The Delusion of Palestinian Independence Through The Deal of Century


US President Donald Trump and Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu take part in an announcement of Trump’s Middle East peace plan in the East Room of the White House in Washington, DC on January 28, 2020. – Trump declared that Israel was taking a “big step towards peace” as he unveiled a plan aimed at solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. “Today, Israel takes a big step towards peace,” Trump said, standing alongside Netanyahu as he revealed details of the plan already emphatically rejected by the Palestinians. (Photo by MANDEL NGAN / AFP)

Written by: Andi Annisa Nur Dzakiiyyah., S.Pd

By Andi Annisa -February 24, 2020017

President Trump on some days ago released his long-awaited Middle East peace plan which he has also referred to as the “deal of the century”. Trump planned to  give what Israel has long sought, including allowing for immediate expansion of territory, In his speech Trump said, “My vision presents a win-win opportunity for both sides, a realistic two state solution that resolves the risk of Palestinian statehood to Israel’s security,” , Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel, warmly welcomed Trump’s plan.

Even though Trump planned to give a $50 billion US investment in Palestine and vowed that he would create more than 1 million jobs over the next 10 years, Palestinians rejected it. They called it as a ‘bribe’ which weakens their struggle for realizing an independent Palestine as a sovereign state.

This surely would be a profitable plan for Israel, but Palestine would not.  That was why Palestinians took to the streets as part of a “day of rage”. In line with that, the Islamic organizations from other countries did it as well. In Indonesia, Koalisi Indonesia Bela Baitul Maqdis (KIBBM) with 20 organizations focused on Palestinian issues held peaceful demonstrations in front of the American embassy on February 14, 2020.

Palestinians’ problems is our problems even their sorrows are ours. The Deal of Century surely will give Israel legitimacy to annex the territory of Palestine more broadly.

Indeed, the solution to solve Palestine’s sorrow is not by agreeing to divide territory in the form of a peace agreement. That is not solution because the territories of Palestine belong to Palestinians. If we trace the history, Palestine is a region which was liberated since the leadership of Khalifah Umar Bin Khattab and moslems have been staying in Palestine for centuries. How about Zionists? They don’t have region at all.  Even when Zionists wanted to buy the region of Palestine, Sultan Hamid II rejected it and he said “I will not sell a single inch of the country, because it is not mine, it belongs to all the Muslims. They paid for this empire with their blood. And we will redeem it with our blood. Let the Zionists keep their millions.”

The statement of Sultan Hamid II showed the firmness of a moslem. We should remember the tragedy in 1917, the British government approved the establishment of the Israeli state on Palestinian land through the Balfour declaration. this agreement became the forerunner of the founding of Israel. It showed that Israel was originally the region of Palestine. The Zionists actually did not have rights to the territories of Palestine. Unfortunately, they were successful to annex the territory of Palestine by doing devious strategy. What was happened in the past should be reminder that making deal the enemy will harm Palestine.

Therefore, what was annexed by the Zionists should be returned to moslems. This of course will not be realized when the presidents of moslem countries only criticize, ignore, and make cooperation agreements, dialogues, or even resolutions with the enemy. In addition, the solution is not by calling for an international conference in which all colonial countries and criminals will gather against the Palestine. Then, who will we rely on? United Nations? The UN Security Council, which becomes the agent of the peace mission, has not been successful to actualize peace for Palestine. In doing this, Palestinian citizen will successfully defend and reclaim their rights and territories when there is a single leader throughout the world named “caliph” who will attack the enemy.

Rasulullah SAW said, “Indeed the Imam (the Leader/Sultan) is a shield. You fight behind him, and you protect yourself with him.” (Muslim).

Based on the hadith above, as moslems, we need the existence of caliphate who will unify all moslem countries in one shade and mobilize the armies to do jihad and against the enemy. This is the only one solutions that can solve all of the problems of moslems not only in Palestine, but also in Uyghur, Myanmar, Syria, and others. The caliph of moslems is the only one leader who will not bow down in front of the enemy as what Sultan Hamid II and Caliph Umar Bin Khattab had done. Moreover, he will lead by implementing all the commands and prohibitions of Allah including the command of jihad against the enemy.

Allah SWT said, ” And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them whom you do not know [but] whom Allah knows. And whatever you spend in the cause of Allah will be fully repaid to you, and you will not be wronged.” (Al-Anfal: 60)

Wallahu A’lam Bish Shawab

Father Hanna urges all Churches globally to reject Deal of the Century

By Elfalasteen -February 21, 2020

OCCUPIED AL-QUDS, PALESTINOW.COM — Archbishop of Sebastia Diocese Of the Greek Orthodox Church in occupied Jerusalem, Attallah Hanna, welcomed a delegation of the World Council of Churches at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the adjacent cathedral, and urged them, along with all churches, to denounce the so-called “Deal of the Century” and the ongoing historical injustice inflicted on the Palestinian people in their occupied homeland.

Archbishop Hanna called on the World Council of Churches to take clear Christian standards, based on the holy bible, humanity, morality, and dignity, to stand firm against this so-called deal, and not to surrender to pressure from the Zionist lobby which is acting against basic the principles of justice and freedom.

“What is the benefit of having a World Council of Churches if it becomes a political organization serving certain interests against the other, and if it continues to be hesitant about taking obvious stances against occupation, oppression, and injustice targeting the Palestinian people,” Archbishop Hanna said, “We are calling for clear positions, for churches around the world to work on protecting human rights, and on helping our people live in their own sovereign independent state.”

“Do not listen to those who keep talking about balanced stances, because for us, there is no space here for such a position while we continue to see people getting killed, targeted, oppressed and made homeless, in addition to being treated as strangers in their own homeland,” he added.

“We call on the World Council of Churches to act, as we all expect, on defending dignity, justice, and humanity in Palestine, in Syria, in Iraq as well as even part of the world,” Archbishop Hanna concluded.

The Worst Deal of the Century for Palestine

Tim KirbyFebruary 22, 2020

Trump is full of surprises and no one in the punditry was expecting anything like his “Deal of the Century”. It promises to solve the Israel/Palestine situation in a way that is fair to both sides and end a political crisis that has gone on for generations with a few pen swipes. Bold moves and showmanship are to be respected in politics, but is this really some new grand answer or a means for Israel-loyal Trump to trick the Palestinians? Well, on the surface it certainly looks like a great step forward if you are on the Israeli side of things.

It is important to note that if one geopolitical “wedge issue” exists, then it is most certainly Israel. The narrative surrounding Israel’s 20th century restoration divides people into two bitter raging camps. For many (Socialists, the Left) the European looking Israelis cutting out space for themselves in a foreign land while pushing the brown people back looks like some sort of microcosm of Western Imperialism. On the other hand, for those in the West who actually like their civilization (Republicans, the Right) they see Israel as a shining Democratic/Western light on a hill surrounded by barbarians. In many ways today’s Israel is like a living satire of the Old West in America – for some it is Manifesting Destiny and taming wild lands but for others it looks more like apartheid/genocide. Although it is unprofessional to mention oneself in a piece of analysis it is important to say that I personally subscribe to neither of these narratives. I can see them, understand them, but I do not believe in them. Meaning, as you will see I think the Deal of the Century is bad for the Palestinians not because they are victims of Jewish pioneers in the Wild Wild Middle-East but simply because accepting the deal means their side loses. This is not a deal but a request for capitulation.


At first glance the “two-state solution” style deal sounds very attractive for the Palestinian side. Being a recognized state, even if very poor and cut up into awkward chunks is still much better than being an “in name only” pseudo state within the official borders of another. If Palestine was more like a state it could control is territory and engage in trade much more easily with nations that are sympathetic to their cause giving them breathing room. The problem is that the Deal of the Century only offers two-state flavour and not the two-state substance that could woo the Palestinians into signing it.

One of the key clauses of the proposition is to disarm the Palestinian Authorities, Hamas and whomever else may be on their side in Israel… and this is where the deal falls apart before it even begins. Disarmament as part of any deal is coded language for capitulation. If your tribe lays down its arms and my tribe does not, guess who is going to be the Helots and who is going to be the Spartans. Strategically speaking if the Palestinians give up their ability to fight they have obviously lost.

Another aspect of this Deal of the Century that works only in Israel’s favour is the clause that the Palestinians must acknowledge Israel as a “Jewish State”. If the deal was to create a true two-state solution with real borders between them this would not be such a problem, but since ultimately the Palestinians would still technically be within Israel’s borders acknowledging that this region is the property of a different religious group would be a huge mistake. If the United States officially acknowledged the “Russianess” of Alaska you could see how that would really not be in America’s interests. It would essentially mean that Russia would by logic have the “right” to this territory and that is why America would and should never ever acknowledge any claim by a foreign power over U.S. territory. As they say in Russian “it was yours, now it’s ours”. If you do not follow this type of policy then you are asking for succession and strife.

This is why Palestine, if it wants to survive cannot sign off on Israel being Jewish. The second they do this it will mean that bureaucratically they have no place in this country and lose any claims to it.

The Palestinians are unlikely to say that all of Israel is “Jewish”.

Other aspects of the deal also force the Palestinians into a submissive state like demanding that they have to end “all programs, including school curricula and textbooks, that serve to incite or promote hatred or antagonism towards its neighbors” when the Israelis do not. Furthermore the Palestinians must have an open and free press, which in reality, means that as a desperately poor region they must open their press up to being bought up or overwhelmed by Western Mainstream Media.

Again as an Orthodox Slav I have no horse in this race, the core narratives in support of the Israelis and Palestinians do not speak to me, but objectively taking a look at the terms, if the Palestinians take this “deal” then they have ultimately capitulated. A completely helpless and yet completely “open” Palestine that may have to give up even more territory officially will erode even faster. No break-away movement in any nation on Earth could agree to similar terms and yet still desire independence.

If I were in Trump’s shoes and very deeply tied to support for Israel I would not have offered some sort of deal between the two sides, but instead offered the Israeli Jews the chance to become the 51st state, which in some ways it already is. Although the bureaucratic realization of this idea would be tough to say the least, it would be good PR within the Beltway and beyond even if the idea was completely rejected. This peace attempt which will get shot down for the reasons stated above and will be yet another blow to Trump’s competency like not knowing where Kansas City actually is. More than anything I hate farces and if the U.S. is so tied to Israel why not just take it? If Israel really is the shining light on the hill in the Middle-East or at least the “beachhead” America needs in the region then just absorb it. Strategically this is really the best option for a pro-Israel America. If they really want to defend it then they should just extend the border around it, which would justify the U.S. to take any actions it deems necessary to secure the territory including ones that would be quite “rough” towards the Palestinians.

In summation…

  • For the Palestinians this deal is a form of capitulation, they must say “no”.
  • For the Israelis this is yet another step to ending the Palestinian problem, they must say “yes”, and blast the other side for rejecting the offer.
  • The United States has such heavy interesting in Israel that they may as well just absorb it, which would ultimately solve all problems for the Israeli Jews that the Beltway claims to want to protect/support.

US Middle East "Peace Deal" Designed to Perpetuate Conflict

February 19, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci – NEO) – A deal that is entirely unacceptable to one of its principal parties isn’t a deal at all. In the case of the US-proposed “Middle East peace plan” – unsurprisingly endorsed by the US and Israel and few others – everything about it is designed to sabotage peace and perpetuate conflict – perhaps even expand it.

The London Guardian in its article, “Palestinians cut ties with Israel and US after rejecting Trump peace plan,” would note what are obvious conditions Palestine could not and should not accept:

The blueprint, endorsed by the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, calls for the creation of a demilitarised Palestinian state that would exclude Jewish settlements built in occupied territory and remain under near-total Israeli security control.

Demilitarizing Palestine and subjecting it to occupation blatantly illegal under international law and what would undoubtedly be continued Israeli aggression, provocations, and encroachment is akin to unconditional surrender and subjugation – conditions no government could be expected to accept with Palestine being no exception.

An op-ed published by Al Jazeera titled, Trump’s Middle East plan may have a silver lining: Trump’s plan will not make the Palestinians’ lives better, but it could help dismantle the disastrous Oslo order,” would aptly describe the deal as:

Basically, Trump’s plan promises the Israelis an almost full realisation of the Zionist objectives to establish a Jewish state on all of historic Palestine, while offering the Palestinians “prosperous apartheid”, ie life under occupation with more money but no dignity and basic rights.

Of course, promises of money may or may not be fulfilled. A Palestine rendered defenseless and entirely dependent on ill-willed sponsors has no way to ensure such promises are fulfilled.

Thus the “peace plan” is yet another demonstration of Washington’s continued malign presence in the Middle East and its absolute disinterest in changing course. The Guardian would also note that several Arab allies of the US would side with Washington’s proposal, prioritizing joint belligerence toward Iran rather than solidarity with Palestine.

Helping ease Arab allies of Washington out of their pretend concern for Palestine will – Washington hopes – help them focus entirely on US plans to create a united front against Iran as US power and influence in the region slips. 

Politics and Power, Not Religion 

This disingenuous and counterproductive “peace plan” does however help illustrate that the current, ongoing conflict in the Middle East is not driven by religion, neither Zionist nor Islamic extremism, but rather by politics and in particular – designs to maintain Western hegemony in the region that has existed since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Religion and its perversion through extremism is simply used to augment and propel these designs.

Were the conflict purely a matter of religion – Sunni and Shia’a soldiers wouldn’t be fighting side-by-side in Syria against US-sponsored terrorists. Arab nations would not be abandoning Palestine in favor of joining the US and Israel in their collective belligerence against Iran. And no nation in the region – save for Israel – would accept the most recent “peace plan” proposed by the US.

Seeing through a “peace plan” intentionally designed to further inflame emotions and deepen divides and understanding the true interests driving regional conflict will help establish common ground rather than erode it. The actual people living in Israel have more in common with ordinary people living in Palestine than with the current circle of special interests dominating the Israeli government.

Ordinary people seek peace and stability – to live out their lives and provide for their families. Tensions and the conflicts they lead to only disrupt ordinary people from achieving this basic desire – whether they are Israelis or Palestinians.

The US proposal illustrates to people on either side of the divide that the US is not an honest broker and that the current process posing as pursuing peace should be dismantled.

Because of this, and just as the US has faded from other areas of the world and even from other areas within the Middle East – the US will fade from prominence regarding the Israeli-Palestinian question – hopefully opening the way for more honest brokers to move in and propose a genuine peace deal that will right injustices and provide for the best interests of ordinary people rather than merely pose as doing so while serving the interests of a malign few.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook”.

خفايا الموقف الفلسطيني من صفقة القرن

سعاده مصطفى أرشيّد

في حين أعلن بنيامين نتنياهو عن تراجعه عن وعده لجمهوره من غلاة أنصاره من مستوطنين ومتطرفين بضمّ مناطق المستوطنات الكبرى والأغوار وشمال البحر الميت المعروفة بـ»قاع العالم»، أو مصيدة الدبابات وفق العقيدة العسكرية (الإسرائيليّة)، فإنّ بعض الآراء ذهبت للقول إنّ ذلك لم يكن له أن يكون إلا نتيجة للموقف الصلب والعنيد والشجاع لقيادة السلطة الفلسطينية الرافض لصفقة ترامب ولموقف الشعب الفلسطيني الداعم لقيادته والملتفّ حولها. ويضيف بعض من أولئك إلى ما تقدّم الموقف العربي الذي عبّر عنه لقاء وزراء الخارجية العرب في القاهرة عقب إعلان الرئيس الأميركي عن صفقته. ولكن الحقيقة تقول أشياء أخرى مختلفة… فـ بنيامين نتنياهو لم يتراجع عن قراره وإنما أجّل الإعلان عنه وإشهاره، فقد قام بالفعل وعلى أرض الواقع بضمّ الأغوار وشمال البحر الميت، وذلك قبل قرابة الشهرين ومنذ الإعلان عن إنشاء مجموعة من المحميّات الطبيعيّة على أراضي الضفة الغربية ومعظمها في مناطق الأغوار، وقد تمّ إبلاغ السكان الفلسطينيين بقرار حظر دخولهم إلى مناطق جديدة، وتمّت معاقبة مَن خالف منهم وكذلك مصادرة جراراتهم الزراعية، ويُشاع أنه سيتمّ نقل سجلات الأراضي الخاصة بالمناطق المنوي ضمّها (والتي تمّ ضمّها فعلاً) من دوائر الإدارة المدنية إلى دائرة أراضي «إسرائيل». والحقيقة تقول إنّ تأجيل الإعلان عن عمليه الضمّ قد أتى بناء على نصائح وطلبات من أصدقاء «إسرائيل» في البيت الأبيض والإدارة الأميركية، وذلك لحين استكمال اللجان الإسرا– أميركية من عملية رسم الخرائط المتعلقة بالضمّ، وبالطبع لن يشارك في هذه اللجان أيّ فلسطيني. فالأميركي هو الطرف المقابل للطرف (الإسرائيلي) وهو من سيناقش حول تقديم هذا الخط هنا أو إرجاعه إلى هناك، يُضاف إلى ذلك أنّ الأميركان يرون أنّ تأجيل الإعلان مهمّ لحين بدء الانخراط العلني والصريح لبعض العرب في هذا المشروع الصفقة.

تقول الحقيقة أيضاً إنّ لقاء الرئيس الفلسطيني محمود عباس ونظيره المصري أثناء زيارة الأول للقاهرة للخطابة في وزراء الخارجية العرب اتسم بالصراحة من الرئيس المصري الذي أبلغ ضيفه بلسان عربي مبين أنّ الموقف المصري لا يستطيع معارضه المشروع (الصفقة) الأميركي، أما ما أوردته وكالة الأنباء الفلسطينية «وفا» عن اللقاء فكان نموذجاً للنسخ المكرّرة في مثل هذه الحالة من نوع أكد الرئيس الفلسطيني على رفضه صفقة ترامب، وأكد الرئيس المصري موقف بلاده الداعم لفلسطين وعلى حلّ الدولتين… واستكمالاً لصورة الموقف العربي فقد أتت لقاءات ولي العهد السعودي مع زعماء الجاليات اليهودية في الولايات المتحدة لتقطع قول كلّ خطيب، فحسب القناة العبرية العاشرة أنّ الأمير محمد بن سلمان أكد لضيوفه أنّ مسألة فلسطين لم تعد على جدول أعمال المملكة السعودية وأن ما يشغل المملكة الآن هو صراعها مع إيران ومع تمدّد إيران الإقليمي، وأنّ الوقت قد حان ليقبل الفلسطينيون العودة إلى مائدة التفاوض أو فليصمتوا، فهم مَن أضاع الفرصة تلو الفرصة من أربعة عقود، ولكن بلاده تفضل حصول شيء من التقدّم باتجاه اتفاق «إسرائيلي» – فلسطيني قبل الدفع العلني للعلاقات العربية مع دولة الاحتلال. هذه الأقوال التي نسبتها القناة العبرية العاشرة لولي العهد السعودي، والتي لم يتمّ نفيها، أسعدت ثم أدهشت الضيوف (حسب القناة العبريّة) لجرأتها وصراحتها سواء في حدّة انتقادها للفلسطيني أو في تأييدها لـ «إسرائيل».

كما تقول الحقيقة أيضاً إنّ الواقع الفلسطيني منهك ومربك وفي حالة انعدام وزن، ففي حين انصبّت انتقادات رجالات السلطة الفلسطينية على رأس رئيس المجلس الانتقالي السوداني عبدالفتاح البرهان بسبب لقائه مع بنيامين نتنياهو في العاصمة الأوغندية، فالسلطة الفلسطينية ترى في هذا الموقف خروجاً على الإجماع العربي وطعنة في الظهر الفلسطيني، ثم ترسل السلطة وفداً باسم «لجنة التواصل مع المجتمع الإسرائيلي» المنبثقة عن حزب السلطة الحاكم والتي يرأسها عضو في لجنة فتح المركزية يضمّ وزراء ونواباً سابقين وأعضاء مجلس ثوري للقاء شخصيات «إسرائيلية» من غير محبي السلام، ثم يقوم وفد «إسرائيلي» من النوع ذاته بزيارة رام الله ويحلّ ضيفاً على السلطة الفلسطينية ويجتمع مع مسؤولين فلسطينيين كبار وأحدهم هو قاضي قضاة فلسطين (أعلى سلطة قضائية شرعية) ولا ترى في هذا السلوك تناقضاً مع موقفها من البرهان السوداني أو طعنة في ظهر نفسها.

كما تضيف الحقيقة أنّ الأمور تسير قدماً باتجاه تنفيذ صفقة ترامب وأن لا شيء جدياً يتمّ فعله لعرقلتها لا فلسطينياً ولا عربياً، وما يُقال ويُعلن عن إسقاطها وإفشالها ليس أكثر من مزاعم فرزدقية.

إنّ هذا المشروع سواء نفّذ بحذافيره أم عرقل في بعض جوانبه لن يكون نهاية المطاف ولا يعني نهاية كلّ شيء. فلا يزال الصراع مفتوحاً وطويلاً، ولكن أشياء أخرى يجب أن تنتهي من قاموسنا السياسي وعلى رأسها أسلوب العمل الفلسطيني الذي تبنّى خياراً أوحد ألا وهو خيار التفاوض، وعند كلّ فشل لهذا الخيار يزداد عناد أصحابه ويذهبون لمزيد من التفاوض ثم التفاوض ثم التفاوض.

*سياسيّ فلسطينيّ مقيم في الضفة الغربيّة.

Palestinian Teen Killed during ‘Violent Clash’ with PA Security Forces

Salah Zakareneh, 17, was shot during a clash with Palestinian security forces. (Photo: via Twitter)


A Palestinian teenager died on Tuesday after being shot in Qabatiya, a village south of Jenin, in the occupied West Bank.

The boy, identified as 17-year-old Salah Zakareneh, was shot during a “violent clash” with Palestinian “security forces and armed men in the Qabatiya area,” according to a statement released by the Palestinian Ministry of Health.

Violence reportedly erupted during celebrations following the release of a prisoner from an Israeli jail.

Marian Houk@Marianhouk

@AFP report: “Salah Zakareneh, 17, was shot during a ‘violent clash’ between Palestinian ‘security forces + armed men in the Qabatiya area late Tuesday, the ministry said in a statement.” …i24NEWS English@i24NEWS_ENReport: A West Bank prisoner release celebration took a violent turn, with a teenager killed as #Palestinian security officers confronted gunmen and came under fire Twitter Ads info and privacySee Marian Houk’s other Tweets

Palestinian Authority (PA) Jenin Governor Akram Rajoub said, in a video published on Facebook, that PA security forces were deployed to Qabatiya after information was obtained that a “military-style demonstration” would take place there.

Rajoub said that on arrival in the village, gunmen opened fire and hurled rocks at PA security forces, which responded with tear gas, while some officers shot bullets into the air.

The Jenin governor did not explicitly address whether Zakareneh was shot by PA security forces or Palestinian gunmen, but blamed the latter for causing “the chaos”.

Despite several calls for answers, Rajoub refused to clarify exact events.Palestine Chronicle@PalestineChron

PA Official: Security Cooperation with #Israel is Continuous https#// via @PalestineChron

View image on Twitter

Twitter Ads info and privacySee Palestine Chronicle’s other Tweets

Hamas spokesperson Hazen Qassim has since accused Palestinian security forces of firing a bullet at Zakarneh, which, he said, proves “the logic of thuggery that the services employ against our people”.

Security coordination between Israel and Palestine security forces has been viewed as controversial and widely unpopular among the Palestinian public.

On February 1, Abbas claimed that the PA had cut all ties with the US and Israeli governments, including the so-called security coordination, following the announcement by Washington of its Middle East ‘peace plan’. Children of Peace@ChildrenofPeace

#PALESTINIAN RESEARCH Latest: 94% Palestinians reject “Deal of the Century;” large majorities call for withdrawal of PA recognition of Israel, ending security coordination with Israel. Support for the two-state
solution drops to its lowest level since Oslo 

View image on Twitter

Twitter Ads info and privacySee Children of Peace’s other Tweets

However, senior PA official Nabil Abu Rudeineh announced on February 17 that security cooperation with Israel was continuous, during a meeting with Israeli journalists in Ramallah.

“Abbas’s periodic threats to cease such coordination cannot be taken seriously,” wrote renowned journalist and writer Ramona Wadi in a recent article.

“As far as quashing Palestinian political dissent and resistance, the agreement with Israel is the best that the colonizer and collaborator can get. In terms of political engagement, security coordination provides the PA with the much-needed funds to sustain its existence,” Wadi added.

(Palestine Chronicle, MEMO, Social Media)

Israeli policy of assassinations cannot terrorize Palestinians to accept Trump’s deal: Nakhala

Wednesday, 19 February 2020 

Secretary-General of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad resistance movement Ziad al-Nakhala speaks during a televised speech broadcast live from Gaza City on February 19, 2020.

Secretary-General of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad resistance movement Ziad al-Nakhala speaks during a televised speech broadcast live from Gaza City on February 19, 2020.

The secretary-general of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad resistance movement says the Tel Aviv regime’s plan to return to “the policy of assassinations” against distinguished figures of Palestinian resistance groups in the Gaza Strip cannot terrorize Palestinians to acknowledge US President Donald Trump’s so-called deal of the century on the decades-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Israel to reinstitute ‘assassination policy’ against Palestinian groups in Gaza: KatzThe Israeli foreign minister says the Tel Aviv regime would reinstitute

He added, “The threats of enemy leaders will not intimidate us, nor will make us accept what they have crafted and called the deal of the century. They will not make us relinquish our historical rights in Palestinian lands and al-Quds (Jerusalem).”

‘Oslo Accords bore nothing for Palestinians other than humiliation’

Nakhala also censured the Oslo Accords signed between the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Israeli regime more than two decades ago, stating that the set of agreements brought nothing for Palestinians other than humiliation, shame and delusions.

“We presented our history as well as our children, and sacrificed them on the altar of delusion of peace. We reaped nothing other than despair that was represented by the deal of the century,” he pointed out.

The Oslo Accords — consisting of Oslo I and Oslo II accords — were signed by the late chairman of the PLO, Yasser Arafat, and former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, respectively in Washington DC, in 1993 and Egypt in 1995. The purported goal of the accords was to achieve peace based on the United Nations Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, and to realize the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination.

PressTV-Palestinians threaten to quit Oslo Accords over Trump dealThe Palestine Liberation Organization says it reserves the right “to withdraw from the interim agreement.”

The senior Palestinian official also lambasted some Arab and Muslim countries for supporting and acknowledging Trump’s proposal in the eye of the international community.

Nakhala then called upon all Palestinian resistance movements to join forces, and tirelessly protect Jerusalem al-Quds and the Palestinian cause from liquidation.

‘The US decision to declare al-Quds as the capital of Israel was not surprising, given that America is the sponsor of the Zionist project ever since its inception (back in 1948). It is a full partner to this project, and is in fact spearheading the Western project in our region,” he underscored.

Billboards in Tel Aviv incite reprisal against Palestinians over rejection of Trump dealBillboards appear on highways in Tel Aviv with hateful messages against Palestinians, in apparent reprisal for their refusal to accept US President Donald Trump’s plan for the Middle East.

On January 28, Trump unveiled his so-called deal of the century, negotiated with Israel but without the Palestinians.

Palestinian leaders, who severed all ties with Washington in late 2017 after Trump controversially recognized Jerusalem al-Quds as the capital of the Israeli regime, immediately rejected the plan, with President Mahmoud Abbas saying it “belongs to the dustbin of history.”

US deal violates UN resolutions, Palestinian sovereignty: AbbasPalestinian President Mahmoud Abbas says the plan proposed by the US for the Middle East is in breach of UN resolutions and Palestinian sovereignty.

Palestinian leaders say the deal is a colonial plan to unilaterally control historic Palestine in its entirety and remove Palestinians from their homeland, adding that it heavily favors Israel and would deny them a viable independent state.

%d bloggers like this: