The Palestinians and the “State” Delusion

By: Rashid Shahin

After over 20 years of the futile “negotiations” the whole world (including the Palestinians) agrees that it has been fruitless.  It was aimless negotiations but a waste of time during which the occupation state of Israel has succeeded to shuffle the occupied land upside down and create deep demographic changes through accelerating the settlement that has never been done before.

Despite all the facts on the ground, some still hope to believe in that mirage and works to revive life in the dead body of the Oslo Accord. Still, some Palestinians are looking for an exit of some sort that would save them some self respect, or what has remained from their self respect, to prove that they can get something from a process that has resulted in nothing but more land grab, building settlements for more settlers obsessed with Talmudic heresies.

When talking of negotiations between enemies, it should be agreed upon from the beginning that there is a possibility for each party to recognize the other which  doesn’t exist in the Palestinian-zionist case. The Zionist party and since the very beginning of the struggle doesn’t recognize the existence of the Palestinian people, in the first place which was very clear from their deceptive slogan that was created in the early twentieth century of “a land without people to a people without land”.

bloody

Accordingly, the Palestinian leadership should take this in consideration and understand the fact that the Oslo process will never lead to a durable or comprehensive peace with the Zionists, with a state that was created initially by terrorist groups who committed heinous crimes in documented massacres against the Palestinian people to establish their atrocious states built on Talmudic heresies, on the rubble of the Palestinian people.

Gambling to reach to any peaceful agreement, even at the minimum level, with the Zionist state of gangsters (especially at the deteriorating Arab situation) is more futile than it was at the beginning of the Oslo process in Madrid Peace Conferencesupported by the first Intifada which was continued secretly later on in the suspicious Oslo Agreement.

Trying to copy the Iranian style (of negotiating) and identifying with it can’t work in the Palestinian case and dragging the situation into the Syrian case is a leap into the unknown.

Working at going back to the same futile negotiations again is nothing but a fruitless game that should be stopped especially after the facts on the ground imposed by the Zionist occupation, which is very clear not only to the Palestinian people in the street but also to all the world leaders.

Finally, we think that the status cue is a thousand times better than pursuing the mirage of the endless negotiations, especially it is clearer now (which is a fact that we should admit) that the Zionist occupation state is not intending to reach to a peaceful settlement for the struggle, and it is not ready ( as it has never been  before) to agree that the Palestinians get an independent state with Jerusalem its capital, and needless to mention the Palestinian refugees and the Right of Return.

The utmost reconciliation that the Zionist state might be willing to is to give the Palestinians an “expanded” autonomy, or a state with two different statuses, one to include the West Bank with annexing some of the bordering Palestinian towns that the Zionists want to get rid of, which is a typical racist style. OR, full occupation and annexing the West Bank. Accordingly we call to stop those futile negotiations with the Zionists that will end into nothing for the Palestinians.

 

خطة مايكل فلين من مواقف ترامب

ناصر قنديل

– لا يمكن إدراج مواقف الرئيس الأميركي الجديد دونالد ترامب تحت باب شخصيته المضطربة وانطلاقه من ازدواجية تخفيف أعباء التدخلات وأكلافها وتوتراتها تحت عنوان «أميركا أولاً» من جهة، والخطاب المتغطرس لتظهير أميركا القوية من جهة مقابلة، فقد بدا ترامب «يلعب سياسة» في جملة مواقفه، رغم ظاهر المواقف بالمتسم بالفظاظة والتحدي. فقد بدأ بالحديث عن إسقاط التفاهم على الملف النووي الإيراني ثم تعديله ليختتم في ملخص ما نشره البيت الأبيض عن محادثته الهاتفية مع الملك السعودي، أن الاتفاق كان على التطبيق الصارم للاتفاق النووي مع إيران بدلاً من تعديله وإلغائه، وكذلك في ملف نقل السفارة الأميركية لدى كيان الاحتلال، بدأ بقرار نقل ثم دراسة ثم لا نزال بعيدين عن توقيت البحث بالأمر، وفي ملف الاستيطان «الإسرائيلي» الذي كان عنوان إشعاله حملة ضد إدارة الرئيس أوباما بسبب عدم استخدام الفيتو في مجلس الأمن ضد الإدانة وتبشير «الإسرائيليين» بأن كل شيء سيتغير مع تسلمه السلطة، ثم تمسكه بالدفاع عن الاستيطان وصولاً لاعتباره غير مفيد، وكذلك في ما يخصّ المنطقة الآمنة في سورية التي بدأت قراراً رئاسياً وصارت دراسة وانتهت بانتظار التوقيت المناسب لدراستها، وكلّها دلائل على أن السياسة تحكُّم وليس العناد ولا العنتريات ولا الغطرسة ولا المبادئ بالتأكيد.

– من خلال تتبّع العناصر التي بادر ترامب لوضعها في التداول على الطاولة تلتقي مع قضية منع السفر إلى أميركا، قضايا المنطقة الآمنة في سورية وقضية السفارة الأميركية لدى كيان الاحتلال ودعم الاستيطان، مع قضية التفاهم على الملف النووي الإيراني والتجارب الصاروخية الإيرانية، ونفوذ إيران في باب المندب كعنوان استعمله ترامب في الحديث عن تدمير البارجة السعودية بصاروخ يمني، مع قضيتين رئيسيتين تحضران في السياسة الخارجية الأميركية المقبلة ومنطلقاتها في حسابات الأمن القومي الأميركي، كما يهندسها الجنرال مايكل فلين مستشار الأمن القومي لترامب الآتي من رئاسة المخابرات العسكرية والواقف في الظل وراء خطاب ترامب المرشح قبل ترامب الرئيس.

– منهج فلين في رسم الاستراتيجيات الجديدة يقوم على محاولة بناء معادلة قوامها أولوية الحرب على الإرهاب والحاجة الماسّة للتعاون مع روسيا. وهما القضيتان اللتان تلتقيان بالقضايا التي أثارها ترامب ورماها في التداول، ومنهج فلين يستند إلى السعي لرسم التعاون مع روسيا في إطار الحرب على الإرهاب على قاعدة تحقيق مكاسب ومصادر قوة لـ«إسرائيل» وإضعاف مصادر القوة التي تمتلكها إيران، والصيغة التفاوضية هي تقديم عرض لروسيا قوامه مقايضة الدور الإيراني بالدور الأميركي في الخطة الروسية في الشرق الأوسط، ودعوة موسكو للتخلّي عن طهران مقابل الحصول على التعاون مع واشنطن، والتخلي هنا ليس إعلان حرب، بل تهميش الدور، ومضمون التخلّي هو التعاون في مقاتلة النصرة وداعش في سورية وإزالة التحفظات على التعاون مع الدولة السورية مقابل خروج إيران وحلفائها وفي مقدمتهم حزب الله من سورية.

– المنهج الروسي لا يضع إيران مقابل أميركا، ولو فعل لاختار أميركا حكماً، بل ينطلق منهج موسكو من أن التعاون الأميركي الروسي ضرورة وحاجة، وفي الحرب على الإرهاب خصوصاً، لكن روسيا وأميركا قوتان خارجيتان في الشرق الأوسط، وعليهما ترجمة تعاونهما عبر بناء مرتكزات نظام إقليمي قوي قادر على هزيمة الإرهاب وتحقيق الاستقرار وحمايته، وترى موسكو بعيداً عن العواطف والرغبات أن هذا النظام الإقليمي تفرضه الأحجام والجغرافيا السياسية، وهي تتطلع لثلاثي تركي إيراني مصري، ولا مانع من أن يصير رباعياً مع السعودية، ترعاه ثنائية أميركية روسية وتدعمه حيث يجب، وترى أن أمن «إسرائيل» وحلّ القضية الفلسطينية متلازان فلا قدرة لأحد على حماية أمن «إسرائيل» خارج حل وفق القرارات الدولية الخاصة بالقضية الفلسطينية، وهذا اللازم تعتبره موسكو من ثمار تعاون روسي أميركي بالتنسيق مع قوى النظام الإقليمي الجديد.

– حتى موعد لقاء الرئيسين الروسي والأميركي تستمرّ منهجية فلين بلسان ترامب، خصوصاً في اللقاء بين ترامب وبينامين نتنياهو قريباً، بدعوة «إسرائيل» للاختيار بين تلبيتها بمكاسب إعلامية وسياسية في ملفات السفارة والاستيطان مقابل إغفال التصعيد مع إيران، أو العكس، لأن قراراً مثل نقل السفارة وحدَه سيتكفّل بإشعال الشارع العربي والإسلامي وسيتحوّل حكماً، كسباً كبيراً لإيران إذا تزامن مع حملة التصعيد بوجهها، بينما ربط التصعيد بتبريد الملفات التي تستفز الشارع العربي والإسلامي يمكن أن يستقطب خصوم إيران في المنطقة سواء على أساس سياسي أو تحت عنوان مذهبي، وهو استقطاب يصير مستحيلاً إذا تزامن التصعيد بوجه إيران وتسخين ملفات الاستفزاز للشارع الداعمة لـ«إسرائيل».

Related Videos

Related Articles

Do You Hear What I Hear?

It’s a song breaking through this fight…

UN Security Council Resolution 2334–“Condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967…”

…adopted on December 23, 2016 by a vote of  14-0 with 1 abstention.

Israeli settlements are illegal

Voting in Favor: Russia, China, Malaysia, Venezuela, New Zealand, Senegal, Spain, Uruguay, France, Angola, Egypt, Japan, UK, Ukraine

Abstaining: US

Text of the Resolution:

The Security Council,

Reaffirming its relevant resolutions, including resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 446 (1979), 452 (1979), 465 (1980), 476 (1980), 478 (1980), 1397 (2002), 1515 (2003), and 1850 (2008),

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and reaffirming, inter alia, the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force,

Reaffirming the obligation of Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and recalling the advisory opinion rendered on 9 July 2004 by the International Court of Justice,

Condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, including, inter alia, the construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and displacement of Palestinian civilians, in violation of international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions,

Expressing grave concern that continuing Israeli settlement activities are dangerously imperilling the viability of the two-State solution based on the 1967 lines,

Recalling the obligation under the Quartet Roadmap, endorsed by its resolution 1515 (2003), for a freeze by Israel of all settlement activity, including “natural growth”, and the dismantlement of all settlement outposts erected since March 2001,

Recalling also the obligation under the Quartet roadmap for the Palestinian Authority Security Forces to maintain effective operations aimed at confronting all those engaged in terror and dismantling terrorist capabilities, including the confiscation of illegal weapons,

Condemning all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation, incitement and destruction,

Reiterating its vision of a region where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders,

Stressing that the status quo is not sustainable and that significant steps, consistent with the transition contemplated by prior agreements, are urgently needed in order to (i) stabilize the situation and to reverse negative trends on the ground, which are steadily eroding the two-State solution and entrenching a one-State reality, and (ii) to create the conditions for successful final status negotiations and for advancing the two-State solution through those negotiations and on the ground,

1. Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;

2. Reiterates its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all of its legal obligations in this regard;

3. Underlines that it will not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations;

4. Stresses that the cessation of all Israeli settlement activities is essential for salvaging the two-State solution, and calls for affirmative steps to be taken immediately to reverse the negative trends on the ground that are imperilling the two-State solution;

5. Calls upon all States, bearing in mind paragraph 1 of this resolution, to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967;

6. Calls for immediate steps to prevent all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation and destruction, calls for accountability in this regard, and calls for compliance with obligations under international law for the strengthening of ongoing efforts to combat terrorism, including through existing security coordination, and to clearly condemn all acts of terrorism;

7. Calls upon both parties to act on the basis of international law, including international humanitarian law, and their previous agreements and obligations, to observe calm and restraint, and to refrain from provocative actions, incitement and inflammatory rhetoric, with the aim, inter alia, of de-escalating the situation on the ground, rebuilding trust and confidence, demonstrating through policies and actions a genuine commitment to the two-State solution, and creating the conditions necessary for promoting peace;

8. Calls upon all parties to continue, in the interest of the promotion of peace and security, to exert collective efforts to launch credible negotiations on all final status issues in the Middle East peace process and within the time frame specified by the Quartet in its statement of 21 September 2010;

9. Urges in this regard the intensification and acceleration of international and regional diplomatic efforts and support aimed at achieving, without delay a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East on the basis of the relevant United Nations resolutions, the Madrid terms of reference, including the principle of land for peace, the Arab Peace Initiative and the Quartet Roadmap and an end to the Israeli occupation that began in 1967; and underscores in this regard the importance of the ongoing efforts to advance the Arab Peace Initiative, the initiative of France for the convening of an international peace conference, the recent efforts of the Quartet, as well as the efforts of Egypt and the Russian Federation;

10. Confirms its determination to support the parties throughout the negotiations and in the implementation of an agreement;

11. Reaffirms its determination to examine practical ways and means to secure the full implementation of its relevant resolutions;

12. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Council every three months on the implementation of the provisions of the present resolution;

13. Decides to remain seized of the matter.

From Ma’an News:

Palestine Victorious Over UNSC Resolution, Israel Left ‘Abandoned’ by US

BETHLEHEM (Ma’an) — Palestinian leadership and members of the international community were victorious after the United Nations Security Council adopted a resolution calling for an end to illegal settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory and reiterated that their existence is illegal under international law.

After days of diplomatic turmoil, the US shocked and outraged Israel by refusing to veto the resolution — by abstaining from the vote, US President Barack Obama allowed resolution 2334 to pass Friday night at the UNSC.

Palestine’s envoy to the United Nations Riyad Mansour noted that the resolution came after years of allowing Israel to “entrench its occupation and a one-state reality with absolute impunity, at times even being rewarded for its violations and intransigence”

“Against this backdrop,” Mansour said, “one Council resolution in nearly eight years is not disproportionate; it is shameful. But today’s vote rectifies this record and sets us on a new course.”

Meanwhile, Secretary General of the PLO Saeb Erekat described the event to Reuters news agency as “a day of victory for international law, a victory for civilized language and negotiation and a total rejection of extremist forces in Israel.”

“The international community has told the people of Israel that the way to security and peace is not going to be done through occupation … but rather through peace, ending the occupation and establishing a Palestinian state to live side by side with the state of Israel on the 1967 line,” Erekat said.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas reportedly called the resolution “a slap in the face to Israeli policy” and an “absolute international condemnation to settlements and unanimous support for a two-state solution.”

He said in a statement earlier marking the occasion of Christmas that “Despite the Israeli occupation, our presence in our homeland and the preservation of our cultural and national heritage are the most important form of resistance in the face of the darkness of a foreign colonialist occupying power.”

Spokesperson for the Hamas movement Fawzi Narhoum said that Hamas applauded the countries who “rejected the Israeli occupation’s aggressive settlement policies against the Palestinian people.”

“We ask for more such supportive positions seeking to bring justice to the Palestinian cause and end occupation.”

Leftist Palestinian faction the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) also released a statement Friday welcoming the Security Council resolution, but warned that Israel and its allies would likely try to make the resolution null and void.

“Israel and its allies,” the statement said, “will try to impede implementation of the resolution or call attention to parts of the resolution’s content related to terrorism, violence, and incitement, which can be harmful to the Palestinians.”

Human rights organization Amnesty International called the decision to “finally” pass such a resolution a “welcome step.”

“This is the first time in almost four decades that such a resolution has been passed. During this time, settlements not only continued to be built, but at an accelerated pace,” Sherine Tadros, Head of Amnesty International’s UN Office in New York wrote in a statment, noting that resolution not only demands a halt to settlement building but also recognizes their illegality.

“Amnesty International has campaigned for many years on this issue. Israel’s settlement policy is inherently discriminatory and has resulted in grave human rights violations including destruction of homes, forced evictions, unlawful killings, arbitrary detentions, and collective punishment.”

Israel reacts

Meanwhile, Israeli officials and their allies expressed shock and outrage over the resolution, accusing the Obama administration of colluding with Palestine while betraying a decades-long relationship of supporting Israeli policies.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel “would not abide by the terms” of the “shameful anti-Israel resolution.”

Netanyahu also reportedly instructed Israel’s ambassadors in New Zealand and Senegal — two states that supported the resolution — to return to Israel for consultations. He also ordered the cancellation of a planned visit to Israel by Senegal’s foreign minister and the cancellation of all aid programs to Senegal, according to Israeli news site Ynet.

Israeli Minister Yuval Steinitz said that the United States had “abandoned” Israel by abstaining from the vote, adding that “the heart aches that after eight years of friendship… and cooperation with Obama, this is his final chord” in the departing Obama administration.

Ynet quoted an anonymous Israeli official as saying that Obama and US Secretary of State John Kerry “secretly cooked up” the “extreme anti-Israeli resolution behind Israel’s back.”

He said the resolution would be a “tailwind for terror and boycotts,” calling the move “shameful” and “an abandonment of Israel which breaks decades of US policy of protecting Israel at the UN.”

Israel’s ambassador to the UN Danny Danon for his part insisted that “Neither the Security Council nor UNESCO will rewrite history and to sever the link between the people of Israel and the land of Israel,” warning that “Efforts to attack Israel” would not help the peace process.

A number of US officials also reacted with dismay to the decision, with President-elect Donald Trump saying ominously in a Tweet, “Things will be different after Jan. 20th.”

Netanyahu had said after the resolution’s passage that he looked forward to working with Trump and the pro-Israeli members of the US Congress to reverse the damages of the “absurd” decision.

US Speaker of the House Paul Ryan calling the abstention vote by the US “absolutely shameful,” while Republican Senator John McCain said the move made the US “complicit in this outrageous attack” against Israel.

Leading up to the vote, US Republican Senator Lindsey Graham who oversees the Senate subcommittee that controls United States’ UN funding, had threatened to cut funding for the UN and any nation that backed the measure.

However, critics have pointed out that dozens of past UN resolutions condemning Israeli policies in the occupied territory have not been supported by the political will necessary to enforce such measures.

Many expressed worry that the Friday’s resolution would also be merely symbolic — noting in particular the resolution did not authorize any form of sanctions to compel Israel to respect international law.

Despite the US government, particularly under Barack Obama, having routinely condemned Israel’s settlement expansions, US officials have yet to take any concrete actions to end settlement building and instead inadvertently encouraged the enterprise through consistent inaction over Israel’s violation of international law and continued support of the Israeli government through inflated military aid packages.

Amnesty International continued in their statement, saying that going forward, the UNSC “must now ensure this resolution is respected. Indeed, it should go further and demand that the state of Israel not only fulfil its legal obligation to halt settlement-building, but also dismantle its settlements and relocate its settlers outside Occupied Palestinian Territories. This is the only way to a just and durable peace.”

‘The Israeli Lobby dominates American, British and French foreign affairs’

December 04, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

Gilad Atzmon on muslimpress.com

http://www.muslimpress.com/Section-opinion-72/106637-the-israeli-lobby-dominates-american-british-and-french-foreign-affairs

Muslim Press: Israeli Education Minister Naftali Bennett has said that “the era of the Palestinian state is over.” What’s your take on this?

Gilad Atzmon: This idea is more than welcome. What we need is one state from the river to the sea and this state will be Palestine. I do not think that we are talking about a political shift but simply facts on the ground.

MP: How do you predict the fate of the two-state solution? How could Trump presidency affect the solution?

Gilad Atzmon: I do not engage in prophecy. The two-state solution is dead and if I am reading the map correctly, the US is not a key player in the Middle East anymore. Putin took their place and this fact may have a significant positive impact on the future of the conflict.

MP: How do you evaluate Donald Trump’s policies towards Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

Gilad Atzmon: We are clueless in regard to Trump’s policies. In fact I do not even believe Trump has a Middle East policy. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. But as I mentioned above, the US is not a key player in the Middle East. Accordingly, America’s position is hardly relevant. This may change.

MP: Do you think the international community has failed to defend Palestinians rights against Israeli crimes?

Gilad Atzmon: Of course! The question is why. The answer has something to do with the total hegemony of the Jewish Lobby in the West. The Israeli Lobby dominates American, British and French foreign affairs. Even the Palestinian solidarity movement is shy of the topic. Why? Because the Palestinian solidarity movement is also dominated by similar Jewish institutions such as JVP, JFJFP etc. In other words, the voice of the oppressed is shaped by the oppressor and oppressor’s sensitivities.

MP: What role does the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Mahmoud Abbas play in the conflict? Do you see their role as positive?

Gilad Atzmon: I never take sides on Palestinians or Arab political matters. As far as I understand, Abbas believes that Palestine’s ultimate bomb is the demographic bomb. In other words, for the Palestinians to win, all they have to do is to survive. I guess that this explains a lot.

COLD WAR IS OVER; TRUMP VICTORIOUS; EXPECT OVERTURES TO DR. ASSAD AS HOPES FOR RENEWED DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS GROW; HILLARY CLINTON IN THE ABANDONED SEWER OF HISTORY

Ziad Fadel

Image result for donald trump

(Image courtesy of “Slate”)

I will not deny it.  I campaigned and voted for Donald Trump.  My hope was always that he would defeat the war-mongering termagant, Hillary Clinton.  While I shared many people’s view that the candidates were not, necessarily, the very best, I harbored deep inside me a sense of confidence that Donald Trump would shock the world with a new approach to everything, including foreign policy.  His words about President Putin encouraged me in the belief that he was a businessman with no axes to grind; that he would engage Russia and disavow the bankrupt policies of the present imbecile in the White House.  I believe, strongly, that President Trump will restore good relations with Syria and give the Saudis their much-deserved kick in the groin.  It was time for a president like Donald Trump to finally take charge of this country and make it great, once again.  The American people, especially the whites, finally reignited a passion for achievement to regain their own sense of worth in a nation obsessed with political correctness and minority sensibilities.

Hillary Clinton, one America’s worst Secretaries of State, constantly berated President Assad, calling for his ouster; taking sides with the terrorists against the Syrian people.  She pretended to support Palestinian rights, but, did absolutely nothing for them while inciting the Zionists to build more settlements, thus, relegating Palestinian aspirations for statehood to the deep recesses of metaphysics.  She will not be missed, especially by the people of Libya to whom she served up anarchy and annihilation.  An odious, pretentious, mephitic wretch, she was so addicted to power you could see her toxic sputum ooze out of the sides of her mouth.  No one ever deserved her own oblivion more than Madame Clinton.  She touted women’s rights whilst she danced the Chattanooga Choo-Choo with the male cockroaches of Saudi Arabia.  She was the eidos of hypocrisy.  She will be remembered like a discarded Tampax, floating down a pipe to the main sewer drain of some town in the Western Sahara.  She was….. and is…… nobody.     Ziad

____________________________________________

AL-HASAKA:  216 former rodents accept amnesty in exchange for their signed covenants not to take up arms against the state again.  On Monday, 140 former terrorists did the same in Qaamishli. 

__________________________________________

NEWS AND COMMENT:

A must-read article sent by John Esq.  Read it all the way down.  It’s excellent:

https://consortiumnews.com/2016/11/08/us-hawks-gamble-on-turkeys-invasions/
Read more 

Related Articles

What will President Trump mean for Palestine?

Source

President-elect Donald Trump shakes hands with Vice President-elect Mike Pence as he gives his acceptance speech during his election night rally, in New York on 9 November. John Locher AP Photo

On a day that most people expected not to see, we can say few things with certainty.

One of them is that Hillary Clinton would have been a disastrous president for those supporting the Palestinian struggle for their rights.

Her failed campaign pitched her as the natural successor to President Barack Obama, the Democrat who just unconditionally handed Israel the biggest military aid package in history.

During the Democratic primary campaign, Clinton marketed herself as a belligerent and violently hawkish ally of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu against the Palestinian people.

She vowed to make blocking the nonviolent Palestinian-led boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement a priority of her would-be administration.

She went out of her way to campaign against the mildest efforts to hold Israel accountable, including appealing directly to members of her United Methodist Church last spring to vote against divestment from companies that assist and profit from Israel’s occupation.

Clinton positioned herself as an anti-Palestinian extremist at a time when the Democratic Party base showed itself more open than ever to embracing Palestinian rights.

Her extreme support for Israel is just one of the many ways she and her party operatives pandered to donors and revealed themselves to be out of touch with large segments of the country they had taken for granted.

But Hillary Clinton will not be president.

President Trump

The only thing that can be said about President-elect Donald Trump with any confidence is that no one knows exactly what he will do.

Earlier in the campaign he insisted that he would be even-handed in dealings with Israelis and Palestinians, driving many of Israel’s most fanatical and neoconservative supporters into Clinton’s arms.

But facing a backlash, he quickly pivoted, promising Netanyahu he would recognize Jerusalem as the “undivided capital of the State of Israel,” and actively encouraging Israel to continue building colonial settlements in the occupied West Bank.

Trump still showed flashes of unwillingness to appease. After winning his party’s nomination in July, he brushed off a reporter’s question about whether he would follow the “tradition” of other Republican candidates and visit Israel.

“It’s a tradition, but I’m not traditional,” Trump shot back.

Even if these changes reveal an erratic man with no fixed views, Trump’s most pro-Israel positions don’t differ much in substance from the policies of Obama, on whose watch settlement construction more than matched the pace during the term of President George W. Bush.

Visceral fears

In his victory speech last night, Trump returned to a regular theme: “We will get along with all other nations willing to get along with us … We’ll have great relationships. We expect to have great, great relationships.”

That will be little comfort to people in the US and around the world whose visceral fears are stoked by the forces that helped propel Trump’s rise: his racist baiting and incitement against Muslims and Mexicans, his boasts about sexually assaulting women, his denial of global warming and his indulgence of anti-Semitic white supremacists, including the Ku Klux Klan, which gave him its endorsement.

The Israeli counterparts of these vile American racists are celebrating Trump’s victory today.

Netanyahu congratulated Trump, calling him a “true friend of Israel.”

“I am confident President-elect Trump and I will continue to strengthen the alliance between our two countries and bring it to greater heights,” the Israeli prime minister added.

Naftali Bennett, the Israeli education minister who has boasted about his killings of Arabs, hailed the coming Trump era.

“Trump’s victory is an opportunity for Israel to immediately retract the notion of a Palestinian state in the center of the country, which would hurt our security and just cause,” Bennett said.

But the so-called two-state solution was already dead and Clinton would not have changed that.

Fighting back

The Palestinian cause has already shifted to a struggle for equality against an entrenched system of Israeli occupation, settler-colonialism and apartheid anchored and rooted in support from the US bipartisan establishment.

Palestinians were not waiting for the result of the US election to decide which way their struggle would go.

Trump has won, but some things have not changed. Over the last decade, support for Palestinian rights has been rising in the United States, particularly among the young – and in the increasingly diverse Democratic Party base that has been utterly failed by its establishment leadership.

More than ever, people understand that US support for Israel comes not only from the same places where support for white supremacy, mass incarceration, unchecked police violence and US militarism and imperialism are strongest.

It also stems from the liberal, pro-human rights circles that championed Clinton, who more often than not equate colonizer and colonized, oppressor and oppressed, occupation and resistance.

This base has no choice now but to rally from its despair, which at any rate the election of either candidate would have precipitated, to keep organizing and fighting for its rights and the rights of people around the world.

The truth is, we had no choice but to wage that fight anyway.

Netanyahu Uncensored

Posted on September 24, 2016

Netanyahu: I hope Obama won’t seek to establish a Palestinian state

Ma’an News

 

BETHLEHEM (Ma’an) — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that he “hoped” US President Barack Obama would not seek to establish a Palestinian state at the United Nations on Saturday.

In an interview aired on Israel’s Channel 2 on Saturday, Netanyahu was asked if Obama had promised him that he would not seek to establish a state of Palestine without Israel’s cooperation before the end of his term in January.

“If you’re asking if he spoke to me about this, the answer is no,” The Jerusalem Post quoted Netanyahu as saying. “If you’re asking me if I am hoping that he won’t do this, the answer is yes.”

The interview came two days after Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas made speeches at the 71st session of the United Nations General Assembly, during which they exchanged heated accusations regarding Israeli settlement building, the Balfour Declaration, and each other’s commitment to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Over the past several months, France has been leading renewed peace efforts between Palestine and Israel with the aim of solving the decades-long conflict between the countries.

However, Netanyahu staunchly rejected the multilateral French initiative in April, saying the “best way to resolve the conflict between Israel and Palestinians is through direct, bilateral negotiations” without Palestinian preconditions.

While Russia reportedly expressed interest in conducting bilateral negotiations earlier this month, Netanyahu had welcomed Egypt’s bilateral efforts through restarting the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative.

The Palestinian Authority has repeatedly expressed support for the French initiative, and in April shelved the submission of a new anti-settlement resolution to the UN out of fear that doing so could thwart progress of new French proposals, causing outrage among various Palestinian political factions.

Israeli Minister of Defense Avigdor Lieberman and Netanyahu issued a joint statement in May expressing their support of reviving the Arab Peace Initiative for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, which called for an Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Palestinian territory in exchange for full normalization of ties with Arab states.

Permanent Observer for the State of Palestine at the United Nations Riyad Mansour slammed the announcement by Netanyahu and Lieberman this month at a UN Security Council meeting in New York, saying that Israeli leaders were “belittling” the initiative and “failing to reciprocate time and time again and obstructing the revival of a political horizon.”

All past efforts towards peace negotiations have failed to end the decades-long Israeli military occupation or bring Palestinians closer to an independent contiguous state.

The most recent spate of negotiations led by the US collapsed in April 2014.

Israel claimed the process failed because the Palestinians refused to accept a US framework document outlining the way forward, while Palestinians pointed to Israel’s ongoing settlement building and the government’s refusal to release veteran prisoners.

While members of the international community have rested the solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on the discontinuation of illegal Israeli settlements and the establishment of a two-state solution, a number of Palestinian activists have criticized the two-state solution as improbable, unsustainable and unlikely to bring durable peace, proposing instead a binational state with equal rights for Israelis and Palestinians.

%d bloggers like this: