Powered by WebAds

Tuesday, March 09, 2010

The 'Palestinians' don't want a state

Laura Rozen posts what is apparently a translation of a column by Nachum Barnea that appeared in Monday's Yediot Aharonot. I don't agree with Barnea that we should force the 'Palestinians' to accept an interim state (the last thing we should be doing is giving them land in exchange for an agreement that would lack an end of conflict provision), but what he says about the 'Palestinians' not wanting a state is spot-on.
Yaari’s basic assumption is that the Palestinians do not really want a state, not if it entails resigning themselves to dividing the land. The Palestinian strategy is to collapse into the arms of Israel. From Israel’s perspective, that is disastrous. It must force them to establish a state. Since they are incapable of signing a comprehensive agreement, they must be compelled to establish a state as part of an interim agreement.

It appears that Yaari’s basic assumption is correct. Abu Mazen and his colleagues in Fatah are missing two vital ingredients for the establishment of a state—willingness to impose painful concessions, and the desire and ability to take responsibility for everything that the day-to-day running of a state requires. The only one in the Palestinian leadership who is working seriously in this direction is Salam Fayyad. It is no accident that he is not a member of Fatah. It is no accident that he sees David Ben-Gurion, rather than Yasser Arafat, as a model to emulate. ....

Abu Mazen does not want a Palestinian state. He is willing, perhaps, to accept it on a silver platter, but he is not willing to pay the required price for it. Netanyahu does not want a Palestinian state either. He is willing to support the idea for public-relations reasons, but is not willing to pay the required price. And perhaps both of them have come secretly to the recognition that it is too late. The die has been cast....
And no, I don't believe that Netanyahu wants a 'Palestinian state' either. Why would he?


At 4:47 PM, Blogger nomatter said...

However...past Presidents hooked Peace in the whole of the ME on Palestinian statehood.

They think they can change the Palestinian terror mentality by handing them statehood even when they know better and even when they know for that Israel will pay a steep price.

Believe, me they know. Unfortunately thanks to all our past US Presidents that train will not stop until until it enters (the terror state of) "Palestine."

Don't delude yourself, the Palestinian 'leadership' and their people have more than proven they are seriously undeserving of statehood. We may have disdain for world leaders lack of judgment but they are not stupid. They know. The irony however is it does not make a dimes worth of difference!

BTW: In our lifetime we will not meet a US President or head of state who will say the Palestinian people are contemptuous liars, terrorists and undeserving of statehood. OH My G-d, there have been plenty of chances, but not one word.

What does that tell you?

At 6:55 PM, Blogger BernardZ said...

What could any Palestinian leader really offer his people if he did try and make peace? A small bankrupt state with a lot of problems! Plus Palestinians have a habit of rejecting any leader that talks peace, so he probably will not last.

The only Palestinian leader to accept the idea of statehood was yasser Arafat, who had nothing left. He was in Tunis, the first Intifada was making the PLO irrelevant. Once Yasser got a base in the West Bank, Yasser took back what he promised.

The reality is a PA state is a no goer.

PS I appreciate all the work you clearly do on this blog.


Post a Comment

<< Home