Domisticated Palestinians and Collaspsed arabs المتأنسنون الفلسطينيون… والمنهارون العرب

From the Balfour to the Abbas Declaration

المتأنسنون الفلسطينيون… والمنهارون العرب

راسم عبيدات ـ القدس المحتلة

لا غرابة ولا عجب في ظلّ استدخال ثقافة الهزيمة و«الاستنعاج» واستدامة عقدة «الارتعاش» السياسي عند العرب والفلسطينيين، أن تصل الأمور إلى حدّ إدانة عملية تل أبيب وتحميل الضحية الطرف الفلسطيني مسؤوليتها واعتبارها مضرّة بالمصالح العليا للشعب الفلسطيني، في الوقت الذي حمل فيه كتّاب وصحافيون وحتى أحزاب إسرائيلية، مسؤولية ما حدث إلى نتنياهو وحكومته التي أغلقت كلّ نوافذ الحلّ السياسي.

قلتُ لا غرابة في إدانة عملية تل ابيب عندما تصل حالة الانهيار والتخاذل والتواطؤ العربي حدّ أن تصوّت دول عربية لصالح تولي المتطرف الإسرائيلي داني دنون سفير «إسرائيل» في الأمم المتحدة للجنة القانونية في الأمم المتحدة، تلك اللجنة المناط بها محاربة ومكافحة الإرهاب، دولة تمارس كلّ أشكال الإرهاب بحق الشعب الفلسطيني وتخالف ولا تلتزم بأيّ إتفاقية دولية ولا تطبق أيّ من قرارات الشرعية، ستكون مسؤولة عن سنّ القوانين والتشريعات المتعلقة بممارسة الإرهاب وسبل مواجهته ومكافحته…؟ هذا هو «العهر» والنفاق الدولي في أوضح تجلياته وصوره.

في زمن «التعهير» والنفاق الدولي، يصبح كلّ شيء مشروعاً، ويصبح الجلاد ضحية والضحية جلاداً، ولكن الأشدّ إيلاما الطعنات الغادرة من أبناء جلدتنا فلسطينيين وعرب.

نحن تربينا وتعلّمنا بأنّ السياسة جبراً لا حساباً، وهي حصيلة موازين قوى وعلاقات وعوامل قوة، تأخذ الطابعين الشمولي والتراكمي، ولا تقوم على المشاعر والعواطف و«الفهلوة» وقوة الإنشاء والمنطق و«فذلكات» التفاوض وغيرها. وعند قراءتي لردود الفعل عند العديد من الكتاب والصحافيين والمثقفين الفلسطينيين والعرب، والتي حاول فيها البعض أن يكون ملكياً أكثر من الملك نفسه، أو أكثر أخلاقاً من المسيح ومواعظه «إن ضربك أحدهم على خدك الأيمن فأدر له خدك الأيسر»، وليس هذا وحسب، بل ذهب البعض إلى ما هو أبعد من ذلك بكثير، حتى يبدو عقلانياً وواقعياً وأخلاقياً، تلك الأسطوانة المشروخة التي أدخلها الغرب الاستعماري إلى قواميسنا ومصطلحاتنا، في ذروة هجوم «إسرائيل» علينا، ورفضها الاستجابة لأيّ من مقرّرات الشرعية الدولية أو المبادرات السياسية لحلّ أو تجميد الصراع، نطالب نحن بأن نقدّم التنازلات ونكون عقلانيين وواقعيين حتى تقبل أو توافق «إسرائيل» على الجلوس معنا ومفاوضتنا، حتى أصبحت عقلانيتنا وواقعيتنا، رديفاً للهزيمة والإستسلام، بحيث نقف عراة حتى من ورقة التوت.

وفي هذا السياق وجدنا البعض يقول بأنّ عملية «تل أبيب» هي عمل «لا أخلاقي… ووحشي» والذرائع والتبريرات هي الحفاظ على «طهارة وأخلاقية» المقاومة الفلسطينية، والبعض الآخر برّر منطقه بالخوف من ردّ الفعل الإسرائيلية وبطشها بالشعب الفلسطيني.

في حين وجدنا بعض من يمتهنون الكتابة من العربان، قد ذهبوا إلى وصف العملية بالإرهابية وتعزية «اسرائيل» بـ«شهدائها»! فقد هاجم الإعلامي والكاتب السعودي دحام بن طريف العنزي، عضو هيئة الصحافيين السعوديين والحوار الوطني، الفلسطينيين معتبراً عملية «تل أبيب» التي أدّت إلى مقتل 4 إسرائيليين وإصابة عدد أخر بـ«الإرهابية والهمجية».

وقدّم الاعلامي السعودي تعازيه لمن سمّاه «الشعب الإسرائيلي» عبر حسابه على «تويتر». وكذلك فعل حمد المزروعي الكاتب الإماراتي المقرّب من ولي عهد أبو ظبي محمّد بن زايد، حيث وصف الفلسطينيين منفّذي عمليّة قتل وجرح «إسرائيليين» في «تل أبيب» بأنهما فاقدا الرجولة.

وبدأ المزروعي تدويناته بالقول «هجوم إرهابي في تل أبيب واعتقال منفذ الهجوم بعد إصابته فعلاً تبرير الإرهاب إرهاب».

منذ ثمانية وستين عاماً أو أكثر، بل مع بداية الغزوة الصهيونية الأولى لفلسطين، وشعبنا الفلسطيني يخوض صراعاً طاحناً مع الإحتلال الصهيوني، صراع عنوانه السيطرة على الأرض الفلسطينية وطرد شعبنا منها وإحلال المستوطنين محلهم، استخدم فيه الإحتلال كل آلات بطشه وقمعه بحق شعبنا الفلسطيني، قتل وجرح واعتقل ودمّر وأحرق ونسف وحاصر وطرد وأبعد، وبنى استراتيجيته على أساس ذلك، ولم تكن في يوم من الأيام ردود فعله قائمة على ردّ فعل لحظي، ونذكر هنا بأنّ المحتل طارد الكثير من قادة الشعب الفلسطيني ومناضليه ليغتالهم بعد عشرات سنين، وديع حداد، أبا حسن سلامه، أبا جهاد، أبا علي مصطفى، سمير القنطار وعشرات القادة الميدانيين من مختلف الفصائل.

هنا يكمن جوهر وجذر المشكلة، وليس في ردود فعل شباب فلسطيني غاضب، واجه أقسى وأعتى احتلال في التاريخ، لم يترك له المحتلّ أيّ خيار، بل يدفعه إلى حالة من الجنون، واللوم هنا لا يقع على من جنّ، بل على من دفعه إلى حالة الجنون تلك.

هذه الأنسنة المتعقلنة، والتي دفعنا ثمنها أنهاراً من الدماء، عليها أن تبدأ من هنا، الاحتلال هو سبب المشاكل وجذر كلّ أنواع وأشكال العنف في المنطقة، تماماً كما هي الجماعات الإرهابية، التي وجدت لها حواضن ودفيئات تفقس كلّ يوم مزيداً من الإرهاب والتطرف على طول ساحات العالم العربي، فاجتثاث الحواضن وتدمير البيئة الحاضنة يفتح الطريق لوضع حدّ للإرهاب والقتل والتطرف. لذلك سواء كانت عملية «تل أبيب» أو لم تكن، فالإحتلال ماض في مشاريعه ومخططاته، فلا حصار عن قطاع غزة رفع ولا إعمار تحقق ولا حواجز عسكرية رفعت أو جدران فصل عنصري هدمت في الضفة الغربية، ولا أسرى اطلق سراحهم.

خطورة مثل هذا التفكير المسموم المغلف بـ«العقلانية» و«الإنسانوية» والذي غدا نهجاً في الساحتين العربية والفلسطينية، من بعد اتفاقيات «كامب ديفيد»، وما أحدثته من خلل كبير في موازين الصراع والقوى، إحالته للمعضلة علينا نحن العرب والفلسطينيين، نحن العرب والفلسطينيين الذين نقدم التنازل تلوّ التنازل حتى غدونا بلا ورقة توت ساترة لعوراتنا، سبب المشكلة! وأصبحنا لا أخلاقيين ومتوحشين! ونتنياهو وليبرمان وبينت وشاكيد وغليك إنسانيين وأخلاقيين!

شعب مشرّد منذ سبعين عاماً، استيطان «متوحش» و«متغوّل» ضمّ متدرّج للقدس، اعتقال أكثر من 7000 أسير فلسطيني، محاولات جادة لتقسيم المسجد الأقصى.. إلخ، كلها أعمال أخلاقية! في وجه شباب فلسطيني غاضب لا أخلاقي! غضبه بسبب سياسات الإحتلال وإجراءاته وممارساته.

منذ مدريد وعندما زادت أخلاقيتنا وإنسانيتنا عن حدّها، ونحن نفاوض سراً وعلناً، وبشكل مباشر وغير مباشر، وعن بعد وعن قرب، بقينا كما يقول المأثور الشعبي مثل «حمير المعصرة» ندور في نفس المكان والفراغ، مفاوضات لم تجلب لنا سوى المزيد من شرعنة المشروع الصهيوني وإبتلاع الأرض، والإحتلال بطشه وقمعه يزداد.

وختاماً أقول: الفلسطينيون ليسوا من الدواعش ولا طلاب قتل، واختم بما قاله الكاتب نصار ابراهيم: «أنا لست مع قتل أيّ إنسان بشكل عام، كما لست مع قتل أيّ إنسان في فلسطين من حيث المبدأ، مهما كان دينه أو لونه، ولكن حتى يحصل ذلك وحتى تصبح هذه الرغبة والنزعة الأخلاقية والإنسانية ذات جدوى وحقيقية ومقنعة ولها معنى، إذن يجب إنهاء سبب القتل في فلسطين، الذي هو في المقام الأول والعاشر يتمثل بالاحتلال، وعدا ذلك هي تبريرات أو هروب لا أكثر ولا أقلّ وتحميل الضحية بصورة مباشرة أو غير مباشرة السبب في ما يجري».

Quds.45 gmail.com

Related videos

 

Confronting the Obvious Truth : Palestinian Authority vs. the People

 

By Ramzy Baroud

Saeb Erekat is an enigmatic character. Despite minimal popularity among Palestinians, he is omnipresent, appears regularly on television and speaks with the moral authority of an accomplished leader whose legacy is rife with accolades and an astute, unwavering vision.

When Palestinians were polled by the Jerusalem Media and Communications Center (JMCC) in August, just prior to the current Intifada, only 3 percent approved of his leadership – compared with the still meagre approval rating of 16 percent of his boss, Palestinian Authority President, Mahmoud Abbas. Even those who are often cast as alternative leaders – Fatah leader, Marwan Barghouti, and former Gaza-based Hamas Government Prime Minister, Ismail Haniyeh – were nowhere near popular, achieving 10.5 and 9.8 percent of the vote respectively.

It was as if Palestinians were telling us and their traditional leaderships, in particular, that they are fed up with the old rhetoric, the constant let-downs, the unabashed corruption and the very culture of defeat that has permeated the Palestinian political elite for an entire generation.

Abbas has operated his political office on the assumption that, so long as Palestinians received their monthly salaries and are content with his empty promises and occasional threats – of resigning, resisting against Israel, lobbing bombshell speeches at the UN, etc. – then no one is likely to challenge his reign in Areas A and B – tiny cantons within the Israeli-occupied West Bank and Jerusalem.

Erekat has been the primary enabler of that PA charade, for he is the ‘chief negotiator’, whose protracted term in that precarious post has negotiated nothing of value for the Palestinians.

In 2002, I followed the Israeli invasion of the supposedly self-autonomous PA areas in the West Bank, when Erekat made an appeal on Al-Jazeera Arabic television to the Israeli Government to exercise sanity and common sense. The entire display of the PA leadership was beyond tragic, proof that it had no real authority of its own and no control over the events on the ground as Palestinian fighters battled the re-invading Israeli army. He appealed to Israel as if he felt genuinely betrayed by its military onslaught.

When Al Jazeera released thousands of secret documents in January 2011, revealing discussions behind closed doors between Israeli and Palestinian negotiators, Erekat held the lion’s share of blame. With a clear mandate from his superiors, he appeared uninterested in many Palestinian political aspirations, including Palestinian sovereignty in occupied East Jerusalem – the spark behind the current and previous Intifadas. He offered Israel the “biggest Yerushalaim in Jewish history, symbolic number of refugees return, demilitarised state… what more can I give?” he was quoted in the Palestine Papers.

What is particularly interesting about Erekat, and equally applicable to most PA leaders and officials, is that, no matter how devastating their roles – which they continue to play out, whether through political incompetence or outright corruption – they do not seem to go away. They may change position, hover around the same circle of failed leadership, but they tend to resurface and repeatedly regurgitate the same old language, clichés, empty threats and promises.

After retreating for a few weeks as Intifada youth took to the streets to protest the Israeli occupation, PA spokespersons, including Erekat, are now back on the scene, speaking of squandered opportunities for peace, two states and the entire inept discourse, as if peace was ever, indeed, at hand, and if the so-called ‘two state solution’ was ever a solution.

In a recent interview with Al-Jazeera’s ‘UpFront’, Erekat warned that the PA was on the verge of shutting down, as if the very existence of the PA was a virtue in itself. Established in 1994 as a transitional political body that would guide the process of Palestinian independence, the PA morphed to become a security arm that served as a first line of defense for the Israeli army, in addition to guarding its own interests. Billions of dollars later, and after intensive military training provided by the US, the UK, Italy, and other western and ‘moderate’ Arab countries, the PA security forces have done a splendid job of cracking down on any dissent among Palestinians.

So why is Erekat warning of the PA collapse as if the sorry leadership in Ramallah is the center of everything that Palestinians have ever aspired for? “Soon enough Netanyahu will find himself the only [one] responsible between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean because he is destroying the Palestinian Authority,” Erekat said. So what? According to the Geneva Conventions which designate Israel as the Occupying Power, Netanyahu is, indeed, responsible for the welfare, security and well-being of the occupied Palestinians, until a just political solution is assured and enforced by the international community.

Using the same tactic which, along with Abbas and other PA officials, was utilized repeatedly in the past, he vowed that “soon, very soon, you’re going to hear some decisions” about disbanding the PA.

It matters little what Erekat and his Ramallah circle determine as the proper course of action. Not only has his language become obsolete and his references irrelevant, but the entire Oslo ‘peace process’ travesty – which delivered nothing but more illegal settlements and military torment – was dead a long time ago. In fact, it was the Al-Aqsa Intifada in 2000 that killed Oslo and the ten years between the end of that uprising and the advent of a new one were filled with mere haggling and desperate attempts at breathing life into a ‘process’ that made some corrupt Palestinians a whole lot richer.

The hope is that the current Intifada will cleanse the residue of that dead process, and surpass the PA altogether, not through acts of violence and vengeance, but rather through the establishment of a new leadership manned by good women and men who are born in the heart of Palestinian Resistance, in the West Bank, Gaza and Jerusalem. The new leadership cannot be imposed from above, or achieved after deliberation with ‘moderate’ Arabs, but selected through an organic, grassroots process that is blind to factional allegiances, religion, gender and family lineage.

Palestinian Intifadas do not liberate land but liberate people who assume their role in the struggle for national liberation. The 1936 Intifada liberated the fellahin peasants from the confines of the dominant clans and their allegiances to Arab regimes so that they could face up to the British and the Zionists; the 1987 Stone Intifada liberated the people from the grip of Tunisia-based factions, thus the establishment of the Unified National Leadership of the Intifada along with Hamas; the 2000 Intifada was a thwarted attempt at escaping the sins of Oslo and its empowered elite. For the current Intifada to achieve a degree of initial success, it must find a way to entirely dismiss those who took it upon themselves to negotiate Palestinian rights and to enrich themselves at the expense of the impoverished and oppressed Palestinian people.

If the Intifada is to be true to itself, it must seek to break not just the hegemony over the Palestinian political discourse which is unfairly championed by Erekat and his peers, but to break political boundaries as well, uniting all Palestinians around a whole new political agenda.

There are many opportunists who are ready to pounce upon the current mobilization in Palestine, to use the people’s sacrifices as they see fit and, ultimately, return to the status quo as if no blood has been shed and no oppression still in place.

After reiterating his support for the two-state solution which is now but a fading mirage, Erekat told Al-Jazeera, “We are fully supporting our people and their cry for freedom.”

I think not, Mr. Erekat. Twenty years is long enough to show that those who have taken part in their people’s oppression, cannot possibly be the advocates of their people’s freedom.


The War in Syria, Palestinian Alignment, and the NATO-Russia Battle for Influence

 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  

 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Hamas arrested Gaza rocket launchers, and Israel president wouldn’t rule out Hamas talks

Hamas: We arrested Gaza rocket launchers


Ynet 27 May by Elior Levy —

Hamas source tells Ynet rocket fire is ‘against the interests of the Palestinian factions in the Gaza Strip,’ noting there are mediation efforts underway in attempt to calm situation — Hamas arrested the militants behind the rocket launched Tuesday night at southern Israel, a Hamas source told Ynet on Wednesday.  A rocket fired from the Gaza Strip hit an open area in southern Israel on Tuesday night. No damage was caused, but one teenager was treated for shock. The IAF retaliated against the rocket fire, striking Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Popular Resistance Committees targets near the Gaza airport in the southern part of the Strip, as well as Hamas targets in Beit Lahiya in the northern part of the Strip, Palestinian news agency Ma’an reported. The Palestinians reported no injuries in the attacks. “What happened yesterday (the rocket fire) goes against the interests of the Palestinian factions in the Gaza Strip and against our national interests,” the Hamas source said. “We consider the rocket fire to be a dangerous thing.” “Right after the rocket fire, our security forces were deployed to different places across the Strip and hunted for the shooters until they were found and arrested,” the source continued. He noted there were mediation efforts underway between Israel and Hamas in an attempt to de-escalate the situation as soon as possible. While refusing to elaborate on who the mediators were, he said Egypt was not involved.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4661772,00.html

 

Israel president wouldn’t rule out Hamas talks


JERUSALEM (AFP) 27 May — Israeli President Reuven Rivlin appeared to challenge a longstanding taboo on talks with the militant Islamic Hamas on Wednesday, saying he favoured dialogue with everybody. The role of president is largely ceremonial, but during a tour of northern Israel a reporter asked Rivlin his opinion on talks with Hamas, the de facto power in the Gaza Strip. “It is really not important to me with whom I speak, but rather about what we are speaking,” he replied in remarks broadcast on television and radio. “I have no aversion to holding negotiations with anyone who is prepared to negotiate with me,” he said. “The question is what they want to negotiate about. If they want to negotiate my very existence, then I would not negotiate with them.” Israel, along with much of the international community, maintains a ban on overt, direct contacts with Hamas, although it held indirect truce talks through Egyptian mediators after last year’s war in Gaza.
http://news.yahoo.com/israel-president-wouldnt-rule-hamas-talks-191531274.html

 

Mogherini calls for resuming Palestinian-Israeli peace process


BRUSSELS (AFP) 27 May — EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini called Wednesday on Israel and the Palestinians to resume peace negotiations, saying the situation on the ground was “not sustainable.” Mogherini issued the remarks after eyewitnesses said the Israeli air force carried out four strikes on militant targets in the Gaza Strip early Wednesday, hours after a cross-border rocket attack on the Jewish state. “We see the situation on the ground as not sustainable and (it is) an illusion to think the status quo is an option,” Mogherini said at the opening of an annual meeting in Brussels of the donor coordination group for the Palestinians. “As we have seen (in the) last hours on Gaza there is no status quo at all. If we don’t have positive steps, we will have negative steps,” said Mogherini, who last week traveled to the region to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian leaders.
http://news.yahoo.com/mogherini-calls-resuming-palestinian-israeli-peace-process-184425583.html

 

Palestinians drop bid to have FIFA suspend Israel


ZURICH (AFP) 29 May by Ryland James — Palestinian football chief Jibril Rajoub withdrew his association’s bid to have FIFA suspend Israel from international football on Friday before shaking hands with his Israeli counterpart. “I have decided to drop the resolution for the suspension,” Rajoub told the FIFA congress in Zurich before shaking the hand of Israeli FA president Ofer Eini. “A lot of colleagues, whom I respect and whose commitment to the ethics and values of the game I appreciate, told me how painful it is to hear of the issue of suspension. “But I want to protect the Palestinian footballers, to let them enjoy the privilege of the game as others do.” But Rajoub demanded that FIFA help tackle racism and problems of movement facing Palestinian players in the occupied West Bank before waving a red card at delegates to emphasise his point. “I think it’s time to raise the red card against racism and humiliation in Palestine and everywhere. It is time,” he fumed. Palestine, which has been a FIFA member since 1998, had wanted the governing body to expel Israel over its restrictions on the movement of Palestinian players. It had also opposed the participation in the Israeli championships of five clubs located in Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank. In an equally passionate address, Israeli football chief Eini said it is now up to the two associations to find a common ground to promote football and help each other in the troubled region. “Football must serve as a bridge to peace,” said Eini … A FIFA committee, which will include figures from both the Israeli and Palestinian governing bodies, will be set up to resolve issues facing those in football on the West Bank after the congress voted for the initiative.
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/palestinians-withdraw-bid-fifa-suspend-israel-135951086–sow.html

Palestinians withdraw call to suspend Israel from Fifa


The Guardian 29 May by Peter Beaumont in Jerusalem — Sepp Blatter overrules attempt to refer status of Israeli clubs to UN, prompting Palestinian Football Association to drop suspension motion — The Palestinian Football Association has withdrawn its call to have Israel suspended from Fifa in a chaotic last minute climbdown at the congress of football’s governing body in Zurich. Following days of negotiations, and the mediation of Fifa president Sepp Blatter, the Palestinian moves at the scandal-ridden congress appeared comprehensively outmanoeuvred by feverish Israeli lobbying and the opposition of senior Fifa officials, including Blatter. As details of an impending deal emerged, the Palestinian delegation came out of the last round of talks expecting the congress to vote on an amendment to refer the main sticking point, the status of five Israeli clubs based in illegal settlements on the West Bank, to the United Nations. But the Palestinian move was overruled by Blatter, to the clear dismay of the Palestinian delegation, whose lawyer tried to appeal from the floor. Instead, the issue will be referred to a new Fifa committee. Palestinian delegation members complained after the vote that the amendment voted on was not the one it had drawn up, which called explicitly for UN referral. The announcement came at the end of a long day in which Palestinian delegation members had insisted they would not back down on the suspension vote … Following the withdrawal of the request to suspend Israel over claims of its racist and discriminatory policies towards Palestinian football, 90% of delegates voted to set up a new monitoring inspections committee to oversee a mechanism to ensure movement of players and equipment. The size of the vote in favour of the motion – 165-18 – is likely to be the only consolation for the Palestinian side, which has been pushing a long-term campaign over what it says are Israeli abuses of Palestinian football. The outcome seemed certain to be a cause for celebration for Israel.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/29/palestinians-withdraw-call-to-suspend-israel-from-fifa-west-bank

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

EU: Court decision to remove Hamas from terror list “legal” not “political”

Palestinian militants of the Ezzedine al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas's armed wing, take part in a parade marking the 27th anniversary of the resistance movement's creation on December 14, 2014 in Gaza City. AFP / Mahmoud Hams

Published Wednesday, December 17, 2014

Updated at 3:24 pm (GMT +2): Palestinian resistance group Hamas must be removed from the EU’s terrorism blacklist, but its assets will stay frozen, a European court ruled on Wednesday, hours before the European Parliament overwhelmingly backed the recognition of a Palestinian state within 1967 borders “in principle.”

The original listing of Hamas in 2001 was based not on sound legal judgements but on conclusions derived from the media and the Internet, the General Court of the European Union said in a statement.

But it stressed that Wednesday’s decision to remove Hamas was based on technical grounds and does “not imply any substantive assessment of the question of the classification of Hamas as a terrorist group.”

The freeze on Hamas’s funds will also temporarily remain in place for three months pending any appeal by the EU, the Luxembourg-based court said.

Hamas, which has been in power in the Gaza Strip since 2007, had appealed against its inclusion on the blacklist on several grounds.

Hamas’s military wing was added to the European Union’s first-ever terrorism blacklist drawn up in December 2001 in the wake of the September 11 attacks on the United States.

The EU blacklisted the political wing of Hamas in 2003 after the group claimed responsibility for a spate of attacks on Israeli targets during the Second Intifada, a popular uprising that erupted in 2000 against Israel’s decades-long occupation.

Hamas was founded in 1987 shortly after the start of the first Palestinian Intifada.

Reactions

The European Union said Hamas is still on its terror list despite Wednesday’s ruling.

“The EU continues to consider Hamas a terrorist organization,” European Commission spokeswoman Maja Kocijancic confirmed, saying the EU General Court’s decision “is a legal ruling, and not a political decision taken by EU governments.”

Hamas, meanwhile, hailed the decision, describing the move as a “victory for justice.”

“We thank the European Court for its decision. This is a victory for all advocates of liberation from all forms of occupation,” senior Hamas member Moussa Abu Marzouq said.

A lawyer for Hamas, Liliane Glock, told AFP she was “satisfied with the decision.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu demanded the EU immediately restore Hamas to its terrorism blacklist.

“We are not satisfied with the European explanation by which Hamas has been withdrawn from this list. We expect the Europeans to puts Hamas back on the list immediately,” Netanyahu said in a statement.

Palestinian state “in principle”

Meanwhile, the European Parliament overwhelmingly backed the recognition of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders “in principle” on Wednesday, following a series of votes on the issue in EU nations which have enraged Israel.

Lawmakers approved the non-binding motion by 498 votes to 88 with 111 abstentions, although it was a watered down version of an original motion which had urged EU member states to recognize a Palestinian state unconditionally.

The motion said the parliament “supports in principle recognition of Palestinian statehood and the two state solution, and believes these should go hand in hand with the development of peace talks, which should be advanced.”

The socialist, greens and radical left groups in the European Parliament had wanted an outright call for the recognition of Palestinian statehood.

But the center-right European People’s Party of European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker, the leading group in parliament, forced them into a compromise motion linking it to peace talks.

“There is no immediate unconditional recognition (of statehood),” EPP chief Manfred Weber said.

But his socialist counterpart Gianni Pittella insisted it was a “historic decision” and a “victory for the whole parliament.”

European politicians have become more active in pushing for a sovereign Palestine since the collapse of US-sponsored peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority in April, and ensuing conflict in Gaza, where more than 2,000 Palestinians, at least 70 percent of them civilians, and on the Israeli side, 66 soldiers and six civilians were killed this summer.

EU’s vote follows Sweden’s decision in October to recognize Palestine and non-binding votes since then by parliaments in Britain, France, Ireland, and Spain in favor of recognition demonstrated growing European impatience with the stalled peace process.

The roots of the Israel-Palestine conflict date back to 1917, when the British government, in the now-infamous “Balfour Declaration,” called for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.”

Israel occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank during the 1967 Middle East War. It later annexed the holy city in 1980, claiming it as the capital of the self-proclaimed Zionist state – a move never recognized by the international community.

In 1988, Palestinian leaders led by Yasser Arafat declared the existence of a state of Palestine inside the 1967 borders and the state’s belief “in the settlement of international and regional disputes by peaceful means in accordance with the charter and resolutions of the United Nations.”

Heralded as a “historic compromise,” the move implied that Palestinians would agree to accept only 22 percent of historic Palestine in exchange for peace with Israel. It is now believed that only 17 percent of historic Palestine is under Palestinian control following the continued expansion of illegal Israeli settlements.

The Palestinian Authority (PA) this year set November 2016 as the deadline for ending the Israeli withdrawal from the territories occupied by Israel during the Six-Day War in 1967 and establishing a two-state solution.

It is worth noting that numerous Palestinian factions, including Hamas, as well as pro-Palestine advocates support a one-state solution in which Israelis and Palestinians would be treated equally, arguing that the creation of a Palestinian state beside Israel would not be sustainable and that it would mean recognizing a state of Israel on territories seized forcefully by Zionists before 1967.

They also believe that the two-state solution, which is the only option considered by international actors, won’t solve existing discrimination, nor erase economic and military tensions.

(AFP, Al-Akhbar, Anadolu)

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

“Our Palestinian resistance is 100 years old:” Interview with Khaled Barakat

Posted on November 17, 2014 by Alexandra Valiente

20141031_211959The following interview with Palestinian writer and activist Khaled Barakat was published (in the Greek language) in the Greek newspaper,Efimerida ton Syntakton:

What is the current situation concerning the Israeli-Palestinian relations since the last assault on Gaza? Do you support the notion that this war was won by the Palestinian Resistance?

This war was won by the Palestinian resistance, because the Israeli enemy did not achieve its goals. In fact, Israel committed war crimes, killing over 2000 Palestinians, and destroying tens of thousands of homes, targeting health workers, and many other crimes. This is what colonizers and occupiers do to the indigenous, native population, and to oppressed communities – exert massive state violence on a whole population. But if we are discussing real, military battles, confrontation on the battlefield, the Zionists and their backers have lost miserably. Just read what Israel’s top generals have had to say about this war. No military expert – or even someone with basic military knowledge – would disagree with this, after seeing the results. The resistance managed to capture Israeli soldiers from the battlefield, managed to hold their ground, and rebuffed the ground invasion. Every time the Israeli forces lost on the battlefield in the ground invasion, their response was to massively bomb civilians. Lastly, the armed resistance is growing by the day.

What has changed in Gaza during the last few years? Can the armed resistance forces successfully confront the strongest army in the Middle East?

Yes, the resistance of the Palestinian people can successfully confront – and defeat – the military power of the Israeli state. Always, armed revolutionary forces are fighting an army of a superpower, or an army that possesses qualitative advantage in terms of funding, weaponry, arms and support from major powers. But what is important is that we are fighting for a just cause. It is an armed resistance, yes, but it is a people’s resistance. We do not evaluate the results of the war to liberate Palestine from one battle – whether we have achievements or losses. This Palestinian armed resistance is 100 years old. When we fought the British, we were fighting the strongest army in the world – not the fourth-strongest. When the Resistance in Greece was fighting the Nazis, they were fighting what was seen as the strongest army in the world. It is a long war but we will emerge victorious. This is inevitable.

What is the situation in Gaza today and which priorities are set? Do you have any expectations from the proximity talks in Cairo, which are mediated by Egypt? I mostly refer to the prospect of lifting the Gaza siege.

As for the needs of Gaza, what is the most important thing today is the physical and mental health of our people, particularly children. Humans come first – then buildings, roads and electricity. We know the heavy cost that Israel inflicted upon our people on all levels. We recognize that Israel bombed hospitals, schools, playgrounds – including bombing children playing on the beach.

The second priority is to maintain our functioning Palestinian society, and circle of life – rebuilding the infrastructure that was specifically targeted by Israeli bombers. Remember that we have over 100,000 displaced people in Gaza – among a population that was already over 85% refugees. Entire neighborhoods were destroyed, in places like Beit Hanoun and Khuza’a. Sewer systems were destroyed, as were water systems – already facing a deep crisis before the assault. Schools have become shelters and were targeted for bombing. Our people in Gaza have shown tremendous steadfastness and resilience, during and after the war.

As to the second part of the question, we do not rely on illusions. We know that Israel is defeated, and therefore, they must comply with the demands of the resistance – the demands of the Palestinian people. But the problem is that Israel wants to transform this into a permanent status of negotiations – we are aware of this. As far as the position of the PFLP is concerned, we will never trust the Zionist enemy and Arab reactionary regimes and their false promises.

How do you receive the prospect of the recommencement of the Israeli-Palestinian talks and on what grounds could this happen?

These negotiations are nothing but a cruel joke and a big lie. It is a futile path. Negotiations and the so-called “peace process” is an industry that some feed on. On the one hand, Israel is using negotiations in order to cover its crimes that it commits on a daily basis, particularly the theft of land and the building of colonies, imposing and deepening apartheid and occupation on a daily basis while it attempts to project an image for international public opinion that “peace” is in the making. On the other hand, it benefits the Palestinian despicable, rotten capitalists, who are hiding behind a big, false slogan called “the Palestinian state” while occupation intensifies. These negotiations are futile for the Palestinian people. For over 20 years, they have achieved nothing for the people – but they are a moneymaker for Zionists and for a few Palestinian capitalists in the West Bank and Gaza.

So, in short, whether these negotiations resume in public or not, we know that they continue on a daily basis in the shadows of closed rooms. These negotiations do not stop and they will not stop unless the Palestinian Authority is forced to truly end their participation in this farce through popular resistance.

These negotiations are guarded by the “big boss” – the United States. These negotiations are dear to the U.S. and Mahmoud Abbas and his cronies are puppets following orders.

 Do you see any grounds for the recognition of Palestine as an independent state and a member of the UN?

This is a bit of a messy question for the PFLP. On the one hand, we want to end the path of negotiations and take back the political struggle in international institutions, including the United Nations. We see that the international arena, despite all of our reservations on it, and the misuse of these bodies by imperialist powers, remains a space for an open political battle against the Zionists and the United States. This is a million times better than negotiations. We want to be able to make a breakthrough in terms of bringing Zionist leaders to trial before the International Criminal Court, and we believe this is a very important battle because if it will not happen tomorrow, or in 10 years, or even in our generation – other Palestinian generations will continue the fight until this happens. Zionists must be put on trial.  So it is a tactical position as far as the PFLP is concerned. When the Palestinian state was recognized as a non-member observer state at the United Nations, we issued a statement calling on the Palestinian Authority president not to use this as a tactic for another cycle of illusions and negotiations. What we know for sure is that the Zionists are infuriated because they do not want this to be a gateway to other Palestinian steps or international pressure.

What would be your message to the Greek people?

Our message to the Greek people is that Palestinians know the support and solidarity they have in Greece. The relationship between our two peoples is very long and deep in history.  In every Intifada, we always find Greek fighters, revolutionary political parties, in the forefront of solidarity with Palestine. We know also that you are going through harsh times, fighting economic hegemony, plundering the resources of the Greek people, threatening your water, land and air. We stand in solidarity with the Greek people’s fight to reclaim their country and liberate Greece from these forces. This is a message of love, respect and the commitment to struggle for Palestinians, Greeks and all people of the world who seek freedom, justice and liberation, and a truly just world for humanity.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Clintons, Monica, Adultery and “strange Jewish laws”

Rehmat

On October 14, 2014 Professor Susannah Haschel (Jewish Studies, Dartmouth College) again defended Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky sex affair based on Jewish law at The Jewish Week.

One of 10,000 documents released from the Clinton Presidential Library on Friday last week, one belongs to Haschel, then senior aide to Sen. HillaryClinton who submitted to the White House: a Talmudic interpretation proving president Bill Clinton was not guilty of adultery.

From the perspective of Jewish history, we have to ask how can Jews condemn President Clinton’s behavior as immoral, when we exalt King David? King David had Batsheva’s husband, Uriah, murdered. While David was condemned and punished, he was never thrown off the throne of Israel. On the contrary, he is exalted in our Jewish memory as the unifier of Israel,” Haschel wrote in 1999.

According to classical Jewish law, President Clinton did not commit adultery; adultery is defined as a married man having intercourse with a married woman, and Monica Lewinsky is single. At worst, President Clinton is guilty of the common sin of onanism (masturbation), a sin that probably afflicts the consciences of most Jewish men at one time or another,” said the Jan. 27, 1999, e­mail that ended up with White House adviser and political fixer Sidney Blumenthal (father of the ‘self-hating’ US journalist Max Blumenthal).

Haschel’s interpretation of Jewish law, later helped several American lawmakers, such as, Sen. John Ensign of Nevada who confessed to an extramarital affair with a female campaign staffer married to one of his top Senate staffers.

Haschel also advised Clintons’ critics that instead of character assassination of Hillary Clinton who in August told a Jewish gathering that “if I were prime minister of Israel, my policy against Hamas, Iran and Syria wouldn’t be different than Netanyahu” – but concentrate on the bloodshed going on in the Middle East and Ukraine. Why? ” Because Clintons’ just had a grandson, who happened to be Jewish from father’s side.

Last week Rabbi David Wolpe accused King David of committing genocide of Palestinians in order to whitewash Israel’s recent genocide in Gaza.

In 2010, Israeli Rabbi Ari Schvat blessed Mossad female agents having sex (Honey-pot) with foreign agents. He supported his fatwa by claiming that Queen Esther had sex with Persian King Ahasuerus in 500 BC in order to save the Persian Jewish community. I suppose, French Jewish president Hollande must be incarnation of Esther as the “First Lady” of France is not married to Hollande. She is just “sex partner” with two kids from her previous marriage.

The White House “Honey-pot” Monica Lewinsky was used by Israeli Mossad to blackmail then president Bill Clinton to stop FBI investigation of Israeli espionage network MEGA lead by Danny Yatom, Mossad inspector-general, according to Gordon Thomas’ book: ‘Gideon’s Spies – The Secret History of Mossad’.

Lewinsky testified under oath that after a session of heavy patting and oral sex in the White House, Clinton told her that a foreign embassy was tapping the two phone lines in her Washington DC apartment. Read more on this story here.

If someone think that’s the end of the adultery in Jewish religion, he needs to look at Adam Kirsch’s article at the Jewish Tablet magazine (October 14, 2014).

Following are some of the kosher things I learned.

1. A Jew can marry daughter of his own brother, his niece. But, if he dies, his brother (father-in-law) is not allowed to have “obligatory marriage” the widow, his own daughter. Islamic traditions allow a Muslim to marry daughter of his cousin.

2. A Jew is forbidden to have sex with his brother’s wife – but if she became widow without bearing a child, the surviving brother is “obligated” to have sex with his sister-in-law in order to provide his deceased brother with a posthumous heir. Kirsch says the practice is commanded in Deuteronomy 25:5. This totally forbidden under Islamic Shari’ah.

Under such ‘modern goodies’, who can blame British Jew -Zionist peer, Lord Greville Ewan Janner, 86, for sexually abusing kids from care homes?

Interestingly, Hillary Clinton in her memoir just published, has acknowledged that ISIS was given birth by the US government and the French Zionist Jew “philosopher” and Muslim hater Bernard-Henri Levy, a French-Israel dual citizen, was the “mastermind” behind the ISIS military success.

————————–

 Modern “Queen Esther”

 

Wahabi Sex Jihad

Mossad agent Dalia Shimon 25 years

Egyptian security forces arrested Hossam El Din Malas and seized at his home military allowances and other important documents and some photos, including this picture And those who do not know the girl sitting next to him Is Dalia Shimon 25 years Mossad agent and a female soldier in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) from the Tel Aviv area.

 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Could Hamas enter into direct negotiations with Israel?

 

West Bank city of Ramallah about the latest developments on the peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians, on October 1, 2014. (Photo: Abbas Momani)
Published Thursday, October 2, 2014
If Hamas ever decides to enter into negotiations with Israel, it would not be the first Palestinian faction to have fought against and then held talks with the occupation. It was therefore not surprising when Hamas leaders hinted something to this effect, albeit Hamas officially denied it. In Palestinian history, there was a similar experience with the Fatah movement, but what is odd for the Palestinian and Arab Street is that this time, Hamas’ desire to engage in or its non-objection to negotiations follows a “war of liberation.”
Gaza – A long time ago, the Palestinian national liberation movement Fatah was locked in fierce fighting across several capitals, and spared no efforts in its battle. The Israelis knew that it was imperative to draw the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and its main component Fatah into an endless political spiral, following the maxim “if you want to thwart a revolution, drown it in money and power.”
Direct negotiations between the PLO and the occupation began through secret channels, preceded by the launch of “test balloons,” so to speak, in the media. In parallel, on the Israeli side, officials paved the way for negotiations in statements explaining Israel had dealt with “stubborn minds” who refused to “work without a gun.”

The overt signs of the launch of the peace process back then began with a Palestinian delegation taking part in the Madrid peace conference in 1991, chaired by Haidar Abdel-Shafi with encouragement from Jordan. This was followed by secret meetings culminating with the Oslo Accord in 1993, with the PLO and Fatah leaving resistance in return for a cardboard state.

[I]slamist movement, represented by factions like Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, saw Oslo and its repercussions as a major crime and sin against history and the people.”

 

Since then, the Islamist movement, represented by factions like Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, saw Oslo and its repercussions as a major crime and sin against history and the people, and the two groups repudiated the peace process and direct negotiations categorically. Despite this, Hamas in particular did not hide the fact that it was open to some political proposals, such as establishing a state along pre-1967 borders “without ceding the rest of the occupied territories,” and agreed to the principle of a 10-to-30-year long truce to “create a liberation army.” But Hamas has insisted on rejecting direct negotiations and shaking hands with Israelis.
While Islamic Jihad’s stated position remains unchanged today, it seems that Hamas became more “flexible” compared to when it issued an Islamic law (Sharia) opinion prohibiting negotiations “for forfeiting core issues for the Muslims, including 78 percent of historical Palestine.” The turning point was in 2006 when Hamas decided to take part in the legislative elections. As a result, Hamas now had MPs in the Legislative Council, which is an integral part of the Palestinian Authority regime produced by the Oslo process. Hamas and Islamic Jihad had earlier contended in the municipal elections, but Islamic Jihad made a distinction between municipalities, which are not directly part of the Palestinian Authority, and the Legislative Council.

Shedding further light on that turning point, the Emir of Qatar Tamim bin Hamad revealed a few days ago that Hamas had agreed to take part in the legislative elections at the request of his father Hamad, based on an “American desire.” After Hamas ruled Gaza for eight years in a row, during which it fought three wars with Israel, it stepped aside in favor of the consensus government it had jointly formed with Fatah prior to the recent war. Now, its leaders have publicly spoken about the possibility of direct negotiations, especially since they had taken part in several rounds of indirect negotiations with Israel in Cairo to end the war.

Direct vs. indirect negotiations
Recently, the deputy head of Hamas’s political bureau Musa Abu Marzouk settled the Sharia-side debate regarding the issue by saying that “there are no qualms regarding direct negotiations.” He then advanced the political and circumstantial argument for direct negotiations by pointing out that Hamas was stuck in a crisis of mediators, whose seriousness in brokering a solution that fulfills Hamas’ demands is questionable, as he said, and whom Hamas was forced to deal with because of the “curse of geography” that made the mediator the only outlet for Gaza – in reference to Egypt.
Yet it appears that this circumstantial situation is not enough for others to justify the kind of dramatic shift proposed by Abu Marzouk. Other leaders in Hamas, such as Mahmoud al-Zahar, stress that the relationship with Cairo, though it has underwent difficult stages, is essential and pivotal, and can be built upon.
But it is hard to escape the fact that Hamas had resorted to direct negotiations with individuals close to Israeli decision-making circles, most notably during the negotiations for the release of Gilad Shalit.

Leaders in Hamas had indicated that there were contacts between Hamas leader Ghazi Hamad and Israeli writer Gershon Baskin, a close associate of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, between 2010 and 2012. In the end, however, the prisoner swap deal was brokered by Egypt, and so was the ceasefire in 2012.

Based on the above, the “mediator problem” cannot be the main reason for the shift in Hamas’ attitude, although sources in Hamas told Al-Akhbar that the Egyptian mediator often “added conditions to Israeli ones, and delayed delivering messages.” “Egypt even tried to get Shalit released in return for a few prisoners rather than hundreds,” the sources added.

But it is hard to escape the fact that Hamas had resorted to direct negotiations with individuals close to Israeli decision-making circles, most notably during the negotiations for the release of Gilad Shalit.

 

“At that moment,” the sources continued, “retired Mossad officer David Meidan passed on a proposal for direct negotiations with the martyr Jabari, but the latter refused.”
Baskin also brought a message from Meidan saying “the mediator (Cairo) was at some stages of the negotiations not enthusiastic for the deal to succeed.”
A “test detonation” is the term that best describes the statements of the Hamas leader regarding negotiations, then bearing in mind that until this moment, the media has not carried the full interview from which the excerpt in question had come. Then in a direct interview with Abu Marzouk, he did not offer any direct answers regarding the issue of direct negotiations, while Mahmoud Zahar categorically refuted the possibility of direct talks. Nevertheless, both men agreed that direct negotiations with the occupation does not violate Sharia, but contradicts the political point of view adopted by the movement at the moment.
While Abu Marzouk said that parties mediating between his group and the occupation “were a burden on the Palestinians,” Zahar just said that the alternative is to look for other mediators, in case the existing ones do not fulfill their role, while he continued to deny the possibility of direct negotiations. Both men denied what newspapers affiliated to Qatar and Egypt had published, quoting anonymous sources close to Hamas, who purported that Hamas was carrying out Sharia-based revisions in order to negotiate with Israel. Zahar said that revisions as such were needed within Hamas, but that any revisions regarding the relationship with Israel are out of the question.
Perhaps these hints followed by denials, according to observers, are meant to pave the way for making the issue a viable topic for discussion within the public opinion, with a view to attenuate any decision Hamas could make in the future. Observers also see this as a clear message of warning addressed to Fatah, in the event reconciliation and other issues are obstructed.
About the revisions
Hamas leader and former adviser to the prime minister Ahmed Yousef confirmed that revisions were being made to some strategies at the leadership level in Hamas, “with the aim of crystallizing positions on what could happen at the level of the Palestinian issue, particularly the nature of internal and external relations.”
But Yousef told Al-Akhbar that direct negotiations with Israel were not on Hamas’ agenda at the time, because Hamas as he said does not sense it is in an intractable crisis, while the Palestinian Authority is already handling negotiations.
However, he added,
“When Hamas joins the PLO, the PLO will be the one negotiating on behalf of all parties and not Hamas.”
Yousef re-emphasized that there is a review underway of the nature of internal national relations, “and the relationship between the Resistance and the consensus government, in addition to Hamas’ position on presidential elections and whether it would participate or put forward independent candidates, all issues that go far beyond the issue of direct negotiations.”
Regarding the position of the parent group, the Muslim Brotherhood, regarding all this clamoring, the chairman of the Shura Council in the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan, Hamza Mansour, said that direct negotiations with Israel violates Hamas’ principles and charter, adding that it would represent direct recognition of the occupation and its claim to the lands it occupies. Mansour told Al-Akhbar, “Hamas, which is known for its honesty, would not make such a move despite the risks it faces from its Arab and Islamic depth.”

“Hamas, which is known for its honesty, would not make such a move despite the risks it faces from its Arab and Islamic depth.” – Hamza Mansour, Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood

 

Concerning consultation with the group, he stressed that Hamas would not make any such move “except after consulting all relevant Sharia entities,” and added, “It will not negotiate directly, because its credibility is associated with its jihad, and slipping into negotiations would cause it to lose too much.”
From the perspective of Fatah, which negotiates with Israel directly, “talk about direct negotiations between Hamas and Israel is premature, not because Hamas objects to the principle of negotiations, but because it must be part of the PLO, which would then negotiate on behalf of all parties,” according to Fatah leader Yahya Rabah. Rabah added, “Negotiations now would raise questions and suspicions regarding the concessions Hamas could make,” stressing that Hamas must not negotiate at a time when the Palestinian Authority is confronting Israel’s lies about it.
While the other side, that is Israel, has kept mum over this issue, its position is open to the possibility of agreeing conditionally or rejecting talks in order to get more concessions, if Hamas decides at some point to do what is still a taboo. However, all those close to Hamas see that this path is still far off, and say that talk about it is nothing more than an attempt to put pressure internally and in the direction of Arab regimes.
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

RELATED

 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Interview with former Hamas Foreign Minister Mahmoud al-Zahar

Mahmoud al-Zahar. (Photo: Al-Akhbar)

By: Mohammed Fouad

Published Wednesday, September 17, 2014

On the ruins of his home destroyed in the last war on Gaza, we sat with Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar to discuss a variety of issues after the war. We talked about direct negotiations with the occupation; Hamas’ position regarding the reconciliation with Fatah; participating in the upcoming elections and last but not least, Hamas’ position on the conflicting regional axes.

Mahmoud al-Zahar is a leading figure in Hamas even though he was left out in the last internal election for the movement’s political bureau. His son Houssam was martyred during the second Intifada. Those close to him describe him as the head of the hawkish wing and a champion of Hamas’ policy of armed struggle. He was foreign minister in Ismail Haniya’s 2006 government.

Al-Akhbar: What is your position regarding what was said by a member of the movement’s political bureau about direct negotiations with Israel and the possibility of Hamas engaging in them in the future?

Mahmoud al-Zahar: This is a hoax that the media used and it is not true. We do not negotiate directly with Israel even though there is no religious or political deterrent that would prevent us from doing so. But we are opposed to the idea. The person who did that is Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas). He helped us negotiate indirectly with the Israeli occupation during the ceasefire talks in Cairo but we did not authorize him to negotiate with Israel on a political program or the 1967 borders or anything else. Abbas was negotiating to lift the siege and for humanitarian issues such as bringing goods and products into Gaza.

To be clear, we told Abbas negotiate as you like, so that no one would accuse us of putting a spoke in the wheel of his project. But he does not speak in our name and we have not agreed to his project.

AA: Then what did Mousa Abu Marzouk mean by talking about direct negotiations?

MZ: He meant that if Abu Mazen does not play his role to the fullest in the negotiations around humanitarian issues, we will look for another mediator to negotiate with Israel directly. We could ask an Arab or international party such as the United Nations to negotiate with Israel on humanitarian and not political issues.

The proof is that during the Gilad Shalit deal, the Irish negotiated with Israel directly and Egypt and Germany interfered too and negotiated with Israel directly but we do not sit with Israel. We, however, insist on our right to choose certain parties rather than others to negotiate.

Fatah’s leadership was angry with Abu Marzouk’s statement because they believe that their organization is the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people even though Fatah lost its electoral and popular legitimacy.

AA: How do you respond to the fact that Abu Mazen accuses you of monopolizing the war and peace decision and of having a shadow government in Gaza?

MZ: Fatah took the decision to make peace in 1992 without consulting anyone. In the latest war, Israel was the one that decided to go to war. Are we supposed to consult him on the decision to defend ourselves? Before him Abu Ammar (Yasser Arafat) also did not consult anyone about peace. This means that we are not the ones making the war and peace decision.

Regarding the shadow government, Abbas makes up terms to cover up for the failure of the current government. He should tell us who are the shadow ministers and who is heading it? We gave him the reconciliation government and he insisted on making most of its members from Fatah, not to mention that he wanted Hamas to pay the salaries in Gaza and this is the result.

AA: What are the alternatives?

MZ: If the failure of the government continues then we must have an alternative. The Palestinian factions should sit together and discuss their options. The Popular and the Democratic Fronts for the Liberation of Palestine called for a national unity government and recognized the weakness of this government. Until then, we shall study this option.

AA: But you agreed that Abbas would be a consensus president of the people?

MZ: Mahmoud Abbas is neither a consensus nor a legitimate president, he is a de facto president. We dealt with him as a president who was elected a year before us and we gave him half of the government in the Mecca Agreement in 2006. But he turned against us and called for our killing. That is why he has lost his legitimacy since 2005 and why he does not represent us politically. It is enough that his 22-year-old project has failed and his political “bazaar” is bankrupt so he is attacking others. Hamas, on the other hand, succeeded in confronting Israeli aggression in the years since the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 and achieved victories in these confrontations.

They might say that we (Hamas) lost our legitimacy too that is why we are always ready for elections and we do not fear them. An election is supposed to take place six months after establishing the government but Abbas is refusing. Our information indicates that he does not want to have the election because he is afraid of its outcome.

AA: In light of the crisis of legitimacy, why has the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) not been strengthened and activated to become a frame of reference for all political forces?

MZ: The PLO’s agenda is not our agenda. We want to preserve it as a political framework but if we join it then we will change the agenda. The issue for us is not joining the PLO but changing its program because of the Oslo Accords which the organization adopted as a “political free-for-all.” Hamas turned into a resistance project.

AA: What has become of the quintet committee that Fatah established to meet with you and what are you going to agree on?

MZ: We have no information about the date or the place yet but discussions will focus on how to implement lifting the siege on Gaza.

AA: You had talked about a national committee to follow up on the issue of reconstruction.

MZ: We have not formed it yet because if we do, they will say that we are trying to circumvent the reconciliation government which should take responsibility, pay the salaries and implement the reconstruction projects.

AA: Does Hamas fear that there will be a trade-off between its arms and reconstruction?

MZ: We don’t fear that at all. The weapons of the Resistance are off the table in talks and on the ground. This is the position of all Palestinians and they all refuse any talk of disarming the Resistance.

AA: Fatah leader Azzam al-Ahmed said that not a dime will go in and the Rafah Crossing will not open unless the legitimate authority enters Gaza. What do you think of this condition?

MZ: The problem is that Fatah considers itself legitimate because international parties, mostly the US and Israel, want to give it this legitimacy and a free position instead of the government that resisted the Israeli project. Regarding the Rafah crossing, there are two decisions, one Arab from the Arab League and the other Islamic from the Organization of the Islamic Conference, that were taken in 2006, calling for lifting the siege on Gaza and opening the crossings. But political changes in Egypt at the end of 2013 led to the closing of the Rafah Crossing in violation of the law.

We said earlier, we are not against the presidential guard coming but there is some sort of political confusion. The presidential guard should guard the president and the border guard is charged with the crossings that have civil bodies like agriculture, health and others. I believe that their goal is to make money as was the case with the security forces that worked at the crossings under the late president Yasser Arafat. The problem is that they don’t know what to do with these crossings or how to deal with people who work there.

AA: What happened with the date of resuming indirect talks in Cairo?

MZ: Until now, we haven’t been told anything. But the agreement stated that we should return to Cairo in a month to consolidate the truce and discuss outstanding issues such as borders, nautical miles and reconstruction. By the way, the ceasefire has lasted and it hasn’t been a month but if the Israelis attack we will retaliate. As for the port and the airport, in my opinion, we should not take the permission of the Israelis to build them. According to Oslo, there was an airport that Israel destroyed in 2000. If we decide internally to build an airport and Israel attacks it, we will attack its airport.

Also, there is a decision to build a port, the dispute is over where to build it. It can be built anywhere in the Gaza Strip as part of a Palestinian decision. Also here, Israeli approval is of no concern to us because we paid for the airport and the port in the Oslo Accords when the PLO recognized Israel at the expense of the Palestinian people.

AAWhat is the significance of the role of the Islamic Republic of Iran in supporting the Resistance in Gaza and why did Hamas bashfully thank it?

MZ: We did not thank anyone and we did not distribute medals to anyone after the war. The people know who stood with us and who supported our agenda. Some people thanked Qatar and Turkey for their positions in the last war. But if we want to talk about the agenda of the Resistance, there are many parties that we ought to thank, first among them is Iran which provided military, political and financial support throughout the last period. I will not respond to claims that Iranian funding of Hamas stopped after the crisis in Syria because Israel will benefit. It is true there’s been a mild divergence after the events in Syria, where we maintained our neutrality. But after leaving Damascus, we should’ve went to Beirut. We could have lived in the midst of the Palestinian people there and created a framework for a real program in coordination with the parties present there.

As to why we did not go to Beirut? You should ask those who went to Doha instead of Lebanon.

Nevertheless, whoever thinks that going to Qatar means that Hamas is against Iran is mistaken. Playing the axes game is destructive. That is why we should have good relations with Syria, Iran and all the countries.

AADoes this mean that you are with restoring the relationship with Damascus?

MZ: There is no enmity between us and the different components of Syria. We were guests there as part of a Resistance program sponsored by the host country. We left because we were shoved in the middle of the problems. I stress that we are opposed to any activities by Palestinians in the Yarmouk refugee camp or anywhere else because our battle is against Israel only.

AA: What about your relationship with Cairo?

MZ: We are not interested in engaging in a political or military dispute with Egypt and everything that was claimed about us is baseless. There isn’t a shred of evidence to support claims about killing Egyptian soldiers in Rafah. All the charges against us were meant to link us to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and describe them as terrorists. That is why we welcome restoring our relationship with Egypt.

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Israel bombs Gaza, withdraws negotiators from Cairo

Smoke billows following an Israeli airstrike on Gaza City on August 19, 2014. (Photo: AFP – Mahmud Hams)
Published Tuesday, August 19, 2014
Updated 7:21 pm (GMT+3): Israel bombed sites across Gaza on Tuesday and recalled its negotiators from truce talks in Cairo after saying three rockets from the strip hit Israeli occupied territory, hours before a ceasefire was due to expire.
At least five people, including three children, were injured in two attacks, Palestinian heath ministry spokesperson Ashraf al-Qudra wrote on Twitter.
Palestinian witnesses and security officials said at least four airstrikes targeted open areas in the northern area of Beit Lahiya, in Maghazi in the center, and in Khan Younis and in Rafah in the south.
A Reuters correspondent also saw an Israeli plane fire a missile east of Gaza City.
Of the five people injured, two children were wounded in a strike east of Rafah in southern Gaza, and three people including one child suffered injuries in the north.
The renewed attacks caused thousands of Palestinians to flee their homes in neighborhoods of eastern Gaza City.
An AFP reporter saw hundreds of Palestinians streaming out of al-Shujayeh carrying bags of clothes, pillows and mattresses.
Thousands more were leaving the areas of Zeitoun and Shaaf, alarmed by a series of explosions, and heading towards shelters in UN schools, the witnesses said.
Meanwhile an Israeli official said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had ordered the negotiating team to return home.
Nor was there any claim of responsibility for the rockets fired at Beersheva.
Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri accused Israel of sabotaging indirect talks in Cairo aimed at brokering a longer-term ceasefire.
“We don’t have any information about firing rockets from Gaza. The Israeli raids are intended to abort the negotiations in Cairo,” Abu Zuhri told AFP.
Egyptian mediators, who are generally hostile to the Hamas movement and tend to take their cues from Israel, have been pushing both sides to put an end to a weeks-long Israel terror campaign against Gaza which has killed more than 2,000 Palestinians, the vast majority of them civilians.
The aim of the talks was to broker a long-term arrangement to halt Israel’s assault, although hostilities had, until Tuesday, largely ended since a series of temporary truces took off on August 4.
Although the truce agreements had brought relief to Gaza’s 1.8 million residents who have been living under a choking Israeli siege since 2007, the drawn-out waiting and the fear of a resumption of attacks was beginning to test people’s patience.
“No one here has any hope,” said Riyad Abul Sultan, a father-of-10 with thick curly hair, smoking as he sits on a flimsy mattress at a UN school in Gaza before the renewed Israeli attacks.
“Maybe they’ll finish the war for two hours, maybe Israel will start bombing again.”
“We want a ceasefire for always, not for three days or for three days,” agreed his wife, Wafa.
“The Israelis are enjoying some quiet. But me, my house is destroyed and I’m living with my husband and my kids in a UN school,” snapped Manal Abu Abed, 40.
“Let them either kill us or let us live with some dignity!”
Gaza’s health ministry said the death toll rose to 2,016 people with 10,196 wounded. Among the dead were 541 children, 250 women and 95 elderly men.
On the Israeli side, at least 64 occupation soldiers and two or three civilians have been killed.
(Reuters, AFP, Al-Akhbar)

RELATED



River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Hamas eager to form unity government

ED NOTE: They are cocking aggregates

Hamas eager to form unity government

Palestinians shouts slogans nd wave their national flag during a demonstration supporting a new attempt to reconcile the militant Islamist movement Hamas and the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) in Gaza City on May 14, 2014. (Photo: AFP-Mahmoud Hams)
Published Wednesday, May 14, 2014
Gaza: Palestinian rival factions, Fatah and Hamas, recently announced a landmark political pact. With two weeks left to form a new government, Azzam al-Ahmed, a Fatah central committee member in charge of the reconciliation file, is visiting Gaza for further deliberations. Though the pact lacked new incentives, Hamas was compelled to accept it due to prevailing circumstances. While Hamas continues to deny the existence of such circumstances, internal and regional political developments obviously confirm it.

Despite the recent agreement, security forces in Ramallah are still acting as the reconciliation never happened and continue to arrest and summon Hamas and Islamic Jihad members

Hamas seems eager to implement the reconciliation agreement with Fatah as soon as possible. Though Moussa Abu Marzouk, a member of Hamas’ political bureau, denied that the group’s financial troubles forced it to approve the agreement, statements by Gaza-based leader, Salah al-Bardawil, who called to speed up the government formation, suggested otherwise.
In this time of political and security instability in the Arab world, Hamas arrived to the negotiations table burdened by internal and external struggles, and exhausted due to political and financial hardships with former allies and geographic neighbors.
The other side, Fatah, was not doing much better either. President of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas chose reconciliation following a deadlock in the negotiations with the Israelis, and internal disputes within Fatah.
Today, Hamas seems keen to put the reconciliation agreement forward. The Gaza government has been taking many measures concerning freedoms and political arrests, while the West Bank’s authorities appear to be delaying or totally ignoring dealing with such issues.
A few months before the reconciliation, Hamas took the initiative to free a number of Fatah prisoners, however the latter did not respond with a similar step. Despite the recent agreement, security forces in Ramallah are still acting as the reconciliation never happened and continue to arrest and summon Hamas and Islamic Jihad members.
Also, Hamas took the initiative and lifted the seven years ban on West Bank newspapers. A few days later, Fatah allowed Gaza’s papers to be distributed in the West Bank.
According to observers, the main challenge concerns the establishment of a technocrat government led by Abbas and holding the presidential and legislative elections within six months. Meanwhile, other thorny issues such as restructuring the security forces and repairing the Palestinian Liberation Organization shall be postponed until after the elections.
Azzam al-Ahmed, a Fatah central committee member in charge of the reconciliation file, is expected to launch a new round of negotiations with Hamas in Gaza today.
“During my two day visit, I will meet with Hamas leaders to discuss the formation of the new government,” Ahmed said, expecting to announce the unity government within two weeks.
Other Palestinian factions that weren’t involved in political strife, as well as common citizens, fear that the reconciliation process will be impeded, mainly because only 14 days are left to form the new government. They are also particularly worried about American and Israeli intervention.
Fatah official, Yehya Rabah, stressed that the reconciliation is an integral agreement, “its first pillar is the formation of a technocrat government, then holding the elections to renew the Palestinian legitimacy and put forward a new Palestinian political system.”
“After the government formation, all other issues will be addressed. The president and ministers appointed after the elections will deal with the security forces and other unresolved issues based on the Cairo and Doha accords,” Rabah further explained.
Meanwhile, Mustafa al-Bargouthy, a member of the PLO delegation who is also involved in the reconciliation process, had a different position. “How can we go to elections without resolving these issues, mainly political arrests?” Barghouthi asked, revealing that there are 40 political prisoners in the West Bank and that the authorities are still summoning others.
In an interview with Al-Akhbar, Barghouthi called to settle the issue of security bodies before the elections. “It is important to gradually integrate security forces starting with the civil defense and the police, then the preventive security forces, national security and intelligence services,” Barghouthi said.

How can we go to elections without resolving these issues, mainly political arrests?

Despite careful optimism expressed by officials and observers, Hamas’ main challenge is about reaching a common political agenda with the Palestinian Authority, which deems the peace process as the best option to resolve the conflict with Israel and to end the occupation.
Israeli media quoted deputy foreign minister in the Hamas government, Gazi Ahmed, as saying that his group’s approval of a state within 1967 borders is temporary “but it is the main pillar for reformulating a Palestinian national agenda and it is an important common issue with Fatah.”
Meanwhile, Rabah didn’t see substantial differences between Hamas and Fatah. He quoted Hamas chief Khaled Meshaal, who said in 2011, that they would accept a Palestinian state within 1967 borders with Jerusalem as its capital. Rabah also quoted him as saying that Hamas “is ready to give a chance for negotiations if held under Abbas’ terms.”
Political analyst Hani Habib agreed. He said that the differences are not political, but rather concern the division of shares. “Hamas hailed Abbas’ recent speech in front of the central council when he said that the agenda of the unity government will be in the framework of his own negotiations program,” Habib elaborated.
“Hamas is getting ready to break the political embargo and is willing to approve any agreement that brings it back to the political arena,” Habib said in an interview with Al-Akhbar, adding “the reconciliation doesn’t involve influencing the armed opposition because it has been transformed into a truce in Gaza and a security coordination, which is still going on in the West Bank.”
Both parties insist that the future government doesn’t have any political agenda, even though it is to be headed by Abbas, the pioneer of the settlement project. They stress that the government’s role will be restricted to managing administrative issues in the West Bank and Gaza, while the political agenda will remain in the hands of the PLO.
Moustafa al-Barghouthi distinguished between three main missions that the future government is expected to accomplish: managing people’s everyday life, preparing for the coming elections, and dealing with the repercussions of the internal conflict that prevailed in the past few years.
According to Barghouthi, the issue of recognizing the state of Israel by the new government is not being discussed. “the Palestinian Authority’s institutions (PLO) is the only body required to recognize Israel, but no Palestinian faction or government has to recognize the occupation,” he said.
Meanwhile, observers warned that the unity government may be subjected to conditions set by the international quartet, which include recognizing Israel, rejecting violence and committing to previous agreements, a statement recently reiterated by Suzanne Rice, US national security adviser, in her meeting with Abbas in Ramallah.
In the meantime, Palestinians still remember the international boycott of the Palestinian government headed by Ismail Haniyeh in 2006 because it didn’t abide by those conditions. The government was unable to pay salaries, leading to a major crisis that eventually caused national divisions.
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Unity Agreement Evokes Israeli-U.S. Threats

—-
Unity Agreement Evokes Israeli-U.S. Threats

Cross-posted from Wallwritings
Schoolyard terror: Bullying has major health repercussions for both victims and protagonists.
(image by Photo: Julian Kingma)

We all remember the schoolyard bully, the girl or boy who set the rules and forced the rest of us to play by those rules, enforced by threats of the loss of backpacks and lunch money.
In the past few years I have found it impossible to look at the current Israeli government as anything other than that bully on the Middle East playground.The latest example arrived this week when the Jewish Telegraph Agency reported:

“The Fatah party, led by P.A. President Mahmoud Abbas, on Wednesday signed an agreement with Hamas that would lead to a unity government within five weeks.”

Actually, that news lead was in the fifth paragraph of the JTA story. Setting the tone for all international mainstream media coverage, JTA’s solemn report began:

“Israel formally suspended peace talks with the Palestinian Authority over the P.A.’s national unity accord signed with the Hamas authority in the Gaza Strip. 

“‘The Cabinet today unanimously decided that Israel will not negotiate with a Palestinian government backed by Hamas, a terrorist organization that calls for Israel’s destruction,’ said a statement by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu released Thursday afternoon.” 

Oh, the irony: Israel “formally suspended peace talks” they were determined to destroy from the outset.

This is Jon Stewart humor territory. He knows how to make fun of news reports in which the bully is the focus of the story, who stands in the playground corner and shouts, “Hamas is a terrorist organization that calls for Israel’s destruction.”

Pity the poor new kid in town who shouts in response, “so’s your old man; takes one to know one.” In an instant, that will be a kid without a backpack or lunch money.
The JTA has more to report from from the playground: “In addition, Israel will respond to unilateral Palestinian action with a series of measures.”

And what, pray tell, would those responses be?

JTA wants to be helpful, suggesting the obvious, “In the past, responses have included accelerated settlement building and suspending tax transfers to the Palestinian Authority.”
More Israeli settlement building and no Palestinian tax transfers? Nothing new there.

The Elders, an international group of veteran leaders, which includes former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, weighed in on the story in more measured tones:

“The Elders welcome the reconciliation agreement signed in Gaza on 23 April by Hamas and Fatah representatives. Since 2007, the Fatah-Hamas division has been the source of a rift between the West Bank and Gaza, making a viable peace between Israelis and Palestinians more challenging.”

Shorn of schoolyard language, the Elders described the agreement:

“The parties have agreed to form within five weeks an interim, technocratic Palestinian National Authority government and six months thereafter prepare for presidential and legislative elections in Palestine.”

The Elders issued a comment from Jimmy Carter, which in the context of schoolyard bullying banter, reads like a calming word of reassurance from a school grown-up:

“I commend the Palestinians for having secured this agreement, and I urge all parties to implement it swiftly, and in good faith. Any remaining differences must be resolved peacefully.   When the Palestinians elect a new leadership — provided the elections are conducted in accordance with international standards — I strongly urge the international community to respect the democratic choices of the Palestinian people.”

These words are not welcome in the ruling circles in Israel nor the U.S. government, as was made obvious when, on cue from their Zionist handlers, congressional leaders rushed onto the playground to retaliate with their “instant call.”

Al Monitor has the congressional story:

“Wednesday’s announcement of a reconciliation between the rival Palestinian factions Hamas and Fatah triggered an instant call for retaliation on Capitol Hill. 

“Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., the author of the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act, called for an immediate suspension of US aid to the Palestinian Authority (PA).

“The 2006 law, passed after Hamas won that year’s legislative elections, prohibits support for a ‘Hamas-controlled Palestinian Authority.’
“The Administration must halt aid to the Palestinian Authority and condition any future assistance as leverage to force Abu Mazen [Mahmoud Abbas] to abandon this reconciliation with Hamas and to implement real reforms within the PA.”

You want your school lunch money? You want your backpack?  Then play by our rules, kid, or go home.
In conclusion, take three minutes to consider the scene below from Hebron, where the Israeli Defense Forces control the civilian population, from the old to the young.
The Israeli soldiers in the video below, taken by the International Solidarity Movement, are not the bullies.
They are the minions who do the will of their Bully bosses and pay masters in Tel Aviv and Washington.
Weep for the soldiers, as you most certainly will weep for their 6-year-old victim, who has been detained on his way to school.

James Wall is currently a Contributing Editor of The Christian Century magazine, based in Chicago, Illinois. From 1972 through 1999, he was editor and publisher of the Christian Century magazine. Many sources have influenced Jim’s writings over (more…)

حماس في مأزق.. ولكن مأزق عباس اكبر

بدأ قطبا المعادلة السياسية الفلسطينية، اي حركتي “فتح” و”حماس″، يعترفان علنا، وبصوت اكثر ارتفاعا، بانهما يعيشان مأزقا وجوديا ويبحثان عن مخرج، ولكن النوايا ما زالت ضبابية، والآليات التي يمكن ان تقود الى هذا المخرج ما زالت غير متبلورة بشكل يبعث على التفاؤل.من المفترض ان يصل الى قطاع غزة في اليومين المقبلين وفد من حركة “فتح”، بقيادة السيد عزام الاحمد عضو اللجنة المركزية لبحث مسألة المصالحة، وتفعيل اتفاقاتها في القاهرة (عام 2011) والدوحة (عام 2112) التي اصطدمت دائما بالمماطلة وعدم الالتزام نتيجة مراهنات اقليمية خاطئة، (رهان حماس على فوز الاخوان برئاسة مصر) او دولية تمثل سرابا (رهان حركة فتح على مفاوضات حل الدولتين).حركة “حماس″ تعيش عزلة عربية ودولية وحصارا انسانيا واقتصاديا خانقا، بسبب الحملة الشرسة التي تشن حاليا بقيادة مصر والسعودية ضد حركة الاخوان المسلمين التي تنتمي اليها، وتمثل جناحها العسكري في قطاع غزة، وهناك احتمال كبير بان يزداد هذا الحصار شراسة في حال ما جرى تطبيق “وثيقة الرياض” التي تلزم دولة قطر بعدم تقديم اي عون مادي او سياسي او اعلامي للجماعة الاخوانية وبما قد يستهدف حركة “حماس″ ضمنا، الا اذا اعلنت انسحابها ايديولوجيا، واختارت ان تكون حركة مقاومة فقط، وهذا شبه مستحيل في رأينا في الوقت الراهن على الاقل.
اما حركة “فتح” فتواجه مأزقا اكثر خطورة، فالمفاوضات المباشرة مع اسرائيل برعاية امريكية تنتهي اواخر هذا الشهر ودون اي مؤشر على امكانية تحقيق اي نتائج، او التوصل الى اتفاق بتمديدها، والرئيس الفلسطيني محمود عباس هدد في حديث لصحيفة “المصري اليوم” المصرية بحل السلطة، واعتزال العمل السياسي، وتسليم العلم الى الجيل الجديد، وقال “ان حل الدولتين يبتعد، ولا مفر من حل الدولة الواحدة”.
***
التهديد بحل السلطة ليس جديدا، والتلويح بحل الدولة الواحدة ثنائية القومية ليس وليد الساعة، ولكن العبرة دائما في التنفيذ، فكلما هدد عباس بذلك اكثر من مرة يتراتجع دائما دون ان يرف له جفن، ولذلك لا يمكن القول بانه سينفذ هذه المرة، ولا نستطيع الرهان على صلابة موقفه، فقد خذلنا والشعب الفلسطيني باسره، من خلفنا اكثر من مرة منذ ان تولى رئاسة السلطة قبل تسع سنوات، وحصر نفسه في دائرة ضيقة من المصفقين له ومواقفه ومفاوضاته حتى وصل واوصلنا الى هذا النتيجة البائسة.المصالحة الوطنية الفلسطينية على ارضية المقاومة، والرهان على الشعب الفلسطيني وحده، والكف عن التذرع بضعف الموقف العربي، وانحسار الاهتمام الدولي المخرج الوحيد من المأزق، ولكن الشعب الفلسطيني او معظمه، بات يشعر بالغثيان من مجرد سماعه كلمة المصالحة هذه على لسان المسؤولين في الجانبين، لانه يعرف انها كلمة حق اريد بها باطل.المعضلة الفلسطينية الذاتية الكبرى تكمن في رفض الجانبين، الفتحاوي والحمساوي، لمبدأ التعايش مع بعضهما البعض اولا، واطياف الالوان السياسية الفلسطينية الاخرى، حيث اعمتها الحزبية الضيقة عن رؤية هذه الاطياف والاعتراف بوجودها معتدلة كانت او متطرفة، مؤطرة تنظيميا او مستقلة.فاذا نظرنا الى حركة “فتح” نجد ان مبدأ التعايش غير موجود حتى بين اجنحتها او قبائلها المتعددة المتصارعة، ويكفي ملاحظة الهوة الواسعة بين القيادات الهرمة والقاعدة الشابة، واذا تعايش، ونحن نتحدث هنا عن سلطتها المركزية، فمع شظايا فصائل انقرضت، ولم يعد لها اي وجود حقيقي على الساحة عمليا، والبقاء نظرة على تركيبة اللجنة التنفيذية لمنظمة التحرير الفلسطينية تعطينا اجابة مفحمة.

المؤسسات الفلسطينية والسفارات في الخارج باتت اقطاعا للحركة، فالغالبية الساحقة من “السفراء” و”الدبلوماسيين: هم من حركة “فتح”، وابناء المسؤولين السابقين فيها وكأنها ملكيات يتوارث الابناء على الحكم من الاباء، وخاصة السفارات في الدول الغربية، اما سفارات افريقيا والعالم الثالث فمتروكة لابناء فقراء الحركة.

حركة “حماس″ ليست افضل كثيرا للاسف، فالحزبية طاغية في مؤسساتها في قطاع غزة وخارجها، ودائرة السلطة فيها ضيقة للغاية، والوظائف والمناصب “محجوزة” فقط لاعضاء الحركة ومنتسبيها والمحسوبين عليها، وهذا امر لا يجوز من حركة اسلامية تؤمن ايمانا قاطعا بالمساواة والتعددية، وهذا الانتقاد للحركة وحكومتها في غزة يتردد حاليا على السنة الكثيرين، واذا لم يسمعه المسؤولون فيها، او ارادوا عدم سماعه، فاننا نوصله لهم كتابة، مع ادراكنا او يأسنا من انه قد لا يجد آذانا صاغية.

نحن مع المصالحة الوطنية وفي اسرع وقت، لان حالة الانسداد الفلسطينية بلغت اقصى درجاتها، ولا يجب ان تستمر، وباتت القضية الفلسطينية تعيش موتا سريريا، واهمالا على كل المستويات، والقيادتين الفلسطينيتين في فتح وحماس تتحملان المسؤولية الكبرى في هذا الاطار، وتوجيه اللوم الى العرب او الظرف العالمي لم يعد مجديا، علاوة على كونه لم يعد مقنعا.
***
كنا اول من طالب الرئيس عباس بحل السلطة الفلسطينية، مثلما طالبنا الرئيس الشهيد ياسر عرفات بالشيء نفسه من قبله، وتحميل سلطة الاحتلال مسؤولية ادارة المناطق المحتلة، فلا يجوز ان تتحول السلطة الى وكيل للاحتلال، وتوظف اجهزتها الامنية لحماية المستوطنين، وتتسول فتات المساعدات الدولية لدفع المرتبات، وتغطية نفقات الخدمات البلدية والصحية والتعليمية وغيرها.

اذا اراد الرئيس عباس حل السلطة فعلا، واعطاء مفاتيحها (اذا كان يملكها فعلا) الى دولة الاحتلال فانه سيكون بذلك قد رد الاعتبار لنفسه ولشعبه، وتاريخ حركة “فتح” النضالي المشرف، واقدم على اهم عمل مقاوم في حياته، وهو الذي لم يكن مطلقا مع المقاومة المسلحة، وفي هذه الحالة يجب ان يلقى الدعم من “حماس″ وكل انسان فلسطيني، اما اذا تراجع عن تهديداته هذه مثلما حدث في كل مرة، فليس له من الشعب الفلسطيني غير القذف بالبيض الفاسد.

راي اليوم – عبد الباري عطوان

Israeli-Palestinian negotiations: settlement or legitimize the occupation المفاوضات الاسرائيلية_ الفلسطينية : تسوية ام شرعنة الاحتلال

المفاوضات الاسرائيلية_ الفلسطينية : تسوية ام شرعنة الاحتلال / ولكن نلتقي 13 04 2014
انقلاب الصورة _ نضال حمادة / العالم 14 04 2014

ONLY THEN SHALOM MAY PREVAIL


By Gilad Atzmon
PM Netanyahu told President Obama earlier today that “Palestinians are failing to advance peace.”
Netanyahu was obviously correct!
1. Palestinians must stop oppressing Israelis and Jews.
2. If the Palestinians want peace, they better end the occupation immediately.
3. The Palestinians must stop building in the West Bank.
4. And if the Palestinians want peace for real, they better give up on the racist, supremacist, anti Jewish  idea that Israel becomes a true democracy and a state of its citizens.
Only then Shalom may prevail.

Perez:Happy with the Palestinian traitor’s seriousness about reaching peace

On Sunday, Abbas struck a conciliatory tone on two of the most divisive issues, saying he did not want to “flood Israel” with returning Palestinian refugees and that there was no need to “re-divide” Jerusalem.
Israeli President Shimon Peres on Monday hailed remarks by Abbas on the Palestinian refugee issue, which he said showed the Palestinian president’s “seriousness about reaching peace.” “I was happy to hear him,” Peres’s office quoted him as saying at the start of a meeting with Peruvian President Ollanta Humala.
———

Zionist Entity to Build Jewish Museum near Al-Aqsa Mosque

Local Editor

Palestine: Al-Aqsa MosqueZionist municipal authorities have approved Wednesday a plan to build a Jewish museum and a major settlement project in the Wadi Helweh neighborhood in Silwan, north of the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound in the city of Al-Quds (occupied East Jerusalem), according to a Palestinian legal center.

“They will build a settlement tourism center, dubbed Ma’ayan Hyogen, on a 1200-square-meter area in the eastern part of the neighborhood,” the Wadi Helweh Information Center said in a statement.

“The tourism center will include a Jewish museum as part of the Zionist national park around the walls of the Old City,” it added.

Ma’ayan Hyogen is a Zionist government project that will be implemented and supervised by the Eliad settlement organization, the center noted.

Palestinians accuse the Zionist entity of trying to “Judaize” the holy city, which they want as the capital of a future Palestinian state.

International law considers the West Bank and Al-Quds – captured by Zionist occupation in 1967 – to be occupied territories and views as illegal all Jewish settlement building on the land.

Palestinians insist that Zionist settlement building must stop before a comprehensive Zionist-Palestinian agreement can be reached.

Related Articles
 

The Do Nothing Peace Machine: Why Zionism Negates Peace

In 2010 I edited The Plight of the Palestinians: A Long History of Destruction, a collection of articles by world renowned writers who unveil the genocide taking place in Palestine by the occupying power in this “advanced” civilization of 2014, a slow water torture of constant humiliation, destruction and death as the world watches and nothing is done to bring justice to the people of Palestine. In that text, Dr. Jeff Halper details the quest for “peace” that has been crippled by the state of Israel, the intentional, calculated and indifferent response to the conditions facing the Palestinian people every day. He offers this reality:

Israel’s strategy until today is to bypass and encircle them, making deals with governments that isolate and, unsuccessfully so far, neutralize the Palestinians as players. This was most tellingly shown in the Madrid peace talks, when Israel only allowed Palestinian participation as part of the Jordanian delegation. But it includes the Oslo “peace process” as well. While Israel insisted on a letter from Arafat explicitly recognizing Israel as a “legitimate construct” in the Middle East, and later demanded a specific statement recognizing Israel as a Jewish state (both of which it got), no Israeli government ever recognized the collective rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination. Rabin was forthright as to the reason: If Israel recognizes the Palestinians’ right to self-determination, it means that a Palestinian state must by definition emerge – and Israel did not want to promise that.4 So except for vague pronouncements about not wanting to rule over another people and “our hand outstretched in peace,” Israel has never allowed the framework for genuine negotiations. The Palestinians must be taken into account, they may be asked to react to one or another of our proposals, but they are certainly not equal partners with claims to the country rivaling ours (“The Problem with Israel,” Jeff Halper, 2007).

Seven years ago, November 22, 2007, I wrote an article about George W. Bush’s plan to bring peace to the mid-east, a plan that used the city of Annapolis as its label with Condoleeza Rice acting as emissary from the American government meeting with Israeli and Palestinian officials. That article tracked the reality of the failed peace process from before the Mandate to 2007. It is now 2014 and there is no peace—but there is once again a “peace” initiative under way, an initiative every American President seems obliged to give lip service to knowing beforehand no peace will be affected. Why? Why go through a process all know will not result in peace? Why exercise an illusion? For whose benefit? To what end?
Resting on my bookshelf is a cunning little device, an object I’ve had in my office for decades, a curiosity piece that grabs the attention of children and adults, a strange unfamiliar gadget that appears to have a purpose since it has a handle, two gears fastened to small rounded cylinders that crisscross each other as one turns the handle, it’s called a do-nothing machine. Someone conceptualized it and someone created it and someone turns that handle to do nothing. Why? Why go through a process all know will not accomplish anything? Why spend time on an illusion? For whose benefit? To what end?
There it sits next to The Plight of the Palestinians and it seems to me Obama and Kerry must have one just like it since they initiated a process that they know will accomplish nothing, inspired no doubt by the do-nothing machine. Why? Perhaps it’s to pretend that they are not owned by the Israeli state or perhaps to defend themselves against the perception that they have abandoned any thought of a peaceful two state solution in Palestine or perhaps to extend time once again so Israel can steal more land and create more settlements allowing the slow motion genocide to continue. Perhaps an illusion is better than nothing at all.
But what of the Israeli government; why would they join this farce? That’s puzzling to me since I know from their own words and actions that they have no intention of recognizing the rights of Palestinians to a state much less create one. Indeed they have for 65 years denied even the idea of a Palestinian state, and as Halper has made clear they have torpedoed more than 19 times any attempt to create such a state. Indeed, there is no logic, no rational explanation of Israeli insistence that they want a two state solution, that peace is their desire, that the United States must be the interlocutor to bring the two parties together without pre-conditions and then raise conditions that could not be met and maintain this ruse for 65 years while absconding with all but 11% of Palestine (Israel has used a complex legal and bureaucratic mechanism to take control of more than fifty percent of the land in the West Bank. This land has been used mainly to establish settlements and create reserves of land for the future expansion of the settlements” [see Ifamericansknew.com] during that same period). There must be a deeper explanation that drives the Israeli governments to deceive the world year after year, something we have not yet addressed yet could be an explanation.
Perhaps once again it’s necessary to seek wisdom in fiction, to explore the unknown in narratives that dig deep into the subconscious mind, to burrow inside the human innards, to seek beyond the intestines and muscles and sinews and bones where the true being resides, where heartfelt yearnings reside, where the spring of emotions pours forth its latent reactions to self, where needles and surgical knives cannot go if understanding is to be sought, where self responds to urgings that drive the impulses to desperate acts that self itself does not comprehend, where the inner self is encrusted with the fears of generations pounded into the small child from inception, and identity is an accumulation of accepted hatred that seeps into the being in a collective response that determines all acts as self-survival against any outside of the tribal clan that has indelibly marked each member with a new source of pulsating blood, no longer a heart that throbs in rhythm to the hearts of all humankind, but emanates from a somatic fear that seeks only its own security, its own purpose, its own distinction as its hallmark at the expense of all who threaten its existence.
Franz Kafka, in “A Fragment,” tells a story told to him by his father who heard the story from a strange boatman. “A great wall is going to be built to protect the Emperor. As you may know, the infidel nations, with demons among them too, often gather in front of the imperial palace and shoot their black arrows at the Emperor.” A cryptic fragment certainly, about an emperor, an imperial palace, and a wall to protect the emperor and his people; unfortunately there are infidel nations who gather around the palace and shoot the emperor. Ultimately there is no protection, there is only on-going fear that any action to protect is doomed, and if, as Kafka also maintained “Guilt is never to be doubted,” fear exists inside the wall, always fear inside and out, of self and all others. Curiously, the Zionists have found reason for a wall thinking that it could serve as protection against their manifest enemies oblivious to Kafka’s admonition. In 2004 I wrote about Sharon’s wall of fear.

I would suggest that Sharon’s “Wall of Fear” walls in both the Palestinians and the Jews, that it gives offense to those on both sides, and it offends the moral sensibilities of any civilized person anywhere in the world. Sharon prepared for the building of the wall by laying its foundation in the guts of his people, fear of four million terrorists and fear that the future offered no hope for peace. Having bulldozed the Palestinian Authority out of relevance, he removed the possibility of negotiations, and, by that act, left the Jews without hope for peace, leaving him free to force the erection of the “Wall.”

Consider how the Wall walls in the Israeli people: it looms on the horizon a daily reminder that they have failed to achieve their primary goal, a peaceful assimilation of Jews from around the world into a haven, given to them by a remorseful Europe and America, where all could live in dignity and respect, without rancor or fear of racism, hatred and oppression; a daily reminder that they have walled in a poor and deprived people behind barriers that isolate them from the community of nations, from their fields and shops, from relatives and families, not unlike the Pogroms suffered by the Jews in Poland, Austria, Russia, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia; a daily and fearful reminder that someday, somewhere, someone will scale or circumnavigate the Wall as people have done from time immemorial – as the Huns did when they mocked the efforts of the Chinese to keep them at bay on their side of the Great Wall, or the Germans when they laughingly skirted the Maginot Line – to make absurd the efforts of one people to subdue the will of another; a daily reminder that their purported Democracy mocks itself as it seals off an entire population in full sight of the world community despite the vocal objection of that community, indeed, in complete and utter disbelief that the Jews of all peoples could undertake such a heinous act; a daily reminder that they have created a monstrous gray monument to the harm they have inflicted on another people, a monument that in time will have the same effect as the march around Jericho, “And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of their sword”; a daily reminder that visible or no each and every name of an incarcerated Palestinian is carved into that cement just as the names of the fallen Jews, victims of Nazi atrocities, are carved into the marble slabs at the Holocaust Memorial in Florida; and, finally, a daily reminder that this Wall is but the beginning of a Wall that must stretch north and south along the Jordanian border, further north along the Syrian line, west along Lebanon’s southern coast, and south along the Sinai, thus completing the incarceration of the Jews once again” (Cook, “Fence, Barrier, Wall: What’s in a Name?,” 2004).
Could we not ask here as we did of the “Do Nothing Machine” why? What drives the mind to destroy what it claims it must protect? Why build more walls except to keep those not of the tribe out and those within the tribe clean of contamination lest their inner self lose its distinction, its hallmark and find release from the fear that pulses inside threatening its existence by purging it of all that could or would destroy it because it is not of them. The Zionists in forcing the existence of the State of Israel on its people did so by capitalizing on this fear. The world desires to destroy the Jews. There is no protection for the Jews anywhere in the world except in Palestine where their historic rights to the land will prevail and where the Jews will protect themselves from all their enemies; they need only ensure that protection by linking their survival to those nations that have the power and the will to ensure security. This requires control of such umbilical linked “friends,” the United States, England, France, Germany, Canada, Australia who become their “protector” as Rabbi Loew’s Golem protected the Ghetto of Prague in the 16th century (see “A Nation of Golems,” Cook, 2009). It also requires that their protection is sealed by law, hence restrictions on “those who criticize the Zionist state” as H.R. 4009(113th Congress, 2nd Session, 2014) demonstrates, a “Bill to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to prohibit an institution that participates in a boycott of Israeli academic institutions or scholars from being eligible for certain funds under that Act” (proposed by Mr. Roskam and Mr. Lipinski as sent to the Committee on Education and the Workforce).
There exists a mindset here driven by forces beyond the reasoning mind. Kafka offers a depiction of this phenomenon in “Metamorphosis,” a tale of surrealistic quality where the protagonist wakes one morning to find himself transformed into a gigantic insect. Yet his mental faculties appeared to be stable, his concerns those of a man prevented from getting to his train on time, on how to deal with the problems of those outside his bedroom door who would be repulsed by his demeanor; fear of confrontations followed, fear of his domineering father rose swiftly, loss of his job, loss of the money he provided for his family, the potential upheaval of his life made by his visible transformation into a loathsome insect roused innate fears both of expulsion and death, his words were not understandable, the imminent awareness by all outside that he was different, driven by different realities, unfit to be welcomed into the community, ultimately to be driven out or destroyed. Such is the inner fear that pulses in Gregor’s being and comes to fruition in the night, a nightmare perhaps but presented as true.
Kafka once stated, “I consist of literature and am unable to be anything else.” The house he (Gregor Samsa aka Franz Kafka) lived in, the town that surrounds it, the wall that surrounds the town metaphorically mirror the inner identity of the narrator, walled within walls, wakening inside a room where now, in this night where he, as he did virtually every night, writes the real world within which he lives, a world of fiction where explanations evoke symbols and depictions that convey truth in images and unleash through dreams the latent fears that energize those forced to exist in isolation from all others for their identity is encased in a tribal mind dependent for its meaning and its understanding of self on those who control their reasoning and determine for them not only who they are but why they are and in that vice how they will act. Thus did Kafka’s narrow world of the Judengassen encompass his entire life, one of Europe’s oldest ghettos, what he called “my prison cell-my fortress.” But in the dream of Samsa transformed into a hideous insect, there comes a release from that control as he can scale now the walls of his room and the very ceiling above, a freedom made possible by his release from his “Penal Colony,” an escape from “The Judgment,” an avoidance of The Trial and find a new life, perhaps, in Amerika.
The Metamorphosis captures the condition of the tribal member caught within the society he must accommodate and assimilate into despite the impossibility of that probability, not because the society consciously refuses the assimilation but because the individual fears those not members of the tribe and because he fears they find him odious as the hideous insect depicts. Crushed inside these twin fears, there is no escape for the tribe but the destruction of the perceived enemies regardless of their passivity to the condition of the tribes’ fears.
But Kafka’s brilliant and penetrating analysis of the tribal mind and its insidious control of its members does not end with The Metamorphosis, it is extended and brutalized in “The Penal Colony.” This narrative captures the incapacity of the individual mind to control its own destiny. There is an Officer who is both controller and judge, guided by a simple rule, “guilt is never in doubt,” a rule that applies to those not of the tribe but to tribal members as well; all are guilty, all threaten the security and control of the Zionist entity, hence the epithet “self-hating Jew.” As the Officer describes the penal colony’s procedures for determining guilt, the condemned are totally submissive to the authorities, they do not expect due rights under the law, they understand that those in control have full authority to arrest, imprison and condemn to death whomever they will thus making legal arrest without due process, incarceration indefinitely and execution as well as extrajudicial assassination.
When questioned by an outside Traveler who comes to interview the Officer, the obvious questions seek obvious answers that the Officer finds incomprehensible, how can anyone question the authorities to inflict what they must to ensure the safety of the people? To justify his position the Officer releases the prisoner who was scheduled for execution and gets on the torture machine that he designed to prove that the judgment of the authorities is justified for all because it stipulates that the judgment must “Be Just.” Ironically, Kafka narrates that the machine goes berserk, and the designer of the hideous machine becomes its last victim as it disintegrates into an uncontrollable monster.
What Kafka envisioned is prophetic; when a state imposes its will on all its sister states, it becomes a monster, a metallic Golem perhaps that destroys at will but creates its own grave in the process, as Kafka’s Officer becomes pinned to the needles that were supposed to inscribe on the prisoner’s back the judgment of the authorities but instead leave his body suspended, bleeding and shredded, hanging above the grave into which he was to have been tossed. There it must remain isolated, condemned, and forever abhorred as an atrocity of insanity and arrogance.
Consider the actions of the Zionist State that from its inception under the control of the Jewish Agency, the eleven controllers in the Red House making their determinations for all Jews arriving in Palestine, as described by Dr. Ilan Pappe in The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, to use terror against the British Mandate Government in Palestine, to coerce the members of Parliament in London to overlook their crimes against the British people, to massacre the citizens of Deir Yassin and over 30 other massacres in areas belonging to the indigenous peoples of Palestine, to control by threat and intimidation the new immigrants arriving in Palestine from Europe as depicted by documents seized by the Mandate Police, and available now from the files of Sir Richard C. Catling in the Rhodes House Archives, and one has a clear picture of Zionist power over the Jewish people escaping Germany and elsewhere as they imposed their will on the helpless, both Jew and Palestinian, during the late 1930s and through 1948.
When complicity in crime is imposed on innocent people through coercion and fear, we have an understanding of the truth imbedded in Kafka’s narratives and that gives us pause to realize why this state can attack Iraq to destroy its nuclear plant construction and that of Syria and attempt to force the western world to attack Iran; it makes one realize that invading Lebanon without justified reason, its invasion and retention of the Golon Heights and its invasion and destruction of Gaza happens despite the international laws that should determine the behavior of member nations, and it should make obvious that this state will go to any lengths to control the United Nations by controlling the American Government by controlling its elected officials regardless of the desires of the citizens of the United States.
We need only reflect on the 2008 Christmas invasion of Gaza to understand the irrationality of attacking a defenseless people surrounded by the military power of the IDF with its use of extensive missile force from the air, the eastern borders under Israeli control and from the sea; add to that the needless use of white phosphorus that is both illegal and causes catastrophic pain for those unable to escape its searing pain. Why such brutality against a people incarcerated on all sides without military capability to defend their homes or even the ability to flee the terror of the Jewish invasion? Why inflict such barbaric force when those surrounded had no means to destroy the Zionist state? What irrational behavior erupts in a purported civilized state unless it is itself an irrational fear of self-destruction if perceived enemies are not eradicated as insurance against security (read survival instinct) for the people of Israel? Listen to the voices of those in positions of power and influence that justify the attempted destruction of the Gazan people:

The son of Sharon :’Flatten Gaza, send it back to Middle Ages, they need to die! 
Interior Minister Eli Yishai said Operation Pillar of Defense would continue and likely be expanded, The war in Gaza “must be so painful and difficult that the terror groups will not think twice but a hundred times before they fire missiles against Israel again…The goal of the operation is to send Gaza back to the Middle Ages, only then will Israel be calm for the next 40 years. ” The National Unity Party, Michael Ben-Ari, called for Israeli soldiers to kill Gazans without thought or mercy.“ There are no innocents in Gaza, don’t let any diplomats who want to look good in the world endanger your lives – mow them down! ” A prominent Israeli rabbi, Yaakov Yosef, the son of former chief rabbi, Ovadia Yosef, in a sermon at the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron blessed IDF soldiers while urging them “to learn from the Syrians how to slaughter the enemy. 

How explain these cries of inhumane hate against a place and its people that have never attacked the Zionist state except out of absolute desperation, hopelessness, and despair, the last resort of those who have the right to attack unlawful occupiers of their land and homes? This is the voice of insanity that cannot exist in a sane world where concern, compassion and love should guide our endeavors and foster the drive toward true peace, not a “peace” (shalom) that justifies its rights by demanding absolute control of all that threatens its security as it denies the very thing it claims as its right. This world in this time is not tribal anymore; it is guided by international laws that all peoples of the earth have designed and mutually accept. That should be true of the Israeli State since it has signed acceptance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Geneva Accords that have defined genocide, a definition resulting from the catastrophic incarceration and deaths inflicted on the Jews in Nazi Germany. Yet today this definition is disgraced and defied by the Zionist State as it commits genocide in Palestine as the voices in the book that opened this article testifies, and the world watches and does nothing.
Perhaps now we might understand that fiction can enlighten us more than the silent voices of the intimidated and the damned; Kafka has looked inside the human breast and unveiled the true force that gives life to the horrors inflicted on the people of Palestine and the peoples of Lebanon and Syria and Jordan and Gaza as the Zionist power used the teachings of Judaism to control those seeking security and comfort in what could have been a homeland for the Jewish people but has become instead a lawless and ruthless occupation power and destroyer of the true owners of the land from the time they were offered solace to live with the people of Palestine.
And this brings us to the “Do Nothing Machine” that the Zionists use to deceive the people of the world that it desires a peaceful solution to the crisis by a mutually negotiated two state determination when in reality they desire only the eradication of the Arabs in Israel and all other Arabs that inhabit their land in Judea and Samaria; this has been their goal since they first arrived in Palestine and that “peace Machine” they use will ensure that neither peace nor a Palestinian state will ever exist. Let’s end with the unfortunate prophetic words of Israel’s most ardent exponent and the most vocal of its true face, a terrorist of extraordinary visibility and one accepted by the Israeli people as their Prime Minister, Menachem Begin, head of one of the Jewish terrorist groups, who described Deir Yassin as “splendid,” and stated: “As in Deir Yassin, so everywhere, we will attack and smite the enemy. God, God, Thou has chosen us for conquest.”
There remains only this horrifying possibility: to fill their new state, the Jewish State, the Zionists have utilized the services of “Settlers,” people who think like their ancestors did 3500 years ago, tribally, as those who respond to day to day living instinctively, in fear, always with the tiger lurking in the rocks, always with their enemy tribes anxious to destroy them, always with the mindset that they alone must preempt another lest they become the victim, and always with the rationale that all are potential destroyers and that gives them the right to kill at will by whatever means necessary; yet in bringing this ancient mindset into their midst, the Zionists have created a fearsome and loathsome nightmare not unlike Kafka’s “Burrow” where “unseen enemies crawl through the dark tunnels” and the narrator, Kafka’s only first person tale of horror, feels “threatened not only by outside enemies, but enemies within, in the earth’s entrails,” and they are legendary, and “I believe in them.”
William A. Cook is a Professor of English at the University of La Verne in southern California. He edited The Plight of the Palestinians: A Long History of Destruction (2010). He can be reached at:wcook@laverne.eduRead other articles by William A., or visit William A.’s website.

ISRAELI JEWS PRAY FOR PEACE FAILURE

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2014 AT 2:35PM

 GILAD ATZMON

UNITED AGAINST KERRY…

Comment by Gilad Atzmon: If you really want to understand the current Israeli Rabbis attack on Secretary of State John Kerry and the special occasion in which it takes place, please review my article on the meaning of Purim and the Book of Esther – Counterpunch’s 2007 Purim Special –  From Esther to AIPAC. 

As the Rabbis confirm below, the Book of Esther is there to teach the Jew how to dominate Goyim’s politics. Back in 2007 I was denounced for exposing the true meaning of Purim and The Book Of Esther. However, the Rabbis Letter’s  closing paragraph confirms that my analysis was spot on.  We are dealing here with a totalitarian identity discourse that is driven by crude Judeo-centric supremacy.

Israeli Arutz 7 reports:

Rabbis Threaten Kerry with ‘Divine Wrath’

“A group called Rabbis from the Committee to Save the Land and People of Israel sent a letter to US Secretary of State John Kerry this Sunday, warning him to end his “antagonism” towards Israel.
The rabbis sharply criticized Kerry for his plans to establish an Arab capital in Jerusalem for Palestinian Authority (PA) Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, and to have Israel withdraw to the 1949 Armistice lines. On Saturday, Kerry threatened Israel with an international boycott if peace talks fail, in addition to previous threats of a “Third Intifada” last year.

Abbas seeks NATO forces, vows to stop third uprising


Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas is seen during a meeting with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin outside Moscow, on January 23, 2014. (Photo: AFP – Yuri Kochetkov)
Published Monday, February 3, 2014

Palestinian Authority (PA) president Mahmoud Abbas said on Sunday that he has proposed to US Secretary of State John Kerry for a US-led NATO force to patrol a future Palestinian state indefinitely, with troops positioned throughout the occupied territories, including Jerusalem.

In an interview with The New York Times , Abbas said that his plan would allow Israeli soldiers to remain in the West Bank for up to five years and that illegal Israeli settlements should be phased out of the new Palestinian state along a similar timetable.
Palestine would be completely demilitarized, and therefore only have a police force, he added.
The NATO mission, according to Abbas, would be responsible for preventing the weapons smuggling and any resistance against Israeli forces.
“For a long time, and wherever they want, not only on the eastern borders, but also on the western borders, everywhere,” Abbas. “The third party can stay. They can stay to reassure the Israelis, and to protect us.
“We will be demilitarized,” he had said in the interview. “Do you think we have any illusion that we can have any security if the Israelis do not feel they have security?”
Abbas’s proposal comes six months into a deflating negotiations brokered by the United States, as Israel continues to enlarge illegal colonial settlements, the construction of the apartheid wall within Palestinian territories, and conducts deadly raids and strikes on Gaza and the West Bank which have killed and injured tens of civilians in the past year.
In regards to recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, Abbas said, “This is out of the question,” pointing out that Jordan and Egypt were not asked to do so when they signed peace treaties with Israel.
In addition, the PA president said that he had been resisting pressure from the Palestinian street to join the United Nations agencies and leadership and that his staff had presented 63 applications ready for his signature, which he has ignored so far.
“No, I don’t want, I want to take advantage of every minute now, maybe we can achieve something,” he said to The New York Times. “I don’t like to go to the courts. I don’t like courts. I want to solve my problems directly between the parties.”
He also stressed that he would not allow a third uprising to erupt.
“In my life, and if I have any more life in the future. I will never return to the armed struggle,” he said.
However Abbas’ comments have been harshly criticized by many within the Palestinian community.
“The declarations by Mahmoud Abbas to the New York Times are simply expressing his opinions and policies,” Suhail al-Natour, a Palestinian writer and an editor for a Beirut-based Palestinian journal al-Hurriyah, told Al-Akhbar.
“All the Palestinian factions in the executive committee of the Palestinian Liberation Organization refused to go to negotiate,” Natour added.
“All the results and positions that are not with the Palestinians’ inalienable rights will be unacceptable for anyone. Israeli or foreign military presence means no state and no sovereignty.”
The writer also noted that also within Abbas’ own political organization, Fatah, there were growing “objections [to] these continued concessions.”
“This is not about creating peace. And Palestinians will not allow the continued existence of the Israel occupational and colonial yoke over them,” he added.
In a similar vein, Marwan Abdel Aal, an official of the Lebanese branch of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), echoed these sentiments.
“[Abbas’] statements are basically allowing Israel to continue it’s control and power. It seems they are going to have a majority of their illegal colonial enclaves on most of the land,” he said to Al-Akhbar
“In regards to security, ironically Israel refuses to have American forces and only wants the military presence to be Israeli. Anyways, whatever foreign forces are there it would ensure that Palestine wouldn’t be a state, it would be a caricature of a state,” he added.
The PFLP official also stressed that Abbas’ policies seeks to “further the occupation and does not have support of Palestinians in the West Bank, in Gaza, in the 1948 land, and elsewhere.”
“For Israel, this is a soft victory and a typical concession by Abbas,” he concluded.
The future of the illegal settlements is among one of many core issue in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Palestinians fear the Israeli colonial enclaves, which are considered strictly illegal by international law, will deny them terrain they see as crucial to a viable country.
More than 500,000 illegal Israeli settlers live among 2.4 million Palestinians in the occupied territories of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Furthermore, Israel, with the help of Egypt, has further tightened an illegal siege on the Gaza Strip, which has been in place since 2007. The blockade, which is considered by many international organizations to be a form of collective punishment, has had catastrophic consequences for the civilian population.

The demise of the two-state solution .


The Israelis do not want the Palestinians to have an independent state, even if this state has nothing more than the facade of self-governance. Israel does not even want the Palestinians to have an independent entity, so how would they ever allow them to have a state, about which the Israelis are extremely sensitive?

Even if the Palestinians agree to implement all of Israel’s preconditions for the peace talks, the Israeli government will surely invent new and even more ridiculous terms to delay yet further the establishment of a viable state of Palestine. This is not surprising given that the then Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin said, before his assassination by a Jewish extremist, that he wished that he could wake up one day to find that the sea has swallowed Gaza. His successor Benjamin Netanyahu has since added, “If only the Palestinians would disappear from the face of the earth.” That is the prevailing attitude which frames Israel’s approach to the negotiations.

The Israelis do not want the Palestinians to have an independent state, even if this state has nothing more than the facade of self-governance. Israel does not even want the Palestinians to have an independent entity, so how would they ever allow them to have a state, about which the Israelis are extremely sensitive? That is why they continue to create difficult preconditions in an attempt to prolong the “peace process” and delay the establishment of a Palestinian state which, they believe, would be detrimental to Israel’s survival and lead to its eventual demise, even if it is demilitarised and lacks complete sovereignty.

For this reason, Israel has deemed Jerusalem to be the “undivided and eternal capital of Israel” and it also rejects completely the Palestinian refugees’ right of return. When the proposal was made by the then President Bill Clinton to allow a limited return of refugees through family reunification, which has been adopted recently by US Secretary of State John Kerry, it was rejected by the Israelis. Furthermore, Israel has proposed a land swap of an area known as the Triangle, home to the majority of Palestinians living in Israel, for large settlement blocs in the West Bank. Israel is well aware that most of its Palestinian citizens would reject this proposal and that the Palestinian Authority would not accept it under any circumstances because it would mean that Palestinians agree to transfer fellow Palestinians from their homes.

Israel has a list of the settlement blocs (all illegal under international law) which it intends to annex under any agreement with the Palestinians. Netanyahu has told Kerry of this. The four blocs in question house a total of 400,000 settlers.

The latest condition imposed by Israel is to keep troops in the Jordan Valley, which is the border between the West Bank and the Hashemite Kingdom. Netanyahu’s government has rejected Secretary Kerry’s proposal that American or international troops could be based in this area to allay security fears; this suggests that Israel will be able to enter Palestinian territory whenever it sees fit. This is not fiction, nor is it a “what if” scenario. We saw how Ariel Sharon justified his invasion of the Palestinian Territories in 2002; Israel will not need any excuse to reoccupy any Palestinian territory which may become part of the new state. In other words, if Israel leaves Palestine through the front door, it will find a way back in through the window.

Land issues aside, Israel also insists on Palestinian recognition of it as “the Jewish state”. Acceptance of the false Israeli narrative about this would threaten, by necessity, the security of the Palestinians in Israel; hence, the scenario of Palestinians having to approve the transfer of other Palestinians from their land. Palestinians must also accept that Palestine is the Jews’ historic homeland and that Palestine “was a land without a people for a people without a land”, with no Arab or Islamic history.

Although they were meant to be dealt with in the so-called “final status talks” dictated by the Oslo Accords, the Israelis are bent on killing-off the negotiations be refusing to compromise on two critical issues: the status of Jerusalem and the refugees’ legal right of return to their land. According to Israeli law, any current or future head of state or government official is prohibited from discussing or negotiating these two issues without the approval of the Knesset (parliament). Due to the changing nature of Israeli politics, as it heads further towards political extremism, this more or less means that, as things stand, these issues will never be on the table for discussion.

Israel annexed Jerusalem in 1967, illegally, and since this date it has refused to broach this subject in any talks; it remains off-limits, regardless of what was agreed in Oslo. If the Knesset refuses to move on this issue, it is quite possible that it will become impossible to discuss and Israel’s adamant refusal to talk about the very nature of a two-state solution will lead to the demise of the peace process. Furthermore, Israel’s insistence on preserving the “Jewishness of the state” makes it impossible for Israel to be a truly democratic state. It could be Jewish or it could be democratic; it could not be both.

The demise of the two-state solution has not happened by chance; it was the result of many of the factors mentioned above. These make it impossible to establish a contiguous and integrated Palestinian state because settlement expansion continues to confiscate Palestinian land under the pretext of Israeli security, the government’s main excuse for not allowing the establishment of an independent and viable Palestine. Bizarrely, despite this, Palestinians and Arabs are still calling for a two-state solution, ignoring the obvious impossibility of this being realised. The two-state solution has become nothing more than an illusion. The Palestinians need to move on and not be bound by the intractable current situation.

This is a translation of the Arabic text published by Al Quds newspaper on 29 January, 2014

Palestinians Against Fake Peace Talks

Please Sign the Palestinian Declaration Here

Palestinians Against Fake Peace Talks

by Stephen Lendman

My PhotoPalestinians want genuine peace. They want their fundamental rights respected. They want long denied liberation. Activists reject ongoing talks. More on this below.
Israel wants unchallenged control. It wants unconditional surrender.
It wants militarized occupation harshness continued. It wants Palestinians denied all rights.
Washington provides full support. Kerry is no honest peace broker. Nor Netanyahu. Nor longtime Israeli collaborators.
They represent Palestine illegitimately. They have no credibility whatever. They sold out before. They did so for special benefits they derived. Another surrender is likely.
The charade continues. Peace in our time remains elusive. It’s a convenient illusion. Palestinians have no legitimate partner. They never did. For sure not now.
On January 26, Haaretz headlined “Kerry to present Israeli-Palestinian framework deal ‘within weeks.’ ”
He and Netanyahu met in Davos. They attended the 2014 World Economic Forum. They addressed participants.
Previous articles discussed their deplorable comments. One lie followed another throughout them.
Privately they discussed Kerry’s framework agreement. It’s duplicitous. It’s entirely one-sided. It’s a work in progress.
No legitimate Palestinian leader would accept it. Abbas is a longtime traitor. It remains to be seen what he’ll do. Odds favor Oslo 2.0.
Nothing will be resolved. Occupation harshness will continue. So will settlement expansions.
Netanyahu was clear and unequivocal saying: “I do not intend to evacuate any settlements or uproot a single Israeli.”
previous article discussed Israel’s likely Jordan Valley annexation. It comprises 30% of the West Bank. It’s 90% Judaized.
In 1967, Jordan Valley Palestinian residents numbered around 320,000. Less than 60,000 remain.
Israel controls over 60% of the West Bank. It demands Jerusalem as its exclusive capital. Netanyahu and like-minded hardliners want all valued Judea and Samaria areas annexed.
Kerry endorses worthless land swaps in return. He wants them legitimizing the illegitimate. His plan assures leaving Palestinians worse off than ever.
He’ll call it success. So will Netanyahu. Expect Abbas to accept what demands rejection. How Palestinians react remains to be seen.
On Friday, deputy State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf lied saying Kerry’s plan isn’t a US one. “The framework that we are in discussions with is based on our discussions with both sides and the parties leading up to this point.”
It’s provisions “will guide the discussion on all of the issues going forward.”
It’s a US/Israeli one. Palestinians negotiators are being pressured to accept it.
Netanyahu lied saying Kerry only offered ideas so far. What Israel wants it’s getting. Major issues are agreed on.
Fine tuning continues. Expect months more of the same. Maybe longer. Rights mattering most to Palestinians are denied.
The include ending occupation, genuine peace, Palestinian independence, control of their borders, offshore waters and air space, the right of return, illegal settlements, resource rights, and East Jerusalem as their exclusive capital.
Kerry’s plan is more frame-up than framework. He said Palestinians will have an independent state.
False! They’ll have isolated bantustans on worthless scrub land.
Israel will be left more secure, he said. It’s a ruse to continue occupation harshness. It legitimizes annexation of over 60% of the West Bank.
Continued land theft takes more. When Israel’s Apartheid Wall is completed, additional territory will be declared part of Israel.
Its only security problem is one it creates. No legitimate one exists. Nor regional threats.
An eventual full, phased, final Israeli army withdrawal is coming, said Kerry. False! Palestine will stay occupied. Israel will control its borders, coastal waters, air space and resources.
Kerry addressed diaspora Palestinians. He promised a just agreed on solution. False again! Since 1948, their legitimate right of return was denied. It remains so.
Nothing in Kerry’s plan suggests equitable conflict resolution. He claims its terms end it and all claims. It mutually recognizes Palestine for Palestinians and Israel for Jews, he said.
It bears repeating. It’s entirely one-sided. It gives Israel everything it wants. It denies fundamental Palestinian rights.
It leaves them worse off than ever. It makes ending conflict impossible. It assures continued Palestinian suffering.
Its negotiators are coming to Washington. They’ll arrive this week. They’ll meet with Kerry. Rhetorically they reject his terms. They fundamentally accepted them much earlier.
According to Haaretz:
“Both sides have come out with aggressive statements to make the other side derails the talks and bears responsibility for their failure.”
Public comments belie what’s agreed on privately. Fine-tuning continues. Abbas wants Palestinians fooled. Oslo 2.0 is disastrous. It’s unconditional surrender. Expect him to call it success.
On January 26, Palestinians demonstrated across the West Bank. They held marches. They challenged ongoing peace talks. They denounced them as fake.
They called them farcical. They make conflict resolution impossible. Hundreds rallied in Hebron and Nablus. Talks intend to “liquidate the question of Palestine and prolong the Israeli occupation,” they said.
Palestinian People’s Party central committee member Fahmi Shahin called on PA officials to “immediately stop peace negotiations and reject US sponsorship to these talks.”
America’s proposal “to accept the Israeli occupation as a fact must be rejected,” he stressed.
He urged PA officials to oppose recognizing Israel as a Jewish state. He demands they support Palestinians rights.
He wants Israel’s occupation ended. Diaspora Palestinians right of return must be respected. Conflict resolution depends on granting Palestinians all rights sovereign independent states enjoy.
In Nablus, hundreds rallied at the Martyrs roundabout. Kerry’s plan prevents conflict resolution. It makes current conditions worse.
Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine political bureau member Ramzi Rabah said Kerry’s drawn out talks give Israel more time to steal land, dispossess Palestinians and expand settlements.
He wants a new status quo worse then the current one. He’s destroying any possibility of Palestinian liberation with East Jerusalem its exclusive capital.
He demanded PA officials categorically reject his ideas. He called for ending sham talks. He called them “a vicious circle of futile negotiations.”
Israel alone benefits. Palestinian rights are being compromised. The longer talks are drawn out, the closer they are to being beyond fixing.
Fatah Central Committee member Tawfiq Tirawi called ongoing talks a slippery slope to “zero results.”
He believes armed resistance is the only possible way to change things. “We must go back to initiating and become part of a circle of action,” he said.
“If we become part of this circle, many things will change. I’m talking about all kinds of resistance, but within a unified Palestinian framework that is agreed to by all sides of Fatah and factions outside it.”
“As part of our plan, we will choose the correct form of resistance and act accordingly.”
“The big explosion in Palestine is coming,” he believes. “All of Israel’s actions have placed the Palestinian public under immense pressure. They have no choice but to explode in the face of the occupation.”
“We know what the Israelis and Americans are suggesting” in private talks. “So far, the negotiations are taking place only with the Americans, not the Israelis, and the Americans are liars.”
“There is no framework agreement. It’s a lie. Even if Kerry (presents) an agreement, Palestinians will reject it.”
“There will be a vote, either inside Fatah or among the Palestinian leadership, and the American proposals will be rejected.”
“Anyone who thinks there will be a (lsraeli/US recognized legitimate) state is sorely mistaken.”
Under current conditions, he added, Palestinian liberation is impossible. Don’t expect it in the next two decades.
US, other Western, and complicit Arab states pressured Palestinians to negotiate against their will, he added.
PLO secretary general Yasser Abed Rabbo said much the same thing. He called current talks futile. They fall short of even agreeing on a framework deal.
Palestinians can’t accept his ideas. They’re vague. They’re entirely one-sided.
“Israel revealed its cards during the talks, and all the illusions that existed in the beginning have since drowned at sea,” he added.
Talks began last July. Zero progress was made, he said. Everything Palestinians most want they’re denied. Israeli demands alone are met.
It’s pointless to continue what can’t work, he said. It’s futile without ending occupation harshness. It’s impossible while Israel employs brutal force.
On January 25, Israeli forces killed a Palestinian civilian. They injured five others. They used live fire in response to stone throwing.
In the week ending January 22, Israeli warplanes attacked Gaza eight times. Two deaths were reported. So were at least four injuries.
Israeli forces commit repeated high crimes against humanity. They murder Palestinians in cold blood. They kill young children.
From January 16 – 22, they conducted 73 incursions into Palestinian communities. Doing so reflects state terror.
At least 44 Palestinian civilians were arrested. They included 10 children and three women. They committed no crimes.
Israeli naval forces opened fire on Palestinian fishermen. No casualties were reported. Several arrests were made.
Israeli violates international humanitarian law with impunity. It does so repeatedly. It does it multiple times daily.
So-called peace talks ignore these abuses. They’re crimes against humanity. Palestinian negotiators should prioritize ending them.
They’re not discussed. Nor settler violence. Nor the impossibility of peace with Netanyahu’s fascist government.
In November 2013, the General Assembly declared 2014 as the “Year of Solidarity with Palestinians.” Why this year? Why not every year? Why not action, not words accomplishing nothing?
Israel’s UN ambassador Ron Prosor responded as expected. He’s a right wing extremist. He fronts for Israeli lawlessness. His comments are way over-the-top. He turns truth on its head. He does it repeatedly.
He accused General Assembly members of “oiling the Palestinian propaganda machine.”
“Rather that putting an end to Palestinian incitement, the UN is now the primary platform for Palestinian propaganda,” he claimed.
“The organization allocates endless resources to advancing lies and half-truths of the Palestinian leadership instead of dealing with pressing issues facing the international community and the Middle East region.”
He claimed encouraging solidarity with Palestinians fosters a climate of anti-Israeli sentiment.
He blamed Palestinians for Israeli crimes. Netanyahu does it repeatedly. Peace is elusive as ever. Palestinian liberation remains a distant dream. It’s impossible under current conditions.
%d bloggers like this: