Senior Palestinian official Abbas Zaki posted on his Facebook page an
interview he gave to Syrian TV in which he said the PA will only agree
to a treaty with Israel if the Palestinian state is established on the
1967 lines. However, he stressed that '67 lines would only be the
beginning. After that, the Palestinians will continue with the stages
plan:
"Even the most extreme among us, Hamas,
or the fighting forces, want a state within the '67 borders. Afterward,
we [will] have something to say, because the inspiring idea cannot be
achieved all at once. [Rather] in stages."
Let's go to the videotape.
I wonder if anyone in Washington even watches this stuff any more.
After the Yom Kippur War, the Arab states realized that there was no way they were going to be able to destroy Israel militarily in one fell swoop. Therefore, in 1974, the PLO adopted a new plan which is known as the 'Phased Plan.'
The plan in brief:
Through the "armed struggle" (i.e., terrorism),
to establish an "independent combatant national authority" over any
territory that is "liberated" from Israeli rule. (Article 2)
To continue the struggle against Israel, using the territory
of the national authority as a base of operations. (Article 4)
To provoke an all-out war in which Israel's Arab
neighbors destroy it entirely ("liberate all Palestinian territory").
(Article 8)
When I read this piece by Dr. Reuven Berko, all I could think was that after 40 years, the 'phased plan' is alive and well. Oslo, as many of us believed since the beginning, is just phase 1 of the plan.
The
situation is Kafkaesque: While Israeli leaders are busy preparing a deal
that will provide two states for tow peoples, Ali is protesting with
the people of his village just a few meters away from the land he claims
for himself and his friends. He is waging his battle in and against the
Israeli homefront. With Palestinian flags at his back, he defiantly
flashes the Arafat-like "V" sign (all of this is Palestine) toward the
abashed gazes of Beit Hanania's residents, who shamefully swallow their
outrage. Ali stands proud, in all his democratic glory, while voicing
nationalistic Palestinian slogans, including a few "for the Arab lands
of the Negev."
Something strange is
happening in the Jewish state: Abbas is declaring a "territory free of
Jews" but is demanding the release of Arab-Israeli murderers, those who
have killed Jews in the name of the Palestinian problem but who were
never under any form of Palestinian jurisdiction. Arab citizens of
Israel, protesting with Palestinian flags in their hands, are demanding
state lands that never belonged to them within the 1967 borders, and
Arab MKs are telling their youth to refrain from performing any type of
national service. On top of all this, Palestinian leaders continue to
demand a "return" of refugees, to Israel of all places, which they call a
state of Apartheid, oppression and occupation, and not to the
Palestinian state they are seeking to establish.
The strangest
phenomenon is that in Umm al-Fahm of all places, the hotbed of hatred
toward the Jews and the state, residents are rejecting any proposal that
includes "freeing themselves from the occupation" and transferring,
with their lands and property, to the jurisdiction of an independent
Palestinian state, the same one that will be "clean of Jews."
How pathetic it is to
recall that every time peace efforts have failed and it was apparent
that the Palestinians, despite the generous offers they received, were
neither ready "nor able" to reach an agreement and recognize the state
of Israel (fill in the blank here with the unmentionable). The shocked
and dumbstruck Left would gather itself and again blame the Israeli
negotiators for the failure.
A Palestinian friend
used an Arab allegory to tell me bluntly, "Just as you came empty
handed, so you will leave." In the jails for security prisoners, the
murderers know they will go free. Those who planned and carried out
terrorist attacks know in advance that if they are caught, they will be
released and will return to their activities. The refugees are certain
they will return to Palestine, in other words to Jaffa, Acre and Haifa.
Hamas, the "rejectionist organizations" and the refugees continue to
demand their "return" to Palestine.
If the phased plan did not remain in effect, why would the 'Palestinians' regard the 'Israeli Arabs' as their own? And why would so many 'Israeli Arabs' seek to remain in the Jewish state (so that they can undermine it from within) rather than joining their brethren in a 'Palestinian state' should one be created?
Are the Islamists fighting the world the same way Arafat fought Israel? Here's an interesting theory.
In fact, it looks as though the global Islamist movement has adopted Yasser Arafat's strategy for destroying Israel. He said,
"Since we cannot defeat Israel in war we do this in stages. We take
any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish
sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When
the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final
blow against Israel." (Yasser Arafat speaking on Jordanian television,
September 13, 1993-the same day the Oslo Peace Accord ceremony was held
in Washington D.C.) That's
exactly what Islamists are doing. Substitute "the world" for Israel,
"the global caliphate" for Palestine, and "Islamist powers" for Arab
nations and you will see what I mean. Arafat also said,
"Peace for us means the destruction of Israel. We are preparing for an
all-out war, a war which will last for generations. Since January
1965, when Fatah was born, we have become the most dangerous enemy that
Israel has....We shall not rest until the day when we return to our
home, and until we destroy Israel." (El Mundo, Caracas, Venezuela,
February 11, 1980) Applying
the same substitutions to this quote lends additional credence to the
hypothesis that Arafat is the originator of the global Islamist
movement's strategy. Whatever the case may be, though, this much is
certain: peaceful coexistence with radical Islamists is impossible.
Based on all of the available evidence, any other conclusion is a manic
delusion.
In fact, it looks as though the global Islamist movement has adopted Yasser Arafat's strategy for destroying Israel. He said,
"Since we cannot defeat Israel in war we do this in stages. We take
any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish
sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When
the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final
blow against Israel." (Yasser Arafat speaking on Jordanian television,
September 13, 1993-the same day the Oslo Peace Accord ceremony was held
in Washington D.C.)
That's
exactly what Islamists are doing. Substitute "the world" for Israel,
"the global caliphate" for Palestine, and "Islamist powers" for Arab
nations and you will see what I mean.
Arafat also said,
"Peace for us means the destruction of Israel. We are preparing for an
all-out war, a war which will last for generations. Since January
1965, when Fatah was born, we have become the most dangerous enemy that
Israel has....We shall not rest until the day when we return to our
home, and until we destroy Israel." (El Mundo, Caracas, Venezuela,
February 11, 1980)
Applying
the same substitutions to this quote lends additional credence to the
hypothesis that Arafat is the originator of the global Islamist
movement's strategy. Whatever the case may be, though, this much is
certain: peaceful coexistence with radical Islamists is impossible.
Based on all of the available evidence, any other conclusion is a manic
delusion.
The time has come for Prime Minister Netanyahu to propose, and for the Knesset to ratify, the repeal of the 'Oslo Accords.' It's time for Israel to stop with the charade that they have any meaning left to them and to adapt its policies accordingly. It's time to acknowledge the reality that the 'Palestinians' do not deem themselves bound by them, and that we should not deem ourselves bound by them either. (Hat Tip: Ashley R).
ANYONE PAYING attention knows that Oslo has been over for quite some time. The second intifada defamed it, disengagement exposed it, Annapolis was in spite of it and now Abbas has renounced it.
Inevitably, the reality Oslo hoped to create could not keep up with onthe- ground realities. What makes Abbas’s repudiation of Oslo so significant is that he did the one thing that cannot be reversed – he went public. Why would the “moderate” Abbas/Fayyad administration take the step that Arafat would not? An answer can be found in Arafat’s 1974 negotiation strategy, known as the “piece plan.” It was a tactic to grab whatever he could through dubious diplomacy. More famously known as the “phased plan,” it continues to be embraced, engraved momentously in the PLO Covenant, which to this day has not been revoked. This scheme states plainly its aim to “adopt a political solution of establishing a National Authority over any territory from which the occupation withdraws,” buttressed with a negotiation to extract as much as possible by simply taking “the ceiling of the last negotiation as the floor for the next.
It is no wonder that Abbas’s declaration makes no concrete reference to actual borders, resources and neighbors. The reason is now obvious; the Palestinians are not interested in compromise with Israel because they want to supplant Israel. They intend to do this through refugees, demanding indefensible borders and perpetuating attrition-styled conflict on Israel’s population. If the current bid at the UN should fail, we can presume that the strategy will continue with the “Quartet” to try to get a large international power to impose Palestinian terms on Israel. Whatever the outcome of this gambit, the breach of Oslo is irreversible, trust severed and the bilateral framework no longer a viable option.
DESPITE THIS, many of Israel’s brightest thinkers cling warily to the two-state solution, neglecting an clear reality that exposes the absence of a credible negotiating partner. Israel, schooled in the art of pragmatism since its inception, has sustained a Palestinian status quo undeserving of being so dutifully propped up. Even Netanyahu continues to operate as if what happened at the UN created just another stalemate.
For Israel to adopt policies that are consistent with reality, Netanyahu is obligated to reframe the national conversation under the assumption that the Palestinians still refuse to recognize basic Jewish sovereignty on its historic land. Moreover, it is incumbent upon Netanyahu to take the commensurate step to repeal Oslo – and subsequent agreements ratified by the Knesset. Repealing Oslo is not only strategically sound, it is now a matter of principle for the government he represents, which has acted throughout in good faith only to be humiliated, cheated and bamboozled by the Palestinians.
For Netanyahu to continue at the helm of Likud – a party that wrestled with Oslo from the beginning – this repeal is a political opportunity he cannot afford to forsake. He must act on his UN speech, which maintained that Israel would no longer be the party always expected to recognize the rights of others. Instead, the Jewish state’s rights must be recognized.
Those that do not will be identified publicly. Repealing Oslo is the first step in shifting this process to a more leveled diplomatic exchange between Israel and its neighbors and toward a new era in international relations.
Israel should expect some considerable international backlash, in repealing this defunct accord.
However, this official act is the only one that can provide the sort of closure the people of Israel desperately need. Here Netanyahu should not follow the Palestinians in squandering opportunities. By closing this chapter, there is the promise of a new one.
Fatah Central Committee member calls Obama a scumbag
In this video, Fatah Central Committee member Abbas Zaki calls US President Barack Hussein Obama (and Prime Minister Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Lieberman - but those aren't really news) a scumbag. For good measure, he makes it clear with his reference to the 'greater goal' that a 'Palestinian state' is just a phase in the destruction of Israel (God forbid).
More 'Palestinians' dislike Hamas, but that doesn't mean that they'll live in peace with Israel
A new survey done by The Israel Project shows more disapproval of Hamas, but disapproval of Hamas does not improve the prospects for peace.
According to the poll, 56 percent of Gazans and 53% of West Bank Palestinians think negatively of Hamas in comparison to 28% and 40% respectively who have positive views. The numbers are also down from the 35% and 44% respectively who had favorable views of Hamas in July 2009.
The change comes after the Turkish flotilla incident in May, where a deadly confrontation between the IDF and Turkish civilians trying to break the Gaza blockade eventually led to Israel changing its embargo on Gaza to let in many more goods. The pollsters interpreted the results as a sign that the local population didn’t give Hamas credit for the change in Israel’s approach.
Gazans also equally blamed Israel (46%) and both Israel and Hamas (46%) for their situation. In comparison, while those in the West Bank blamed their own leaders as much as Gazans blamed Hamas (both at 6%), West Bank Palestinians overwhelming blamed Israel (62%) while only 19% blamed both.
Palestinians in both areas dislike Iran more than like it, with 49% in Gaza and 58% in the West Bank having unfavorable attitudes versus 39% and 35% respectively who have favorable attitudes towards them. While Gazans' negative attitudes toward Iran grew from the 44% who had negative views last year, the approval rate also increased from 31% in 2009.
...
Overall, 54% of Palestinians thought peace with Israel was possible with only 43% saying there was no hope, and 61% said they approved of continuing talks with Israel while only 33% disapproved.
Additionally, 60% said they accept a two-state solution with only 36% saying they don’t. However, 60% of those surveyed said they agreed with the statement that “the real goal should be to start with two states but then move to it all being one Palestinian state” with just 30% backing the statement that “the best goal is for a two-state solution that keeps two states living side by side.”
In addition, 56% said the Palestinians would once again have to resort to armed struggle, with only 38% agreeing that violence only hurts the Palestinians and the days of armed struggle are over.
That confirms what most Israelis believe: the 'Palestinian state' is just part of the 'phased plan.' There is nothing for Israel to gain by agreeing to it.
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
