Finally the USA Supports the One State Solution

 

One State .jpg

By Gilad Atzmon

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced yesterday that the US is softening its position on Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Secretary Pompeo repudiated the 1978 State Department legal opinion that stated that Jewish settlements in the occupied territories are “inconsistent with international law.”

 It is hard to determine whether the move was intended to rescue Benjamin Netanyahu’s political career or to buy the Jewish Lobby’s support for President Trump at a critical time. It is reasonable to assume that the policy was put forth to advance both aims.

 Pompeo’s declaration was, predictably, welcomed by PM Netanyahu and denounced by Palestinian officials and anyone else who still advances the delusional Two State Solution. Like Secretary Pompeo, I am far from an expert on international law, but it seems the notion of international law is vague or elastic enough to allow the secretary to (mis) interpret it in a radical manner. Yet, unlike most Palestinian solidarity campaigners, I see Trump, his administration and the recent move as a positive development.

 However inadvertently, Trump has finally committed the USA to the One State Solution. It is hard to deny that the area between the ‘River and the Sea’  is a single piece of land. It shares one electric grid, one pre-dial code (+972) and one sewage system. Ay present, the land is ruled over by a racist, tribal and discriminatory ideology through an apparatus that calls itself  ‘The Jewish State;’ and declares itself home for every Jew around the world; yet, is abusive, lethal and some would say genocidal toward the indigenous people of the land.

Yesterday’s move may buy Netanyahu some time and it may save Trump from being evicted from his current residence, but what it did most clearly was to redeliver a message to the Palestinians: In the battle for your liberation you are alone. America is not a negotiator, it has never been one. The USA has a side in the conflict and it is not your side.

In categorical terms Pompeo’s declaration repeats Trump’s earlier decision to move the American Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. On December 6, 2017, President Trump announced that the United States recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and ordered the relocation of the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. No doubt, the move bought Trump support from the Jewish Lobby in America, and political gain for Netanyahu in the Jewish State, it was also an unambiguous message to the Palestinians: there is no prospect of a  harmonious and peaceful solution for your plight.

 For the Palestinians, the move also exposed the misleading and dangerous nature of their ‘solidarity’ movement. Jewish ‘anti’ Zionist institutions have undertaken a relentless effort to suppress the Palestinian’s Right of Return and replace it with watery alternatives such as ‘End of occupation’ or  ‘the Right to BDS.’ Trump’s move forced the Palestinians to accept that they were alone in their battle and finally  accept that The Right of Return is the core and the essence of their plight. Less than four months after Trump’s Jerusalem decision, on 30 March 2018,  thousands of Gazans gathered on the Israeli border to demand a return to their land.

That clumsy decision by Trump made to serve some immediate political purpose to do with Jewish support has matured into a vast awakening for the Palestinians.  Week after week, for almost three years, Gazans have arrived at the Gaza border in the thousands to bravely confront the IDF’s merciless snipers, tanks and air force.  The Hamas owes a big thank you to Trump who has managed to fuel and unite the Palestinians with a renewed spirit of fearless resistance. Israeli military analysts and commanders admit that the situation at the Gaza border is pretty much out of control. They agree that Israel’s power of deterrence is literally a matter of  nostalgia. Accordingly, Palestinian resistance organizations do not hesitate to retaliate against  Israel. Last week Israel was hit by the rain of 400 rockets fired over the course of only two days in response to  Israel’s assassination of a Palestinian Islamic Jihad militant.

 Pompeo’s declaration provides an explicit and necessary message to the Palestinians in general and in the West Bank in particular. The conflict is not progressing toward a peaceful resolution. Those amongst the Palestinians who advocated the ‘Two States Solution’ will have to hide now.  Pompeo has affirmed that there is one Holy Land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. From now on the battle over this disputed land is whether it will be subject to the racist discriminatory ideology implied by the notion of “The Jewish State” and its ‘National Bill,’ or if it will transform itself into a ‘State of its Citizens’ as is inherit in the notion of One Palestine.

Axis of Resistance Frustrated Three Phases of the Project for a ‘New Middle East’

Trump Kushner

Al-Manar Website Editor

August 13, 2019

The first phase of the so-called New Middle East was just after ‘the Summit of Peacemakers’ in 1996, when former Israeli premier Shimon Peres applied his New Middle East vision by declaring the “Operation Grapes of Wrath” on Lebanon for 16 days in April 1996.

During the 2006 Lebanon war, former US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced the beginning of the New Middle East. After almost one decade of political attempts to resolve the Arab- Israeli conflict, the US decided to use a brute force to eliminate what it saw an impediment to the ‘peaceful’ resolution of the conflict by pushing ‘Israel’ to attack Lebanon, destroying its infrastructures.

The first phase of the above mentioned project has fallen after the US-Israeli failure to impose their conditions for the 2006 ceasefire agreement on Lebanon. It was Lebanon which emerged victorious after a 33-day war, as declared by Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah. It was the resistance of Hezbollah that turned the table on the New Middle East project, said the Winograd Commission report, after the investigation of the causes of failure in the 2006 war.

In 2011, the second phase of the scheme has started, Syria was the battlefield. However, the US-backed terrorists failed to overthrow the Syrian government, and the second phase was over. Then, the old Shimon Peres vision was revitalized and there was the third phase of the so-called New Middle East project.

The US administration proposed an economic approach, allegedly to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict, in a bid to gain in politics what it couldn’t achieve in the war.

US President Donald Trump sent Jared Kushner, his son-in-law, who is presented as the godfather of the ‘Deal of Century’, to the region. Kushner decided to replace the well-known slogan of “land for peace” principle with his own one: “peace to prosperity”.  He believes that such a slogan could reduce the conflict to an economic problem that can be resolved by improving the living standards of the Palestinians.

The absence of a draft solution for major political issues, particularly Palestinian statehood, the status of Al-Quds (Jerusalem), and the Palestinians’ right to return to their land, turns Kushner proposal to be a mere attempt to bribe the Palestinians into giving up self-determination.

The funding issue is also a significant factor of disruption for that deal, especially that EU, the traditional donor, did not participated in the workshop in Bahrain, neither Russia, nor China.

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia, which has shown an extreme enthusiasm for the deal, has been already facing an economic problem and the war in Yemen, which has cost it billions of dollars. The US, where the proposal was launched, certainly would not spend that much money, particularly under Trump administration, who prides himself on extracting monetary concessions from other countries, including Saudi Arabia by extortion, or by the arm sales.

The development and prosperity that Kushner is heralding can only happen if the Israeli occupation is ended.

In contrast, the Trump administration has already made major steps in strengthening the pillars of the occupation, including recognizing Israeli annexation of Al-Quds and the Golan Heights.

With all these major flaws, it was hardly surprising that the Bahrain Workshop failed to jump-start the deal process.

The Axis of Resistance is accomplishing important steps in the warfare in Syria, Yemen and Iraq, preventing Trump and his allies to step forward for the announcement of the “Deal of Century” that could eradicate the Palestinian cause in favor of the Israeli occupation. Hence, the third phase of the New Middle east has also failed.

A flashback to Madrid conference in 1990: the peace process had been built on the principle of “land for peace”, where ‘Israel’ withdrew from occupied Arab land in 1967 in exchange for peace and normalization of ties with the Palestinians and Arabs.

The 1993 Oslo Accord provided a political vision for Shimon Peres’s plan – a two-state solution – which was followed by the 1994 Paris Protocol that established rules regulating economic relations between the Palestinians and Israelis.

This vision was also the core of the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative proposed by Saudi Arabia in Beirut Arab League summit.

Needless to say, all past proposals have failed for one simple reason: They were all in favor of the Israeli occupation of Palestine.

Source: Al-Manar English Website

Kamel Hawwash: Trump’s Deal of the Century, A Mirage Already Rejected by Palestinians

Mon May 06, 2019 9:12
Kamel Hawwash: Trump’s Deal of the Century, A Mirage Already Rejected by Palestinians
Kamel Hawwash: Trump’s Deal of the Century, A Mirage Already Rejected by Palestinians

US “Deal of the Century” Eliminates Two-state Solution

Capture

May 3, 2019

US president’s son-in-law and advisor Jared Kushner said that the upcoming ‘peace’ plan (“Deal of the Century”) will not include a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, considering that it has not worked out during the previous rounds of talks.

Speaking at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Kushner said that the creative ideas must be suggested to reach a solution, rejecting to reveal more details.

So far, US has carried out some of the Deal of the Century’s dangerous stipulations by acknowledging Al-Quds as the capital of the Zionist entity and annexing Syria’s Golan to ‘Israel’. It also stopped aiding the United Nations relief agency for Palestinian refugees in preparation for naturalizing them in the host countries.

Kushner pointed out that Washington would mull annexing the Zionist settlements in the West Bank with the Israeli officials after the formation of their government.

Source: Al-Manar English Website

Related Videos

Related Cartons

Image result for two state solution abbas carton

Related image

Image result for treason abbas carton

The South and Gaza were liberated due to the growing resistance …but time is not over بفعل الممانعة نَمَت المقاومة وتحرّر الجنوب وغزة… والزمن طويل

أبريل 29, 2019

Written by Nasser Kandil,

Long decades ago, the occupation was the strongest, it was said what was refused by the leaders who stick to the Arab rights especially the right of the Palestinians has become a dream after awhile, and the resolution of the division of Palestine which was not accepted by the Arabs has become an unattainable dream later. It is known that Israel does not accept such resolution and no one in the United Nations initiated to put an agenda to implement the resolution of division no 181 as the resolution dedicated to the return of the displaced no 194. And what would have issued due to the Arab acceptance is similar to what was issued by the Arab acceptance of the resolutions 242 and 338; the survival of the occupation and the rash towards peace.  While Israel is Judaizing the land and devouring more geography, it strengthens itself in preparation for a war to come and to occupy new territories. The Arab acceptance of those resolutions does not prevent the occupation of Beirut and the South of Lebanon.

After the American announcement of the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and the annexation of Golan to Israel, there were who said similarly that if the Palestinians have accepted what was offered by Bill Clinton and Ehud Barak in 2000 as half or quarter of the Eastern Jerusalem, they would not have lost all Jerusalem today, and if Syria has accepted Golan without Tiberius, it would not have lost all Golan. Those do not forget to say the contradiction; While they are pretending that they highly appreciate the leading capacity of the late Palestinian President Yasser Arafat and the Late Syrian President Hafez Al-Assad, they refuse to admit that the rejection was made by them. Then they say that if they have known that before , they would not done so.

Let us discuss that, when the President Yasser Arafat accepted Oslo Accords, did the Israeli implement it? What was the result in areas A, B,and C, and when Syria accepted the Agreement of disengagement in 1974 as a temporary starting point for the withdrawal from Golan under American guarantee, did that happen/? when Lebanon accepted the resolution 425 and was seeking to implement it, did anyone respond?  And when Washington signed the nuclear understanding with Iran, did it hesitate to withdraw from it? Therefore, will the American signing on the agreement on Golan prevent the withdrawal from it, since the American signing on the agreement of disengagement which is based on the recognition that Golan is Syrian did not prevent it from the recognition of the annexation of Golan to Israel. Therefore, the only constant is not what was not accepted by the Arabs to avoid the worse or a search for a peaceful solution or what is signed by the American or the Israeli, rather it is the balance of forces.

Jerusalem and Golan are under the occupation since 1967, and the talk about the annexation is a political interpretation of the occupation not an expression of the change in the balances of forces, it is an interpretation of the inability to got the Syrian-Palestinian recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation of Palestine as an inevitable cost of any understanding proposed by Washington and Tel Aviv. So those who forgot that the Syrian rejection of bargain in the time of the late President Hafez Al-Assad has led to balances of forces which contributed in the rise of the resistance forces which liberated the South of Lebanon and Gaza without negotiation and without the recognition of the legitimacy of occupation have to be reminded that the objection that prevented the incomplete return of Golan as Sinaa has fortified the resistance and ensured the complete return of the South of Lebanon and Gaza, and because time is not over, the resistance which led to these two successive liberations will soon liberate Golan and what is far from Golan and Gaza…Jerusalem as well,,, let days witness that.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

بفعل الممانعة نَمَت المقاومة وتحرّر الجنوب وغزة… والزمن طويل

مارس 30, 2019

ناصر قنديل

– خلال عقود طويلة كانت يد الاحتلال فيها هي القوية وصاحبة القضاء والقدر، كان يقال لنا إن ما رفضه القادة المتمسّكون بالحقوق العربية وأولها الحق بفلسطين كل فلسطين صار حلماً بعد حين، وإن قرار تقسيم فلسطين الذي لم يقبله العرب، صار حلماً بعيد المنال لاحقاً. وللعلم والتذكير فإن «إسرائيل» لم تقبل القرار، ولم يبادر أحد في الأمم المتحدة لوضع روزنامة لتطبيق قرار التقسيم الذي يحمل الرقم 181 مثله مثل القرار الخاص بعودة اللاجئين الذي يحمل الرقم 194، وكل ما كان سينشأ عن القبول العربي هو شبيه بما نشأ عن قبول العرب المشابه بقرارات مثل الـ242 و338، وهو بالتحديد بقاء الاحتلال واللهاث وراء سراب اسمه السلام، فيما إسرائيل تهوّد الأرض وتلتهم المزيد من الجغرافيا وتزيد منسوب القوة استعداداً لحرب قادمة واحتلال أرض جديدة، فاحتلال بيروت وجنوب لبنان لم يمنع وقوعهما القبول العربي بمشاريع الحلول التي سبقت.

– مع الإعلان الأميركي عن الاعتراف بالقدس عاصمة لـ»إسرائيل» وبضمّ «إسرائيل» للجولان صعدت أصوات تتحدّث بلغة مشابهة تقول، لو قبل الفلسطينيون بما عرضه عليهم بيل كلينتون وإيهودا باراك عام 2000، وفيه نصف القدس الشرقية أو ربعها، لما كانوا كما هم اليوم يخسرون كل القدس، ولو قبلت سورية بما عُرض عليها من الجولان بلا أمتار طبريا، لما وصلت الأمور إلى خسارة كل الجولان، وطبعاً لا ينسى المتحدثون أن يقولوا النقيضين، فهم يحاولون الإيحاء أنهم يقدّرون عالياً القدرة القيادية للرئيس الفلسطيني الراحل ياسر عرفات والرئيس السوري الراحل حافظ الأسد، وينسون أن الرفض تمّ على يديهما، ثم يستدركون بأنهما لو عرفا أن رفضهما سيجلب هذه النتائج لما فعلا.

– حسناً. سنأخذ الكلام بقدر حجم عقول أصحابه ونسير بالأمر كما يقدّمونه، فنسأل عندما قبل الرئيس ياسر عرفات باتفاقية أوسلو، هل نفّذها الإسرائيلي؟ وماذا كانت الحصيلة في المناطق أ وب و ج؟ وهل ما يحكم التنفيذ لأي اتفاقية هو شيء آخر غير موازين القوى التي تولد فيها؟ وعندما قبلت سورية باتفاقية فك الاشتباك عام 1974 كنقطة انطلاق مؤقتة للانسحاب من الجولان بضمانة أميركية هل حدث ذلك وتمّ الانسحاب؟ وعندما قبل لبنان بالقرار 425 وبقي يلاحق العالم لتطبيقه هل سمع له أحد؟ وعندما وقعت واشنطن على التفاهم النووي مع إيران، هل منعها ذلك من الانسحاب منها من طرف واحد؟ وهل سيمنع التوقيع الأميركي على اتفاق حول الجولان من الانسحاب منه لاحقاً، كما لم يمنع التوقيع الأميركي على اتفاق فك الاشتباك القائم على أن الاعتراف بأن الجولان سوري الهوية من إعلان معاكس بالاعتراف بضم الجولان لـ»إسرائيل»؟ فالثابت الوحيد لم يكن يوماً بما يقبل العرب، تفادياً للأسوأ، أو سعياً لحل سلمي، أو ما يوقع عليه الأميركي أو يوقع عليه الإسرائيلي، الثابت الوحيد هو ميزان القوى، وميزان القوى فقط.

– القدس والجولان تحت الاحتلال أصلاً منذ العام 1967، والحديث عن الضمّ هو ترجمة سياسية للاحتلال وليس تعبيراً عن تبدّل في موازين القوى، بل الأصح هو ترجمة للعجز عن الحصول على الاعتراف السوري والفلسطيني بشرعية احتلال فلسطين، كثمن حتمي لأي تفاهم تعرضه واشنطن وتل أبيب، والذين ثقبت ذاكرتهم ونسوا أن الرفض السوري للمساومة في زمن الرئيس الراحل حافظ الأسد، أنتج موازين القوى التي ساهمت بتصاعد قوة المقاومة التي حرّرت جنوب لبنان وغزة دون تفاوض ودون منح الشرعية لاحتلال باقي الأرض العربية، لا بدّ من تذكيرهم بأن الممانعة التي حالت دون العودة المنقوصة للجولان على طريقة عودة سيناء، هي التي حضنت المقاومة فضمنت عودة غير منقوصة لجنوب لبنان وغزة، ولأن الزمن بيننا وبين أميركا طويل، فالسياق الذي بدأ مع الممانعة وتطوّر مع المقاومة وأنتج تحريرين متلاحقين، سيكتمل بتحرير غير بعيد للجولان، وتحرير لاحق لما بعد الجولان وما بعد غزة، والقدس ليست بعيدة، والأيام بيننا.

Related Videos

Related Articles

Hamas Won Again

April 10, 2019  /  Gilad Atzmon

hamas won again.jpg

By Gilad Atzmon

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu won a decisive victory yesterday. He is likely to carry on to a fifth term in office. As of this morning, the right-wing bloc has a clear advantage of 65 seats (out of 120) over the centre/left parties and seems more likely to form a coalition.

The meaning of yesterday’s election results are obvious and undeniable. The Israeli left is now marginal, verging on non-existent. The Israeli Labour party has been reduced to a miniature caricature, pretty much the size of Meretz, themselves a parody of left thinking. Needless to mention that these two parties are Zionist to the core. They deny the Palestinian right of return and believe in segregation between Jews and Arabs by means of a two-state solution.

Netanyahu is, beyond doubt, the most sophisticated player in the Israeli political theatre. In the weekend he  vowed to annex the West Bank Settlements. By performing this election ploy, he managed to completely obliterate his hard-line rivals on the right such as Bennett-Shaked’s New Right and even Zehut, which promised to be a ‘rising political force.’ As for this morning neither Zehut nor Bennett, who promised his voters he would be the next Defence Minister, made it to the Knesset.  Netanyahu has also managed to reduce the USA into a subservient colony.  We saw President Trump working hard for his friend in Jerusalem, recognising Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights and castigating Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a ‘terror organisation’. But most significantly, Netanyahu is also Hamas’s favourite prime minister.

Hamas knows very well that Israeli centrist government are genocidal in their approach to Arabs and Palestinians in particular. Hamas remembers Ehud Olmert, Tzipi Livni and Ehud Barak. They clearly prefer Bibi. They know very well that Bibi has been anxious to operate in Gaza. Hamas knows very well that Israel is running out of military and political options, let alone solutions to the conflict. Hamas voted Bibi. It entered ceasefire negotiations with Israel just a few days before the election. There is good reason to believe that Hamas would prefer to deal with Netanyahu rather than with a ‘centrist’ party led by three war criminals. Hamas won again, it has pushed Israel into a state of further paralysis. Israel does not have a prospect of a future in the region. Israel may not be defeated by Quasam rockets but by its own Ghetto mentality. 

The One Jewish State Solution

April 07, 2019  /  Gilad Atzmon

One Jewish State solution.jpg

By Gilad Atzmon

Some of the more advanced Israel/Palestine commentators have agreed amongst themselves that the ‘one-state solution’ amounts to empty talk for the simple reason that Palestine is ‘one-state’ already: It has natural borders, one electric grid and even one international pre-dial number (+972). But this beautiful and historic land, stretched from the river to the sea, is dominated by a foreign and hostile ideology that is racially supremacist and vile towards the indigenous people of the land.

Some of those perceptive analysts have been bewildered following a peculiar shift in Israeli politics: while the so-called Israeli ‘Left’ has been advocating racial and ethnic segregation between Jews and Palestinians by adopting the two-state solution, it is actually the Zionist ultra-right that has been pushing constantly for an integration of the ‘land’ by means of Israeli annexation.

While very few within the Israeli Left joined the call for a one-state solution, it seems as if PM Benjamin Netanyahu and the entire Israeli Right are thrilled by the idea.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed on Saturday to extend Israeli sovereignty to the settlements of the West Bank if he is re-elected in Tuesday’s poll.

Netanyahu’s declaration shouldn’t take us by surprise. Two weeks ago, a Haaretz poll revealed that 42% of Israelis back West Bank annexation. Apparently, 16% of those polled support annexing the entire West Bank without giving any political rights to the Palestinians who live there. I guess that it is hard not to see the political reasoning behind PM Netanyahu’s promise to annex settlements. Netanyahu, who is likely to form the next Israeli government, is attempting to appeal to the Israeli ultra-right voters. He wants them to vote Likud on Tuesday rather than ‘wasting’ their vote on a small ultra-right party or another.

There is obviously a big difference between the one-state call that has been pushed by Palestinian solidarity activists and Netanyahu’s politics of annexation.  While Palestinian rights advocates are referring to one democratic state, Netanyahu is not committed to democracy at all. He is solely faithful to the Jewish population and what he offers in practice is a ‘One Jewish State Solution.’ After all, Israel defines itself as ‘the Jewish State’ and it is there to serve one people while denying others their most elementary rights. Israel, as we know, is not a state of its citizens, it is a state of its Jewish citizens. By the time Israel comes to term with its sin and transcends into a state of its citizens regardless of their race, ethnicity or religious belief it will be renamed. It may as well be called Palestine.

%d bloggers like this: