Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
June 27, 2007
Developments in the Israeli-Palestinian Embroglio

by Bea

Re: The possibility of Gaza being passed to Egyptian control and the West Bank to Jordanian control, the (predictable) response from the Arab world appears to be no way:

Egypt, Jordan and other Arab countries understand that Gaza cannot remain outside of consensual Palestinian control. This is the case not only because agreements between Israel and the PA define Gaza as an inseparable part of Palestine, but because no Arab country wants to relieve Israel of dealing with Gaza as long as the occupation continues, and no Arab country believes Abbas can rule Gaza under present conditions. Responsibility for the needs of 1.5 million people imprisoned in Gaza might end up on their doorstep either through the need to make donations or domestic public pressure to save Gaza.

Egypt and Jordan want to return the Gaza Strip and the Palestinian problem to the Palestinians and go back to acting as advisers, mediators or exerters of pressure. Thus, they need Hamas and Fatah to reconcile.

They feel the most direct way to do this is to aggrandize Abbas by emphasizing the gestures Israel is making, which will highlight the gap between those governed by Hamas and those governed by Fatah. The assumption is that such gestures will create public pressure on the leadership in Gaza that will in the end agree to move toward reconciliation.

Only problem with this analysis is that as I’ve said before, I doubt that the "masses" in the W.B. will really gain much benefit from whatever the US and Israel allow Abbas to receive. This is already in play, with the tax monies that Israel owes to the PA. Israel has decided that they are not ready to give them all over to the Palestinians at once. Rather:

According to sources at the Prime Minister’s Office, a timetable for the transfer has not yet been decided, nor has a method for the transfer been devised. They said that "throwing the money all at once would be a wrong move on Israel’s part," and that Israel wants to transfer the funds in an orderly and controlled manner.

The sources said they believe the first installment will be transferred within several days, in light of the new Palestinian government’s declaration it would honor the demands imposed on it by the Quartet of Middle East peace negotiators. The demands include recognition of Israel, renunciation of terror and abiding by previous Israeli-Palestinian agreements….

Industry, Trade and Labor Minister Eli Yishai said during the cabinet debate that the funds should be transferred to the PA in stages, in order to determine whether it has any practical effect in terms of strengthening Abbas.

"If Abu Mazen [Abbas] doesn’t act, Israel should limit the next monetary installments," said Yishai, adding that Israel must ensure that the money does not end up in Hamas hands.

It’s important to note that according to the above-cited article from Haaretz, already at the get go Israel says the tax monies total far less than the Palestinian accounts indicate.

Palestinian sources estimate that Israel currently holds $700 million in frozen revenues. Israeli sources estimate the sum at $562 million, after the deduction of Palestinian debts owed to Israel.

So they are slashing the total to begin with, then giving out only a part of that, and attaching strict conditions to the release of the next part… all with plenty of opportunities along the way to say "oh so sorry, you failed to meet our requirements so unfortunately we will have to resume witholding your tax money. The money, that is, that we automatically witheld from working Palestinians’ wages that is rightfully yours… to get it you must behave and comply with whatever hoops we tell you to jump through." How much more clearly can the total asymmetry of power be???

Israel has also refused to lift any of the hundreds of road blocks in the West Bank. This will surely "bolster Abbas." Particularly that he has announced that he has "received assurances from the US and Israel" ahead of the meeting in Sharm el-Sheikh that "serious" gestures will be forthcoming from Israel.

What gestures does the Arab world expect Israel to offer?

Earlier Sunday, Egypt urged Israel to halt West Bank raids as well as construction of the separation fence, as a further measure to boost Abbas.

In advance of the Monday talks, Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit phoned Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and called on Israel to take a series of steps aimed at strengthening Abbas.

Aboul Gheit asked Israel to "act towards the Palestinian Authority in a way that achieves calm and creates the atmosphere for resuming the peace process," according to a ministry statement.

"This requires halting settlement operations, ending construction of the separation wall, stopping raids on cities and removing the checkpoints," he said….

But Aboul Gheit told Livni that Israel must let food into Gaza, along with water and electricity.

What gestures is Israel offering?

a. Release of PA funds collected by Israel in the form of customs duties and VAT. The funds will be released in a number of installments in "agreement with the PA emergency government" [Editorial translation: in accordance with Israel’s solely-determined, not mutually discussed, terms] and while ensuring that none of the money is given to militant groups.

b. Continuation of humanitarian assistance to the Gaza Strip – water, electricity, food, medicines, medical services and the opening of the Kerem Shalom crossing (which connects Israel, Egypt and Gaza) to the passage of people and cargo.

c. Reissuing VIP cards to Palestinians, and expanding the permits to Palestinian businessmen wishing to cross into Israel.

d. Allowing the transfer of armored cars to the Fatah forces in the West Bank.

e. Renewed security cooperation in the West Bank.

f. Resumption of the work of the combined security committee – Israel, Egypt, PA, U.S. – particularly in efforts to curtail arms smuggling to the Gaza Strip from Sinai.

And we mustn’t overlook the fact that Olmert has refused to comply with Condi’s request, during his recent trip to Washington, that Israel negotiate a final agreement with the Palestinians immediately, and then put it "on the shelf" until such time as the circumstances are ripe for its deployment.

Rice supports talks on a "shelf agreement" that would outline the permanent settlement but not be implemented immediately because of Abbas’ weak standing.

   
In Rice’s view, merely reaching such an agreement in principle would provide the Palestinians with a "political horizon" and hope, thereby encouraging them to fight terror and to establish governing institutions in preparation for an independent state.

Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni shares Rice’s approach, but Olmert is strongly opposed to the idea. He believes that any settlement reached should be implemented, and fears a situation in which Israel approves the agreement, but Abbas fails to sell it to the Palestinian public. In that event, Israel might be pressured to make further concessions to make Abbas’ task easier.

Olmert agreed several months ago to launch talks with Abbas over "a political horizon," on condition that these deal not with the three core issues – Jerusalem, permanent borders and the refugees – but only with the nature of the future Palestinian state, its systems of government and law and security arrangements for the territories. Political sources in Jerusalem say that as Abbas becomes stronger and more able to sell the agreement to his people, Israel will agree to expand the discussion agenda to include the core issues.

Hmmm. How can Abbas or anyone possibly consider the nature of the future Palestinian state without knowing what its borders, capital, or population is likely to be???

The disagreement between Rice and Olmert was evident at the White House lunch meeting given by President George W. Bush for Olmert and senior U.S. and Israeli aides. As published previously in Haaretz, Rice talked about the importance of giving the Palestinians hope, "so that a Palestinian boy doesn’t want to commit suicide when he grows up." Olmert countered that Israel has paid a price for its mistakes in negotiating with the Palestinians, and spoke about the horrific suicide bombings he saw in Jerusalem after the failed summit at Camp David and the outbreak of the Al-Aqsa Intifada in 2000.

Finally, don’t miss this excoriating comment by Akiva Eldar about Bush:

Heavy clouds will float over today’s summit in sunny Sharm el-Sheikh….

And who isn’t coming to this sad party? The United States, the superpower with the lion’s share of responsibility for the deteriorating situation in the Middle East. Who stayed home? President George W. Bush, the one whose semi-hallucinatory dream of democratization has become a genuine reality of anarchy; whose adopted vision of two states – Israel and Palestine – has become during his tenure a distant dream. It is difficult to think of an American president who has caused more damage to Israeli interests than the president who is considered one of the friendliest to Israel of all time. No leader has done more than Bush – by commission as well as omission – to destroy the Palestinian Authority under Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas.

It was Bush who imposed the wretched elections on the Palestinians, despite Hamas’ refusal to fulfill the terms of the Oslo II Accords concerning the participation of political parties in the democratic process. Bush gave his blessing to sacrificing the road map on the altar of unilateral disengagement, an act of charity toward the Palestinian "refusal front" and a death blow to the already damaged peace camp….
When Hamas was dragged into the unity government and the cease-fire agreement, with great effort, the Bush administration spared no effort to defeat the new alliance. And now, after cooking up the stew, Bush is leaving his "friends" to eat it alone, while exhorting the use of obsolete tricks to raise the dead, such as removing checkpoints in the West Bank and releasing Palestinian prisoners. The two-state vision will have to wait for the next president. What’s the rush?

Officials in Olmert’s government are sighing in great relief over the lowering of the American profile. To understand the depth of these leanings, one must go to Damascus. Vice President Farouk Shara interpreted Bush’s statements using the following harsh, but accurate, words: "The American president does not want peace between Israel and Syria." Israeli intelligence officials are already warning that the opposite of peace is imminent war between Israel and Syria. This means that Bush is refusing to help prevent another round of blood-letting.

Let’s not hold our breath for what will come out of the meeting in Sharm el-Sheikh. Anyone want to place bets on how before Abbas’ government begs Hamas to reconstitute the national unity government or simply implodes in some other fashion?

I am sorry to say it, but if Shakespeare were alive today, even he could not possibly have conjured up a greater tragedy than the one presently unfolding in the once "Holy" Land.

Comments

Thanks Bea – meanwhile: At least 12 Palestinians killed, two soldiers wounded in IDF Gaza raids

At least 12 Palestinians were killed and two Israel Defense Forces soldiers lightly wounded Wednesday in two separate IDF operations in the Gaza Strip.
Roughly 40 Palestinians were wounded in the fighting.
The IDF confirmed both operations, saying they were aimed at “negating threats.”

Posted by: b | Jun 27 2007 13:07 utc | 1

Well I wrote that before the Sharm el-Sheikh summit… which took place on Monday. so we need an update now. I will get to that later today if I can.

Posted by: Bea | Jun 27 2007 13:41 utc | 2

The analysis by Ran Ha Cohen in the link provided by ran on another thread also sheds light here:
Palestine: Blood is in the Air

What does Israel offer (at Sharm el-Sheikh)?….
Not a single measure …to improve the everyday life of millions of impoverished Palestinians strangled by walls and roadblocks, exposed to the Israeli army and settlers’ terror. All these measures have just one objective in common: strengthening the Fatah militia and enabling it to crush any opposition. Fatah’s hysteria should now turn it into an Israeli proxy, dependent on Israel to survive, serving Israel’s interests, and using ever more violence against the Palestinian opposition, which happened to win the democratic elections. Forget removal of roadblocks, let alone of outposts and settlements; forget work permits in Israel; forget freedom, of movement or otherwise; forget a Palestinian state. The occupation is here to stay.

Posted by: Bea | Jun 27 2007 13:46 utc | 3

Editorial in Lebanon’s Daily Star newspaper:
Olmert’s Summit Gesture to Abbas Was More Insult Than Overture

Now Olmert has only made matters worse, and at precisely the wrong moment. Abbas needed desperately to show that his strategy of engagement has a better chance of achieving Palestinian statehood than the confrontation recommended by his rivals from Hamas. He needed to come home with a trophy for his championing of a two-state solution arrived at by mutual agreement, some kind of evidence that Israel’s leaders finally see the errors of their ways. Instead, Abbas returned with a flimsy Israeli undertaking to pursue an almost meaningless gesture. As a result, the Palestinian people received only confirmation that Olmert views their flexibility as weakness, their patience as gullibility, and their suffering as irrelevant. How much longer can this continue before they, in turn, conclude that negotiation with the Jewish state is a fool’s errand that can only end in additional frustration and heartache?

Posted by: Bea | Jun 27 2007 14:47 utc | 5

A bit like the arguments about the finances in ‘private’ prisons – who will pay for the health care? *the state*, who will pay for the clothes? *well the prisoners themselves from what they earn doing piece work* or *the prison authorities* or maybe *the families* or *the investors* or maybe standard garb is not needed, that would be innovative. Some (state, local authorities, prisoners, families, lobbies, partner businesses, etc.) refuse to pay or withhold dollaris if some X conditions are not met, because they are pushing their own cause, either cleverly or through obstinate obstruction; or want a slice of the pie; or are afraid of rules, laws, media scandals down the pipe.
This article in Counter Punch is hopeless – many false premises, left gate keeper mantras, insisting on “ayrab hate” etc. – but one interesting point is touched on, out of left field – supporting US imperialism, critical of strategy :
Finally, just imagine that the United States would make a 180 turn and suddenly side with the Palestinians, as they did with the Kosovars against the Serbs–who, by the way, were, like the Israelis, richer and more “Western” than their Albanian adversaries . Such a change of policies is by no means impossible : when Indonesia invaded East Timor in 1975, the US supported the invasion by providing most of Indonesia’s weapons. Yet, 25 years later, the US supported, or at least did not oppose, East Timor’s accession to independence.
What effect would *that* have? Can anyone doubt that such a change of policy would facilitate U.S. access to oil fields and help it gain strategic allies (if any were still needed) throughout the Muslim world? In the Middle East, the main charge against the United States is that it is pro-Israel, because it lets itself be “manipulated by the Jews”. Therefore, if Washington switched sides, there would be no more basis for hostility to U.S. presence, including its control over oil. Thus the notion of Israel as “strategic ally” makes no sense.

Heh! the Left today.
Bricmont in Counterpunch, Aug. 2006 – via Xymphora

Posted by: Noirette | Jun 27 2007 15:44 utc | 6

The purpose of the Sharm meeting was stated “to bolster” Abbas, supposedly. Noone would believe that a handshake from Olmert and Mubarak would do anything but weaken him more. Perhaps the purpose was to do so and pave the way for Fayad, the West’s man in Ramallah to work with Dahlan, Israel’s man in (now) Ramallah, while continuing the destruction of Gaza.
As few or as slight as Abbas chances were, he should have refused going to this meeting until there were some show from the other side (probably never) and never should have believed any assurances given to him by the West before the meeting. I’ve debated with myself whether he is a fool or a tool; this move was foolish indeed.
I don’t see how Abbas or Haniyeh will survive, but the struggle and bloodshed certainly will not end with their demise.

Posted by: ww | Jun 27 2007 15:49 utc | 7

Just as Hamas leader Haniyeh prediced last Sunday:

He warned the Arab world not to get caught up in the Israel-Palestinian summit “trap”, saying “this is like sprinkling sand in our eyes.
“The Israelis and the Americans won’t give us anything. Our land and our rights will not be returned to us through these summits. We will only get our rights back through resistance,” he said.

He is now certainly confirmed.
I wonder what Olmert wants. Not talking seriously with Abbas will strengthen Haniyeh. More pressure on Haniyeh and Hamas, if successful, will push the people to look for more radical folks to follow. Just what the now still few salfis (and their Saudi sponsors) are waiting for.
Of course then Israel could claim to be fighting “al-Qaeda” and use that as justification for even more brutality …

Posted by: b | Jun 27 2007 16:13 utc | 8

This should solve the Problem! Talk about adding insult to injury.
Mideast Mediators Appoint Blair

Posted by: ww | Jun 27 2007 17:43 utc | 9

@ww – yes an insult.
But Blair will simply join Abbas to get fucked by Bush and the Zionists.
He is used to that.
Does anyone remember that Blair was promissed progress in Palestine for taking part in the Iraq war? He got screwed on that promisse and he will get screwed again.
NYT archive – March 15, 2003, Bush Promises To Adopt Plan For the Mideast

Pres George Bush, following several days of negotiations with British Prime Min Tony Blair, promises to adopt long-deferred peace plan for Palestinian state as soon as Palestinians choose new prime minister; says, during statement in White House Rose Garden, ‘there can be no peace for either side in the Middle East unless there is freedom for both;’ Blair, moments later, hails Bush’s announcement as showing ‘obligation of even-handedness’ on eve of possible war against Iraq

Posted by: b | Jun 27 2007 18:18 utc | 10

Related to my comment above: The Sun: Blair ain’t my poodle says Bush

I’ve heard he’s been called Bush’s poodle. He’s bigger than that. This is just background noise, a distraction from big things.

Now Blair got promoted to what? Bush’s spaniel?

Posted by: b | Jun 27 2007 18:24 utc | 11

Now Blair got promoted to what?
Bush’s donkey (ass)?

Posted by: Bea | Jun 27 2007 19:11 utc | 12

Give it a few months. Fatah is bound to crumble in the West Bank as it did in Gaza. The Fatah true believers have long since died or faded into bitter cynicism. The WB armed factions will eventually yield to Hamas’ moral authority and power.

Posted by: Rouser | Jun 27 2007 19:15 utc | 13

Just heard on Al Jazeera that Blair will be based in Jerusalem. Perhaps a special place has been “cleared” for him.

Posted by: ww | Jun 27 2007 19:40 utc | 14

Blair will need a huge security detail in Jerusalem. Who would benefit from a “hit-squad” taking him out?

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jun 27 2007 20:32 utc | 15

I’ve heard he’s been called Bush’s poodle. He’s bigger than that.

A bigger idiot anyway.

Posted by: PeeDee | Jun 27 2007 23:54 utc | 16

Fatah’s progression is remarkably like China’s Sun Yat-sen’s
Fundamentals of National Reconstruction, then the corruption
of Koumintang by capitalists and landlords, them crushing the
Communists, then Mao’s peasant post-war liberation in 1949.
Of course, Mao didn’t have these Neo-Zionists parked in his
vanguard, walled in 20-foot high with Full Spectrum Dominance
like Hamas is, so the parallel becomes a purely academic one.
It’ll be interesting to see if Hamas can liberate Palestine.
What we want to know is who signs Blair’s paycheck, then why
didn’t Congress get to vote that expropriation by Executive?
You notice how skillfully they parse who he’s working under?
Good luck trying to find the org chart and his salary grade!
Latest tab, $77B to Katrina, but nobody knows where it went!
Again, $10B to AIDS in Africa, but not a penny to treatment.
Again, $10B to Afghanistan, and all they got was textbooks.
No wonder Cheney is worth $550M on just a government salary!
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?!

Posted by: Blair Underwood | Jun 28 2007 1:29 utc | 17

CP@15, since that would mean one less war criminal in the world, I’d say everyone would.

Posted by: ran | Jun 28 2007 2:46 utc | 18

re: #1
Abbas Squawks, How Could you, Ehud?

The PA chairman’s office went on to say that “this aggression comes only a single day after the Sharm e-Sheikh summit and calls into question whether Israel really intends to seal an agreement and negotiate to end the occupation.”

No further comment required.

Posted by: Bea | Jun 28 2007 4:34 utc | 19

Afraid of an “islamic state”? You should be. Now a “jewish state”, that would be different …
A male singer with a too female sounding voice? Can’t have that on radio the fundmentalists say, so the Taliban shut him down.
Haredi public shuns singer who sounds like girl

Apparently, listeners had called in to complain about Faizkov’s voice.
According to many Orthodox rabbinic authorities, Jewish law forbids men to listen to a female singer’s voice, even if it is taped and even if the listener does not know what the woman looks like. In Jewish law, listening to a singing woman’s voice is compared to viewing parts of a woman’s body that are normally kept covered.
Apparently, the audience of pirate haredi radio stations such as Radio 10, Kol Haneshema and Radio Beit Yisrael does not want anyone to receive the false impression that they are transgressing Jewish law.

Posted by: b | Jun 28 2007 5:16 utc | 20

Blair had asked himself for the job as Middle East envoy. Now it turns out Bush will not let him do it ….
Blair to Tackle Economics but Not Peace Efforts, a Task Reserved for Rice

In his new role as envoy to the Middle East, Tony Blair will be charged with shoring up Palestinian institutions, but not with trying to nail down a peace deal between Israelis and Palestinians because Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state, is handling that job herself, administration officials said Wednesday.
Ms. Rice has said several times that she intends to spend her remaining months in office trying to push peace talks forward.
Some Middle East analysts said Wednesday that such a narrow mandate would hamper Mr. Blair’s chances for success.
Indeed, the lack of a link between final status talks and the building of Palestinian institutions is the crux of why previous attempts have been unsuccessful, those analysts say.

Posted by: b | Jun 28 2007 5:18 utc | 21

off topic — b., could you open another thread? I wanted to talk about the weather but the scrolling is incredible. Thanks.

Posted by: jonku | Jun 28 2007 8:36 utc | 22

okay skip it. another open thread is here!

Posted by: jonku | Jun 28 2007 8:38 utc | 23

This article on the Blair appointment and mandate in the Guardian makes a number of excellent points, some of them are even humorous.
Scepticism Hangs Over Blair’s Appointment as Envoy
Money quote:

The White House last night appeared to play down expectations over what he might achieve, saying progress depended on Palestinians first renouncing terrorism. “Tony Blair is going to have the opportunity to work with and in support of those who support democracy and peace in the region, and that’s what he does. He’s not Superman, he doesn’t have a cape,” said Tony Snow, George Bush’s spokesman.

So many questions, but the biggest one is:

It is already clear he will face one grave problem, as Israel makes clear that it will not contemplate any dealings with Hamas, and intends to back Mr Abbas to the hilt. Critics say talk of Palestinian governance and capacity building is meaningless if it ignores 1.4 million people in the Gaza and institutionalises a West Bank/Gaza schism, critics say.

The article also suggests that neither Palestinians nor Israelis think a person in this role is what is needed or desired at this time.
And Blair is not some neutral third party by a long shot:

“No one doubts Blair’s status and commitment,” said a figure closely involved in the quartet deliberations. “He came fresh to Northern Ireland, but he’s not coming fresh to this. He has an extraordinary amount of baggage. And he’s coming in at the worst possible moment.”

Should be a fun story to watch in the coming months. Anyone want to make bets on how long before Blair quietly packs it in and takes on some other challenge?

Posted by: Bea | Jun 28 2007 10:57 utc | 24

An article in today’s Haaretz has a pretty stark and brutally honest assessment of the current situation:
No One to Give Them Back To

There is a growing consensus in Israel that a withdrawal from the West Bank is no longer possible. It may be possible to hide the Palestinians behind a separation fence, but it is impossible to relinquish control over them.
Everyone shares this conclusion, in all the camps and across the political spectrum. Only the reasons differ. The ideologically motivated right considers the settlements a religious decree. Benjamin Netanyahu is talking about the “defensive wall” of the mountains of Judea and Samaria. Ehud Olmert, who promised to withdraw from the West Bank and evacuate most of the settlements, turned his back on the idea following the Second Lebanon War and the Qassam rocket attacks from the Gaza Strip. They are no longer talking about a permanent settlement even in Meretz, only about a theoretical agreement which will grant Israel international legitimacy, out of recognition that Mahmoud Abbas will not be able to carry it out….
What is shared by these views, on the left and the right, is that they all perpetuate the existing situation of dozens of settlements, hundreds of roadblocks and thousands of soldiers who are deployed over the fence.
They used to say in Israel that “there is no one to talk to” on the other side. Now they say that there is no one to whom we can return the territories. No one said it better than president-elect and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Shimon Peres. “It is unclear when we will pull out entirely from the territories,” Peres wrote in last weekend’s Yedioth Aharonoth. “Even if we are ready to pull out, we have no one to hand them over to at this stage, because of the Palestinian inability to establish a single army, and a single state that will assert their control over the territories. In the meantime, Israel is unable to ignore its responsibility for the territories, whether it is a responsibility by choice or lack of choice.” …
In this atmosphere, it is clear that any talk about a “two-state solution” and the prime minister’s declarations at the Sharm el-Sheikh summit about “new opportunities” and “accelerating the process toward a Palestinian state” are bogus. This diplomatic lip service, disassociated from reality and real expectations, is meant to assuage the Americans and the Europeans and deflect pressure on Israel.
The international community is participating in the show, and gradually is losing interest in the conflict. The postponement of the speech of President George W. Bush, meant to commemorate five years since he presented his “vision” and to offer new ideas for an Israeli-Palestinian settlement, suggests that he has nothing to say. As it winds down its tenure, the Bush administration in Washington is toying with fake charms: like the “shelf agreement,” proposed by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, or the appointment of Tony Blair as the Quartet representative “to build Palestinian institutions.” Does anyone remember his predecessor in that job, James Wolfensohn?
From Israel’s point of view, freezing the situation in the territories is the default option, freeing the government from internal disputes. But it comes at a cost – in growing calls for an academic and economic boycott of Israel, in perpetuating the conflict with the Arabs, and in a growing gap between declarations and actions. If the government considers control over the Palestinians as inevitable and not as a temporary situation, it must prepare accordingly: through the correct public relations abroad, through building task-specific security forces, and through fair treatment of the residents of the West Bank. The current approach – in which there is a surprise with every development, in which there are measures announced to ameliorate the lives of the Palestinians only to be withdrawn a day later, and mostly, in which we believe that time is in our favor – does not bode well.

Posted by: Bea | Jun 28 2007 11:15 utc | 25

@Bea – “No 0ne to give them back to” is of course the Israeli policy since 1967.
There was never no one to talk with, not Arafat, not Abbas, not Hamas. Whenever somone is coming up, s/he will be ignored or worse, killed.
The article is build on the lie that there is “no one” and simply goes from there.
The poor Israeli have to keep up the occupation and colonization, because “there is no on”.
What scumbs, what utter bullshit.

Posted by: b | Jun 28 2007 13:39 utc | 26

This article is really worth a read… too much. The U.S. army has now become to the Israeli army like extreme sports are to walking: a supercharged, on-crack version of the same thing, only ever so much imaginably worse.
Marines to train at new Israeli combat center

BALADIA CITY, Israel — In a new, elaborate training center in the Negev desert, Israeli troops — and someday, U.S. Marines and soldiers — are preparing for the wide range of urban scenarios they may confront.
Here, at Israel’s new National Urban Training Center, the Israeli Defense Force’s Ground Forces Command is preparing forces to fight in four theaters: Gaza, Lebanon, the West Bank and Syria.
Built by the Army Corps of Engineers and funded largely from U.S. military aid, the 7.4-square-mile generic city — balad, in Arabic, means village — consists of 1,100 basic modules that can be reconfigured by mission planners to represent specific towns.
It’s a much smaller, IDF-tailored version of the Army’s Joint Readiness Training Center, the sprawling 100,000-acre simulated microcosm of the Middle East used to train infantry brigade task forces deployed in the region. And while Baladia City won’t feature all the pyrotechnic bells and whistles of the Fort Polk, La., facility, it will offer the same high-fidelity simulated battlefield technologies, force identification and location systems, and debriefing capabilities, officers here said.
“Combat units from platoon up to brigade level will train in an environment that simulates the real urban battle,” said Brig. Gen. Uzi Moskovich, commander of the NUTC and its adjacent National Ground Training Center, Israel’s downsized version of the Army’s force-on-force training facility at Fort Irwin, Calif. “Enemy forces will fight according to their respective combat doctrines, and the civilian population will behave in ways typical of their particular community, religion and culture.”
Moskovich said Baladia City would eventually host Army and Marine Corps units for training before they head to Iraq.
“This is something developed by us in cooperation with the U.S. Army; we intend for it to become a valuable center of knowledge that will also benefit our American allies and other friends,” he said.
An Israeli budget official said total Baladia City program costs came in at less than $45 million, a small fraction of Washington’s investment in the JRTC. As a frame of reference, he estimated each weeklong brigade-size exercise at a few thousand dollars, while major drills at JRTC could run into the millions.
“In terms of cost versus effectiveness, this is the best investment we’ve made in the army in the past 10 years,” said Moskovich, who also commands the IDF’s Gaza division. “This facility will be unique in the world, even with regard to the U.S. Army. It’s not the size, but the added value of the different terrains, the fine-tuning of the cultural environments and the debriefing capabilities.”

Much more to read at the link, including this final paragraph:

Recent developments in Syria may make it necessary to give Moskovich more than that. Syria is developing specialized infantry battalions trained in the type of guerrilla warfare waged so successfully by Hezbollah in last summer’s war, a military intelligence source said.
And with the “reasonable likelihood” of another war on Israel’s northern front — perhaps by summer’s end, according to some intelligence estimates here — that Red Team force may not come soon enough.

Posted by: Bea | Jun 28 2007 15:44 utc | 27

An interesting tidbit that I just posted over at Missing Links as well:
Reconcilation stymied

(snip)
This week, the Israeli army arrested Hamas political leader Sheikh Saleh Aruri, who was released three months ago from an Israeli prison, after serving 15 years, including six without being charged or tried.
The reason for the arrest is believed to be connected with his contacts with Fatah leaders in the West Bank for the purpose of reconciling differences between the two movements.
This week, Israel warned Abbas and his government not to renew contacts with Hamas as this would force it to re-adopt the same draconian measures now imposed on the Hamas-led government. The brazenness of the Israeli warning shows Israel’s vested interest in ensuring Abbas’s dependence on the Jewish state both financially and politically.
(snip)

Posted by: Alamet | Jun 28 2007 23:41 utc | 28

Interesting new poll out from the Palestinian Center for Polling and Survey Research. Some key findings highlighted below; more at the link.

Main Findings:
Findings show that the recent infighting has angered most Palestinians and led to a loss of confidence in the leadership and most of the security services. They also show that while a consensus is developing over the need to conduct early parliamentary and presidential elections, the public is split over other alternatives such as the dissolution of the Palestinian Authority and replacing it with an international trusteeship or the establishment of a confederation with Jordan.
Satisfaction with the performance of President Mahmud Abbas during the period of infighting does not exceed 13% and satisfaction with his overall performance in general drops from 48% last March to 36% in this poll.
Satisfaction with the overall performance of the previous National Unity Government does not exceed 17%.
Overwhelming majority (75%) wants holding of early presidential and parliamentary elections today while support for the formation of an emergency government stands at 56% and opposition at 38%. Opposition to the emergency government stands at 47% in the Gaza Strip.
If new parliamentary elections are held today, Fateh would receive 43% of the vote, the same percentage it received three months ago in our March survey. But support for Change and Reform (Hamas) drops from 37% three months ago to 33% in this survey. Support for all other third parties combined stands at 12% and 13% remain undecided.
If new presidential elections are held today and the only two candidates were Mahmud Abbas and Ismail Haniyeh, 40% would not participate in these elections. Among those who would participate, 49% would vote for Abbas and 42% for Haniyeh.
Both sides, Fateh and Hamas are seen as equally responsible for the infighting in the eyes of 59% while 71% believe the two sides are equally losers.
90% describe current Palestinian conditions as very bad or bad while only 6% describe them as good or very good. 28% say they want to immigrate to other countries and 23% say they are not proud of being Palestinians.
Overwhelming majority of 82% view acts such as the kidnapping of foreigners, the burning of internet cafe’s, and the bombing of foreign schools as criminal deserving condemnation while only 3% view them as nationalistic and deserving support. In the Gaza Strip, 85% view these acts as criminal and 2% as nationalistic.
The greatest threat to Palestinians today is infighting and lack of law and order in the eyes of 56% followed by poverty in the eyes of 21%, Israeli occupation (12%) and international sanctions and boycott (10%).
After 40 years of Israeli occupation, the percentage of those who believe that the chances for the creation of an independent Palestinian state are medium or high does not exceed 26% while 70% believe the chances are non existent or low.

Posted by: Bea | Jun 28 2007 23:52 utc | 29

Missing Links: “Picture Coming Into Focus”
Another insightful post from Badger.

Posted by: Bea | Jun 29 2007 1:25 utc | 30

Boston Globe Palestinian fantasy vs. reality


Meantime, efforts to isolate Gaza under Hamas control will only reinforce America’s abysmal standing in the Muslim world. Eighty percent of the 1.4 million people living in Gaza now live in poverty.
The United States needs to rethink its approach to Palestinian politics and peacemaking, as well as how it comprehends groups such as Hamas. The bloodletting in Gaza is a reminder that unless diplomacy makes room for all the major Palestinian players, the United States will only increase the vehemence and the cohesion of those who are left out of the picture.

Posted by: b | Jun 29 2007 10:22 utc | 31

Two signs that the US/Israeli plans of isolating Hamas are already in jeopardy:
Saudi king avoids meeting Abbas

Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah has snubbed the Palestinian president, skipping a meeting with Mahmoud Abbas on a visit to Jordan.
An Abbas official said “the meeting was postponed due to lack of time as both leaders had busy schedules”, but Al Jazeera’s David Chater, reporting from Jordan, said it was a deliberate and undiplomatic snub.
Abbas was kept waiting at a palace room for a telephone call that never came.
Instead, the Saudi monarch, who brokered a power-sharing deal between Abbas’s Fatah faction and rivals Hamas in February, urged both sides to talk to each other, saying the infighting was benefiting only the Israelis.

Al-Quds al-Arabi via missing links: Egypt-Hamas rapprochement said to be helped by AlQaeda intelligence

Palestinian sources said the Egyptian authorities have resumed contacts with Hamas, in spite of their anger over the movement’s seizure of control of the Gaza Strip. Al-Quds al-Arabi has learned that the backing-down that has occurred in Egypt’s attitude–which had been to isolate Hamas and follow the American line in putting an end to their military presence in the Gaza Strip–came about as a result of Egypt’s acquisition of information confirming that its [Hamas’] replacement would be the AlQaeda organization.
Palestinian sources who are following the talks between Egypt and the Palestinian side [meaning Hamas] said that an official with the Hamas movement told the Egyptian authorities that the military wing of Hamas could become more extreme, and could change to an attitude [even] more implacable than that of the AlQaeda organization. Moreover, [the Egyptians were told] that AlQaeda itself has already been able to make substantial inroads in the Gaza Strip, and has been able to set up cells involving young people.

Exactly as I predicted – if Hamas is shut down, the people will look for more extreme “solutions”.
Sometimes I think this is exactly what the neocons want.

Posted by: b | Jun 29 2007 11:34 utc | 32

Israeli sources estimate the sum at $562 million, after the deduction of Palestinian debts owed to Israel.
Huh? What debt would that be?

Posted by: Dismal Science | Jun 29 2007 11:54 utc | 33

DS @33
I have no link, but in the past a good portion goes to electricity and probably water. Israel doesn’t provide those things for free dontcha know, and must keep these people dependent on the Master for the necessities. Just part of the humiliation.

Posted by: ww | Jun 29 2007 12:16 utc | 34

Recommended – Alaistair Crooke, founder of conflicts-forum in the London Review of Books: Our Second Biggest Mistake in the Middle East


Western commentators – prompted by Fatah loyalists – are still inclined to see the 2006 election result as no more than a severe rap on the knuckles for the hitherto dominant Fatah on the part of an electorate angered by its corruption and mismanagement. Since 1993, Palestinians have been living under a one-party system: patronage, jobs and government have been in the gift of Fatah, and it is to its members that these benefits have been distributed. The election outcome, however, was not primarily a judgment on Fatah’s corruption, even if this was a significant factor. I recall a leader in a refugee camp in Lebanon saying: ‘You will see . . . what this victory for Hamas represents is the final rupture of the Palestinians’ faith in the international community. We no longer believe that the Americans or the Europeans ultimately can be counted on to do the right thing by us. We know that we must rely only on ourselves now.’ Hamas had recognised for some time that the Palestinian constituency that voted Fatah a monopoly of power and of armed force in 1993, following the Oslo Accords, no longer existed. Hardly any Palestinians now believe that Palestinian ‘good behaviour’ – as promised to Israel by Fatah – will induce the US to ignore its domestic Israel lobby and exert pressure on Israel to withdraw from the lands occupied in 1967. ‘Hamas had predicted all along that Israel would not fulfil its bargain,’ Tamimi writes, ‘and that it was using peacemaking in order to expropriate more land.’

Posted by: b | Jun 29 2007 16:37 utc | 35

Abbas doesn’t seem to have many friends left on his home turf. First it was Hani al-Hassan, his long-term chief political adviser, fired for saying “the recent events in the Gaza Strip were not a war between Fatah and Hamas, as which they had been widely described by the media, but between Hamas and Fatah collaborators who served the Americans and the Israelis.”
Next, Former PA justice minister and Fatah political leader Justice Nahedh Al-Rayyes describes “Hamas’s military acts in Gaza Strip as a ‘preemptive’ step to abort the ‘malicious’ plan of Mohammed Dahalan and his treason trend to attack Hamas and finish it off in Gaza Strip.”
More tellingly, Fatah-affiliated Al Aqsa Brigades reject decree of President Abbas regarding the disbanding of militia in the occupied Palestinian territories.
Their declaration:

First: the rejection of the dissolution of the brigades, “because they are a resistance group, and are defending the country and the dignity of the people”.
Second: the refusal to disarm the group, “because it is a legitimate arm of resistance, and is the only weapon to remain to defend the Intifada [“Uprising”].”
Third: the rejection of the description of the brigades as ‘militias’, “which defame the Palestinians, and it is nonsense to describe the only remaining armed wing as a militia.”
Fourth: the brigades support the presidents’ decision to withdraw illegal arms used in the lawlessness, and announce that they stand with the security forces to stop the state of disorder.
Fifth: the brigades will “do their best” to aid the security forces, “and will be honored to stand beside the security forces to defend the country.”
Sixth: the brigades will not be complacent before the crimes of the occupation, “and will retaliate for the crimes committed [by the occupying Israeli military], especially in the recent days in the [Gaza] Strip, Nablus and Jenin.
Seventh: the brigades reject the connection established between themselves and the current state of lawlessness, and confirm that they “were created to confront the occupation and its aggression against the Palestinian people”.
Eighth: the brigades will not be committed to a truce with the Israelis, as long as the occupation continues the crimes and incursions against Palestinians and their cities.

Posted by: Alamet | Jun 30 2007 0:00 utc | 36

**Recommended reading
Divide and Rule, Israeli Style, by Jonathan Cook
It is impossible to do this piece justice with an excerpt. You just have to read the whole thing.

Posted by: Bea | Jun 30 2007 2:14 utc | 37

Bea #37,
Yes good article – food for thought, a full meal in fact. How much by initial design is hard to say – maybe evolved plans through circumstances?
More than abuse by neglect or sanctions, much assistance is required to achieve such a degree of genocide necessary for any long term “success”. If this is a plan, it surely lacks promise. Is it not illusory to believe that Israel can maintain its apartheid in the long term? A similar but more obvious illusion exists with the not all-dissimilar circumstance with the U.S. occupation in Iraq’s green zone. And with current ideologies and populations of neighboring nations, including so many refugees who escaped varying degrees of abuse, both Israel and the U.S. would be well to remember that such small geographic areas of occupation are not isolated islands beyond the reach of their enemies. Enemies that need not have been.

Posted by: Rick | Jun 30 2007 5:04 utc | 38

Bush reprimands others again for wrongful interference.
From a lead story this week: “President George W Bush banned Syrian and Lebanese officials whom Washington accuses of undermining the Lebanese government from entering the United States…”
But hey, these outcasts actually feel “honored.” Of course real honors for interference in a country’s affairs can only be achieved by the “best” humanity has to offer, at least according to President Bush. Years after Bush rewarded each of his 1st tier American partners in crime with the Medal of Freedom, Tony Blair now receives a reward, in the form of being a newly appointed emissary of peace for the Palestinians, even after his more than significant share in enabling death and destruction on a scale that is truly historical. Surprisingly, Blair’s recent reward does not come from Bush, but from many world leaders, specifically those from the U.N., the U.S., the European Union and Russia. Perhaps reward is the wrong word to use here. For this reward will not come with any “medal” or innate honor, as it is more like a bad desert served after an equally bad meal. Even worse, this desert is laden with poison and its true intended recipient is Hamas. And who is involved in preparing this desert? Surely, Israel has done more than just provide the recipe. Hamas is hungry but probably not that foolish to eat such a contaminated concoction.
Though this topic has been discussed here at MOA the last few days, I bring it up again, not that I have any wisdom to add, but for personal relief in expressing my disgust. Quite simply, Tony Blair being ’The Peace Envoy’ for the Palestinian people is something that really galls me. Of all the people in the world who may be right for such a job, how did the poor Palestinians end up with Tony Blair? Again, this story is nothing new, but the link in this paragraph provides an essay that is clear and easy to read, even if it does not answer my questions.
 

Posted by: Rick | Jul 1 2007 5:20 utc | 39

Rick, It reminds me of Andy Card accepting an honorary degree from the U.of Mass. recently. Standing on the stage at graduation with literally thousands in the audience waving signs and booing him for at least three solid minutes. He gets off his chair and with a sheepish sort of shit eating grin and walks up and accepts the degree and then sits back down, like not noticing whats wrong with this picture. Outside of a having a particularly nasty streak of masochism, these award winning fools must be so removed from the world of the living as to be oblivious to all, except for those whom they serve – to which they will literally do anything for. In exchange for that award, medal, or promotion, securing supposedly a footnote in official history. The PTB, for their part must take particular satisfaction in letting their failures hang openly in the public square, fouling the air for all those who might think their fall from stature is amusing. Exactly Tony Blairs new mission.

Posted by: anna missed | Jul 1 2007 7:04 utc | 40