead of three as agreed in the 2012
Doha Agreement, one of numerous attempts at reconciliation between the
rival Palestinian factions.
Abbas might ask current Palestinian Authority prime minister Rami Hamdallah to lead the unity government, sources said.
The
Palestinian president will issue the needed presidential decrees
announcing elections after attending a meeting of Arab countries'
foreign ministers scheduled on December 21, sources added.
I can't wait to hear what John Kerry has to say about this? Matt Lee? Attending the press briefing at the State Department today? Here's a good question to ask....
Jonathan Schanzer has what seems like a pretty modest goal for President Obama to pursue during his March meeting with 'moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud AbbasAbu Mazen: Get Abu Mazen to name a successor.
Alarmingly, there is nobody in that role now. Abbas, also known as
Abu Mazen, is 78 years old. He is a heavy smoker and a cancer survivor.
In 2010, he reportedly was admitted six times to a Jordanian hospital
for unspecified health reasons. It's unclear how much longer he'll be
fit for office.
Should the unthinkable happen, according to Palestinian Basic Law,
Article 37, "the Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council shall
temporarily assume the powers and duties of the Presidency of the
National Authority for a period not to exceed sixty (60) days, during
which free and direct elections to elect a new President shall take
place."
But here's the rub: The current speaker is Aziz Dweik, who ran on the Hamas-affiliated Change and Reform ticket. His history does not recommend him. In 1992, Dweik was expelled from Israel
for his involvement with Hamas. He was among those the Israelis rounded
up and arrested in 2006 after an Israeli soldier was captured in Gaza.
He was arrested again in 2012 for alleged "involvement in terrorist
activities."
Should Dweik succeed Abbas, it would be the end of any possible peace process.
Schanzer even has a candidate to take Abu Mazen's place:
Of course, Abbas has a prime minister. Salam Fayyad
has done an admirable job and is worthy of succeeding Abbas. But Abbas
has not identified him as the next in line for reasons that only he
knows.
The reasons that Abu Mazen has not identified a successor, and why he has not identified Fayyad in particular, are known to all in the region. First, Abu Mazen has one and only one goal: Staying alive. If he named a successor who was popular, that successor could decide to throw Abu Mazen out. After all, having been named, why should he wait? (Abu Mazen waited for Arafat's departure because Arafat was an icon who was far more popular than Abu Mazen). When a Prime Minister or President is thrown out of office in the Middle East in any country other than Israel, it doesn't happen because he lost an election. It happens because he lost his life.
And why not Fayyad? Because Fayyad, although a competent technocrat, has absolutely zero support among the 'Palestinian people.' None. He hasn't spent significant time in jail and hasn't got lots of Jewish blood on his hands - the two main qualifications for holding office in the 'Palestinian Authority.' He couldn't be elected dog catcher in the 'Palestinian Authority.' Yes, it's sad, because he's probably the only person who's qualified, and he's certainly the only one who's trusted by the West. But why let reality intrude on the 'Palestinian' dream of extirpating the Jewish state?
Besides, for Abu Mazen to do what Schanzer is suggesting would require statesmanship and a vision. If Abu Mazen has shown nothing else over the past ten years, he has shown that he has neither of those.
I suppose that the funniest part about the quote in the title is that it came from the 'Palestinian' chief negotiatorbottle washer, Saeb Erekat. I can't remember the last time the 'Palestinians' settled anything except with bullets. But now, he claims that Hamas is going to be allowed to run in elections, and that will settle everything between them. Just like 2006?
What most of the world doesn't understand is that regardless of whether Fatah or Hamas leads the 'Palestinians,' the prospects for peace are the same. The two don't differ on goals. Only on how to get there.
"Hamas and Fatah have differences in opinion," Chief PLO negotiator Saeb
Erekat said Sunday morning, but stressed that "everyone has a right to
run."
"We are a democracy" he told Army Radio, emphasizing that
"whoever wins, wins." This does not mean that Hamas would be "taking
over" the West Bank, however, adding, "We don't use bullets, we use
ballots."
When probed over whether Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal is
expected to run in the Palestinian presidential elections, Erekat said
he has not announced a decision.
"They
forget that even [the late PLO leader Yasser] Arafat recognized Israel
within the 1967 lines," he said, claiming that after he did so he was
killed. Erekat expressed hope that Russian, French and Swiss investigators "will find out who killed Arafat."
Is Saeb saying that Hamas and Fatah don't share the same objective? If so, what happens if Hamas (presumably the bad guys) wins the election? (Assuming that there ever is an election).... And if they do share the same objective, how does Saeb define that objective?
As far as I can tell, they do share the same objective and it's to extirpate the Jewish state.
Jonathan Schanzer worries about who will follow 'moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud AbbasAbu Mazen.
The aging Abbas, however, may not have years. The Palestinian leader is 77 years old, a heavy smoker, and an incessant traveler. He reportedly underwent treatment for prostate cancer a decade ago, and in 2010 he was admitted
six times to a Jordanian hospital for unspecified health reasons. In
short, he's not a picture of perfect fitness. This raises the
inconvenient question: Who will follow in his footsteps?
Right now, the answer is Hamas. According to Palestinian Basic Law, Article 37,
if the presidency of the Palestinian Authority becomes vacant "the
Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council shall temporarily assume
the powers and duties of the Presidency of the National Authority for a
period not to exceed sixty (60) days, during which free and direct
elections to elect a new President shall take place."
As it turns out, the current speaker is none other than Aziz Dweik.
In January 2006, the last time Palestinians held legislative elections,
Dweik ran and won on Hamas's Change and Reform list. When Hamas emerged
with a majority after that vote, he was sworn in as speaker.
Who is this leader waiting in the wings? He has spent two decades
being pursued by Israel. In 1992, Dweik was one of 415 Hamas members exiled
to Lebanon by Israel for their involvement in the nascent terrorist
group. Following the 2006 kidnapping of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit,
the Israelis arrested him for being a member of Hamas. In June 2009, Dweik was released from prison, but was rearrested this January for "involvement in terrorist activities." He was released again, only months ago, in July.
Of course, Dweik isn't a shoo-in. Succession does not always proceed
according to law, and the PLO could still appoint someone from its own
ranks if Abbas could no longer lead that body. However, a power struggle
is a recipe for another ugly clash between the PLO and Hamas -- perhaps
a reprise of the bloody 2007 civil war, in which Hamas seized the Gaza
Strip. And right now, Abbas's health and political fortunes are the only
things standing in the way of this chaotic scenario.
...
Abbas continues to hang on, but he still doesn't seem to stand for
anything other than the perpetuation of his own rule. He has failed to
deliver peace, yet will not engage in violence against Israel. This
"neither here nor there" approach explains why he was basically
irrelevant during the most recent round of fighting between Israel and
Hamas.
The question of who might succeed Abbas is not a new one. According
to a leaked U.S. State Department cable, Palestinian negotiator Saeb
Erekat warned
Americans as far back as 2006 that a "political vacuum" would elevate
Dweik to the role of president. Other Palestinian insiders have also
quietly expressed concerns about the Palestinian Authority's succession
plan.
Abbas, however, refuses to name a successor. Taking a page from
deposed Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, his old ally, he has no vice
president and no heir apparent. Instead, he has led campaigns to weaken
potential challengers. Mohammed Dahlan, the popular strongman of Gaza
under the late Yasir Arafat, has endured particularly nasty treatment from Abbas, who has made moves to freeze his assets abroad.
...
If the international community is serious about Palestinian statehood,
it should start thinking about who is next in line to govern the
Palestinian people and how to forge the infrastructure needed to ensure
good governance. More importantly, it should demand that Abbas take
steps to ensure that legitimate contenders have the opportunities to
ensure their political voices are heard.
The problem with the 'Palestinians' isn't just that they don't get the 'vision thing' as former President george W. Bush would call it. There is no 'vision thing.' There is not and has never been anything to a 'Palestinian state' other than the destruction of the Jewish state. And therefore there's no plan for continuity after a leader dies. That was true under Arafat and it's true under Abu Mazen.
Here's Soccer Dad's Middle East Media Sampler for Monday, April 30.
1) Benzion Netanyahu
Unsurprisingly the New York Times obituary of Benzion Netanyahu, the Prime Minister's father is titled, Benzion Netanyahu, Hawkish Scholar, Dies at 102. I'm uncertain why the adjective, "hawkish" is necessary.
Ultimately, Israel was created as a result of the partition the revisionists opposed. Nonetheless, Rafael Medoff, director of the David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, said in a letter to The Jerusalem Post in 2005 that Mr. Netanyahu was instrumental in building American support for the smaller Israel that did emerge. Mr. Medoff said Mr. Netanyahu persuaded the leadership of the Republican Party to put a call for a Jewish state in its 1944 platform. It was the first time a major party had done this, and the Democrats followed suit. In his 1995 book, “The Origins of the Inquisition in Fifteenth Century Spain,” Mr. Netanyahu offered a radical new way of viewing the Inquisition. Rather than seeing it as the persecution of Jews for secretly practicing their religion after pretending to convert to Roman Catholicism — which had been the predominant view — Mr. Netanyahu offered evidence that most Jews willingly became enthusiastic Catholics. Jews were thus burned at the stake, he concluded, for being perceived as an evil race rather than for anything they did or believed.
Ben-Zion Netanyahu was born in Warsaw on 25.3.10, named Ben-Zion Mileikowsky. In 1920, he and his family immigrated to the Land of Israel. In 1944, he married Tzila, whom he had met during his studies in the Land of Israel. Ben-Zion Netanyahu had three sons – the late Col. Yonatan Netanyahu, who fell during Operation Yonatan at Entebbe; Benjamin, the Prime Minister of Israel; and Ido, a doctor, author and playwright. Prof. Netanyahu was among the great historians of the Jewish People. In his research, he focused on the history of the medieval Spanish Jewish community and the history of Zionism. Among his books area biography of Don Isaac Abravanel, a history of the Spanish Marranos and his major work, 'The Origins of the Inquisition in Fifteenth Century Spain', which received global acclaim. He also authored 'The Founding Fathers of Zionism' about the lives of the founders of political Zionism – Leon Pinsker, Theodor Herzl, Max Nordau, Israel Zangwill and Zeev Jabotinsky.
Late last week, President Obama issued this waiver:
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 7040(b) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2012 (Division I, Public Law 112-74) (the "Act"), I hereby certify that it is important to the national security interests of the United States to waive the provisions of section 7040(a) of the Act, in order to provide funds appropriated to carry out Chapter 4 of Part II of the Foreign Assistance Act, as amended, to the Palestinian Authority.
In Context provides the context of the waiver (it is part of the legislation) but notes:
Bottom line: not only is such a waiver not in the national security interest of the United States, it runs directly counter to any such interest. There is no national security interest in propping up a failed dictator who is now more than three years past the term of his elected office. There is no national security interest in continuing to feed US taxpayer dollars, even if we had them to spare (which we do not), into an anti-US, anti-Western, antisemitic kleptocracy that knows no bounds.
"Everyone expects these Arab revolutions to solve the problems, but what they are actually doing is revealing the existence of all these problems that were put in a freezer,” the Arab commentator Hazem Saghieh told me. “All these years, the only thing that was allowed to come to the surface was that there is a consensus on the beloved leader and animosity to Israel and imperialism. There was no room for politics and differentiation. Behind this facade, Arab society became rotten, and now we are seeing the return of the repressed.” It’s like a kid who was beaten and left uneducated by his parents for 50 years and one day the kid finally decides to fight back, he added. “Morally, you have to support his right to revolt, but this guy is very traumatized.” So let’s help in an intelligent, humane way, but with no illusions that this transition will be easy or a happy ending assured.
Ten years ago Friedman gave a clean bill of health to the members of the Arab League. Why? Because they had offered Israel a "peace" initiative. Friedman didn't care that they were repressing their own people, just that they had supposedly made an offer of "normalization" with Israel, if Israel would accede to their demands. Back then, Friedman was supporting the consensus that his source now disparages.
If he wishes to quote Simon and Garfunkel, I'd recommend, "A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."
They say that — and then they speculate about when and whether the Obama administration might decide to abandon its passivity. The United States, after all, is more than capable of creating and defending a humanitarian zone in Syria, with help from Turkey and NATO. If it were to support the arming of the Free Syrian Army, there is little question that the army would soon have more weapons. Many in the Syrian opposition believe that merely the announcement of such U.S. initiatives would cause Assad’s regime to crumble from within. What’s missing, of course, is a decision by President Obama to make that commitment. To do so, he would have to set aside the idea that any action must be authorized by the U.N. Security Council. He would have to forge an ad hoc coalition with Turkey and other NATO members, led by the United States. And he would have to order U.S. diplomats to work intensively with Syria’s opposition movements and ethnic communities to build an accord on a post-Assad order. In other words, Obama would have to behave as if the United States were still what Bill Clinton understood it to be: the indispensable nation.
Emanuele Ottolenghi wonders why the European foreign policy chief, Baroness Catherine Ashton, has held her tongue since a pronouncement in Ramallah two weeks ago.
Baroness Catherine Ashton, the European Union's high representative for foreign affairs, is not afraid to speak out. In August alone, she issued no fewer than 36 statements and speeches on a wide range of foreign policy issues; in July it was 56.
Since July, Ashton has seen fit to weigh in on the Arab Spring, speaking on Bahrain, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, North Africa, Syria and Yemen. She has addressed EU relations with Kazakhstan, tensions in South Kordofan, elections in Thailand, the shooting of protesters by Malawian police, and human-rights abuses in Belarus. She has decried the arrest of female journalists in Iran, and voiced regret over the execution, in Texas, of Humberto Leal Garcia, a Mexican citizen convicted of raping and murdering a teenage girl. Ashton welcomed the release of seven Estonian cyclists abducted in Lebanon. She celebrated the arrest of Serbian war criminal Goran Hadzic. She condemned the execution, in Delaware, of Robert Jackson, a man convicted of ax-murdering a woman during a botched burglary in her home. She even issued a festive statement on the occasion of the International Day of the World's Indigenous People.
But on August 22, the Palestinian Authority postponed local elections indefinitely, and Ashton had nothing to say.
Gee, I wonder why. /sarc
No, it's not because she wasn't there. Ashton was in Ramallah this week and kept her silence. You see, Ashton is a hypocrite.
Middle East peace remains Europe's top priority, and it is a European axiom that Israeli settlements stand in the way of that vision. Ashton thus expressed "profound disappointment" at the Israeli government's announcement last month that it would permit the building of 900 new housing units in East Jerusalem. In the following weeks, she expressed deep regret over the same state of affairs, noting that "This is the third time since the beginning of August that the Israeli government has approved settlement expansion in the West Bank, including in East Jerusalem."
...
Baroness Ashton began her journey as EU high representative when she spoke at the headquarters of the Arab League in Cairo, on March 15, 2010 - barely nine months before the Arab Spring began. Addressing an audience of autocrats, Ashton never spoke of democracy in the Arab world. She only mentioned the word "freedom" once - with regard to Palestinian freedom from Israeli occupation, not human freedom from repression, a topic that, no doubt, would have resonated with ordinary Arabs, but might have infuriated her hosts.
Eighteen months and several Arab revolutions later, Europe's top diplomat is waxing lyrical about democracy in the Arab world, as if she, or Europe, had always championed it. Yet, the basic tenets of her first flawed speech, designed to ingratiate Europe to Arab dictators, did not change. Israel building a few hundred more houses in the West Bank is a threat to peace, which solicits disappointment, concern and regret. But this is not the case when, in the midst of the Arab Spring, the PA makes once more a mockery of democracy. Ashton might have expressed disappointment, concern or regret at this development.
...
Instead, the consolidation of another corrupt and autocratic Arab regime in the West Bank does not even merit a gentle nudge.
The world may be against us, but the world is a bunch of hypocrites. Ashton is typical.
'Palestinian Authority' breaking up anti-Mubarak demonstrations
The 'Palestinian Authority' has been breaking up demonstrations in its territory in support of the Egyptian opposition. Here's video from a demonstration on Saturday in Ramallah.
Let's go to the videotape.
Looks like an awful lot of people, doesn't it?
But not everyone in the 'Palestinian Authority' establishment is opposed to the demonstrations.
While PA security spokesman Adnan Ad-Dmeiri told the Bethlehem-based Ma'an news agency that the PA supported the right of expression, he said that such protests “create chaos.”
One demonstrator told CNN that he came "to stand with the Egyptian people," adding, “It is the right of the people to have democracy and self-determination. We are the same people and from the same region.” [So then why should the 'Palestinians' have a 'right' to 'self-determination' if they are - as he admits - the same people? CiJ]
PLO member Hanan Ashrawi and other Arab officials took part in the Ramallah protest, according to a brief on the Arab News website.
"From Ramallah to Al-Tahrir (Square), the people want change," "bring down the regimes of oppression," they chanted, the report said.
Similar rallies have been held in Bethlehem and eastern Jerusalem since the eruption of demonstrations in Egypt.
The PLO is opposed to the demonstrations for two reasons. First, out of loyalty to Mubarak who has tried to help them reconcile with Hamas. And second, because they know another illegitimate government whose people might want to rise up and overthrow it.
Learning the right lessons from the Palestinian election of 2006
In Friday’s edition, the Wall Street Journal suggests that the lesson that ought to be learned from the Palestinian election of 2006 was that Hamas should not have been allowed to run without accepting past agreements and Israel’s right to exist, and eschewing violence. Instead, Hamas was allowed to run in that election without meeting those preconditions, and won the election, leading to the eventual split between Hamas and Fatah which leaves us with two de facto Palestinian polities to this day.
Get my take on the lessons of the Palestinian election of 2006 by reading my latest article on Newsreal's Right to Exist blog here.
I'm sure that you'll all be shocked to hear that as a result of what's happening in Egypt, 'moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud AbbasAbu Mazen is considering holding elections in the 'Palestinian Authority.' Those elections are two years overdue.
Senior Fatah official Azzam Al-Ahmad said Sunday that President Mahmoud Abbas was looking into holding presidential and legislative elections despite the national division.
Speaking at a press conference in Ramallah, Al-Ahmad said a meeting would be held Monday to discuss holding elections.
Fatah would support a government decision to hold elections, he said.
I wonder what will happen if someone other than Abu Bluff is elected the Grand Pubah of 'Palestine.' Heh.
While Israel has been extremely cautious not to appear to be taking sides in the current goings-on in Egypt, 'moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud AbbasAbu Mazen is a different story. Abu Mazen has come out strongly in favor of Mubarak.
President Mahmoud Abbas contacted his Egyptian counterpart Hosni Mubarak on Saturday, state media said.
“President Abbas affirmed the Palestinian leadership's support for Egyptian security and stability,” Abbas was quoted as saying.
If Mubarak is ousted, Abu Mazen's support for him could come back to bite him. While the Dayton forces have been able to keep Hamas in check in Judea and Samaria, if a mass uprising against Abu Mazen's rule were to occur, they might find that more challenging to put down. And Abu Mazen has been ruling for more than two years since he was supposed to hold elections.
Surprise: PLO walks back support of Tunisian revolution
In an earlier post, I noted the lukewarm support for the Tunisian revolution from the 'Palestine Liberation Organization,' while the 'Palestinian Authority' did not take a stance. Now, the PLO has walked back its support for the revolution as well.
The Palestinian president's advisor to the PLO said Saturday that the body's leadership had not taken an official stance on the situation in Tunisia, contradicting a prior statement expressing solidarity.
PLO advisor Ahmed Abdel Rahman said the Executive Committee had not met and therefore had not issued an official statement. Still, he extended condolences to the families of Tunisian victims, the official Palestinian Authority news agency WAFA reported.
Rahman's remarks came hours after an Executive Committee statement praised the "unprecedented courage of the Tunisian people and their heroic sacrifices for their just rights."
The statement also called the spontaneous uprising across Tunisia one "against corruption and oppression," and reaffirmed that the Tunisian people possessed creative power in exercising self-determination, democracy and development.
I guess somewhere along the line someone realized that the analog to the Tunisian government under Ben Ali is not the 'Israeli occupation,' but Abu Bluff's illegitimate government that is still in power two years after its term expired.
I am an Orthodox Jew - some would even call me 'ultra-Orthodox.' Born in Boston, I was a corporate and securities attorney in New York City for seven years before making aliya to Israel in 1991 (I don't look it but I really am that old :-). I have been happily married to the same woman for thirty-five years, and we have eight children (bli ayin hara) ranging in age from 13 to 33 years and nine grandchildren. Four of our children are married! Before I started blogging I was a heavy contributor on a number of email lists and ran an email list called the Matzav from 2000-2004. You can contact me at: IsraelMatzav at gmail dot com
