Thursday, 15 October 2009

RubinReports: Palestinian Prime Minister Rejects "Mickey Mouse" State. Perhaps Prefers Donald Duck State Instead?

Palestinian Prime Minister Rejects "Mickey Mouse" State. Perhaps Prefers Donald Duck State Instead?

[Warning! Satire. Since the Middle East can be so grim, we have to laugh at it sometimes. But all of the below also happens to be true.]

By Barry Rubin

Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad complains about Israel’s offer to the Palestinians. "By all indications they have a Mickey Mouse state in mind," Fayyad said, using the Disney character's name as slang for unimportant or trivial. "It looks like it would not come close to what we have in mind."

Unfortunately, Fayyad didn’t explain what he meant. Possibly he meant that Israel sought an unmilitarized Palestinian state, as if it weren’t serious unless it had a big army? If what Fayyad has in mind is a country with a big gun perhaps he would prefer an Elmer Fudd state.

Or is the problem that Israel wants a Palestinian state which ends the conflict forever? In that case, Fayyad seems to prefer a Wiley Coyote state, which is always trying to trap Israel in order to destroy it.

After all, the Palestinian leadership is always in search of some magic weapon (from Acme Corporation?) and can never accept that it won’t wipe out Israel.

But Israel, like the Roadrunner, always avoids the trap. Like Wiley, the Palestinian leadership always ends up by catching itself in its own trap. Pretty often, it runs off a cliff only to be left standing in mid-air until it looks down and remembers gravity, then plummeting to the valley far far below. Meanwhile, the Roadrunner dashes off merrily unharmed. Beep! Beep!

In a sense, though, Fayyad is right that Israel wants a Palestinian state to be like Mickey. After all, Mickey is a nice guy, never aggressive or violent, always trying to get along with neighbors.
No wonder that role model is so upsetting for Fayyad!

Nevertheless, the mouse metaphor seems to have a powerful hold on the Palestinians and Islamists, too. The Saudi Shaykh, Muhammad Al-Munajid, stated on Al-Majd TV on August 27, 2008, that mice were Satan's soldiers and that "according to Islamic law, Mickey Mouse should be killed.”

Is Fayyad's mouse reference a subtle hint from him that he thinks Israel wants Hamas and its friends to finish him off by demanding he make risky compromises? (Note, in the Arabic-speaking world, any compromise is considered risky, no matter how much you get for making it.)
Or maybe Fayyad has in mind Farfour, the Hamas children’s show character based on Mickey Mouse, who calls for genocide against the Jews but is later killed by the Israelis and thus, as a martyr have to be revenged. Hamas wants a Farfour state.

Farfour once made a mistake of praising the English language, only to be criticized by Sara, the show's cute little suicide-bomber-in-training human co-host: "No, Farfour, you are wrong," she explained, "because you don't know that the Muslims are the basis of civilization. If not for the Muslims, the world wouldn't have gotten to where it is today."

Is that a double-entendre?

But Fayyad has evidently forgotten old Yasir Arafat who when once asked if he watched television answered that he only liked the Tom and Jerry cartoons because he enjoyed the way the mouse always fooled the cat.

So perhaps it is a question of whether the state be based on Mickey Mouse or Jerry the Mouse or Farfour the Mouse.

Personally, though, I think Fayyad should ask for a Donald Duck state, a far more appropriate choice. Here’s what a Disney site says about Donald. While Disney (which believes that everyone is naturally good, a nice idea for a children's entertainment company but not for a U.S. president) attributes good intentions to Donald, it continues (please allow me to quote as length as it is too perfect):

"But by the time they surface Donald's already off and running in the wrong direction. He refuses to let anyone or anything stand in his way. It doesn't matter how much humiliation the world dishes out to him, Donald will take it and come back for more. He's a loser, not a quitter, and he'll go down fighting. This is a duck with one short fuse, and...when things don't go right, he goes ballistic. Yet after the storm is over and the tantrum is through, when faithful Daisy [one of the heavenly virgins?] soothes his brow or his conscience finally catches up with him, even Donald can admit that there must be a better way. If only he could figure out what it is.

"Hot-headed Donald is a little man in a big world that's trying to keep him down. Call it fate, or call it lack of self-control, nothing goes right for this duck: even his best intentions often go awry. Of course, by the time his best intentions surface he's probably already chasing after less noble pursuits. As stubborn as he is temperamental, he won't give in, even when he's up to his beak in trouble. Then watch out. Like a lot of people with a temper problem, he's blind to his own faults but quick to see them in others. He can't understand why life seems so much easier for pals Mickey and easy-going Goofy. It's not fair. Still, Donald will keep struggling to get what he deserves in the world."

Now if Fayyad admits that Donald Duck is the perfect symbol for the Palestinian movement and the state he wants to create, the casting will be perfect. Moreover, the Saudis can be Scrooge McDuck, Donald’s wealthy uncle who never helps him despite having mountains of money in his vault.

And to this I can only add: That's all, Folks!



RubinReports: Palestinian Prime Minister Rejects "Mickey Mouse" State. Perhaps Prefers Donald Duck State Instead?

RubinReports: How the Palestinian Authority is Killing Even the Charade of a Peace Process

How the Palestinian Authority is Killing Even the Charade of a Peace Process

By Barry Rubin

Let’s take a careful look at this AP dispatch on an October 12 Fatah internal memorandum. The official Fatah document charges the Obama Administration with disappointing the Palestinians and being mainly responsive—like presumably all previous presidents—to the pro-Israel lobby.

It states:

"All hopes placed in the new U.S. administration and President Obama have evaporated. Obama couldn't withstand the pressure of the Zionist lobby, which led to a retreat from his previous positions on halting settlement construction and defining an agenda for the negotiations and peace."

Now if the Palestinian Authority and Fatah aren’t happy with Obama they are going to have a very difficult time ever finding a U.S. government they like.

And even given this attitude, their “job” is to court the U.S. government, give it incentives to help them, show they are compromising in order to win its favor, and prove they can deliver benefits for American interest. But they have no concept of such a strategy.

Instead, they basically demand what they want and view anyone who doesn’t give it to them—without their doing anything to earn it—as an enemy.

Note carefully this passage in the AP dispatch about the memorandum:

“Obama raised Palestinian hopes further with his repeated calls for Israel to halt all construction in settlements in the West Bank and east Jerusalem--areas the Palestinians claim for a future state.”

What the mass media won’t tell you is that Obama himself introduced this divisive idea of a freeze—which the Palestinians had never made a precondition for talks—thus leading the Palestinians to raise their demands and, consequently, wrecking even talks being held, much less them achieving any progress.

And here, indirectly, is the proof:

“The last round of Israel-Palestinian negotiations broke down late last year with no apparent breakthroughs on the main issues dividing the two sides: final borders, the status of Jerusalem and a solution for Palestinians who lost homes and other property in Israel after it achieved statehood in 1948.”

No mention of construction freeze here, right? Just borders, Jerusalem, and the Palestinian demand (a rather strange one for real nationalists but not for those who put the priority on destroying Israel) that Palestinians go to live in Israel rather than Palestine.

Two other points are worth noting. First, the Western media virtually never mention Israeli demands when discussing the peace process. Nothing about security guarantees, that any peace agreement ends the conflict forever (which is a rather normal thing to request), plus demilitarization and the barring of any foreign forces from entering the state. Only Palestinian demands are ever brought up.

(To be fair, one could imply that Israel wants border modifications, east Jerusalem, and Palestinians going to live in Palestine, but in other articles these are mentioned far less than Palestinian demands.)

Second, the AP articles states:

“The Palestinians want talks to resume from the point they broke down last year under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's predecessor, Ehud Olmert. Netanyahu says he is not bound by any concessions Olmert may have made.”

This is a common misstatement, rationalizing a ridiculously sleazy bargaining technique. Imagine you are in negotiation with someone over the sale of a house. You offer him a higher price if he makes certain concessions like helping on financing, including the furnishings, etc. He says: “No, I won’t give you any of those things. Now remember where we left off? You offered me a higher price in exchange for nothing.”

If the Palestinians had accepted Olmert’s offer and made their own concessions to get more, Netanyahu would view himself as bound by any concessions Olmert made. But since the Palestinians rejected Olmert’s proposal and refused to give the concessions he asked of them, no Israeli government is bound. As Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin once said in an identical situation: Nothing is decided until everything is decided.

And finally here’s my favorite line about the memorandum:

“The document, dated October 12, was issued by Fatah's Office of Mobilization and Organization. The office is headed by the party's No. 2, Mohammed Ghneim.”

Do an Internet search—allowing for variations for the transliteration of this name, example, Muhammad Ghaneim—and you will find that I’m just about the only one who has written about this gentleman and his role as the number-two man in Fatah, the Palestinian Authority, and the PLO. Everyone else has ignored it.

I wrote that Ghaneim is a hardliner who rejected the 1993 Oslo agreement and would pull the Palestinian leadership in a more radical direction, making peace even more impossible and increasing the movement’s anti-Americanism.

This is precisely what’s happening.


RubinReports: How the Palestinian Authority is Killing Even the Charade of a Peace Process

Israeli Flag Raised in United Arab Emirates - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Israeli Flag Raised in United Arab Emirates - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Shared via AddThis

Anti-Israel Attack Foiled in Turkey - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Anti-Israel Attack Foiled in Turkey - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Shared via AddThis

From Friend to Enemy? Israel Slams Turkish Incitement on TV - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

From Friend to Enemy? Israel Slams Turkish Incitement on TV - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Shared via AddThis

Katif Evictees Say New Gov't Treats them Better - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

Katif Evictees Say New Gov't Treats them Better - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

Shared via AddThis

Israeli Firm Patents Unmanned Helicopter - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Israeli Firm Patents Unmanned Helicopter - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Shared via AddThis

Reclaiming the Land, Making Wine - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

Reclaiming the Land, Making Wine - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

Shared via AddThis

Photos: Sanz Rebbe in Hevron - Jewish World - Israel News - Israel National News

Photos: Sanz Rebbe in Hevron - Jewish World - Israel News - Israel National News

Shared via AddThis

Muslim Mafia Exposed

Muslim Mafia Exposed

Shared via AddThis

Israel Matzav: Good luck with that

Israel Matzav: Good luck with that

Israel Matzav: Putin kicks sand in Obama's face

Putin kicks sand in Obama's face

Remember those ads from comic books in the '60's where some poor shmendrick on the beach gets sand kicked in his face and then Charles Atlas comes and turns him into a bodybuilder? President Obama is looking more and more like the shmendrick, but Charles Atlas is nowhere to be found.

On Tuesday night, Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov told US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that sanctions against Iran would be 'counter-productive.' And on Wednesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin called the threat of sanctions against Iran 'unneeded.'

Putin said the threat of sanctions is unneeded at this point because it could scare the Iranians, scuttling chances that talks with global powers could end Tehran's recalcitrance.

"If we speak about some kind of sanctions now, before we take concrete steps, we will fail to create favorable conditions for negotiations. That is why we consider such talk premature," Putin told reporters in China.

"We believe that we should treat this issue with caution, and there is no need to scare the Iranians," he said.

Yeah, let's not scare the Iranians. That might actually induce them to give up their nuclear weapons or to come out and fight like men. Instead, we'll be really careful not to scare them.

Is Barack Obama scared yet?

What could go wrong?


Israel Matzav: Putin kicks sand in Obama's face

Israel Matzav: How to end the Arab - Israeli war

How to end the Arab - Israeli war

Jeff Jacoby nails it in Wednesday's Boston Globe column:

In an important article in the current Middle East Quarterly, Daniel Pipes reviews the terrible failure of the 1993 Oslo accords, and homes in on the root fallacy of the diplomatic approach it embodied: the belief that the Arab-Israeli war can “be concluded through good will, conciliation, mediation, flexibility, restraint, generosity, and compromise, topped off with signatures on official documents.’’ For 16 years, Israeli governments, prodded by Washington, have sought to quench Palestinian hostility with concessions and gestures of good will. Yet peace today is more elusive than ever.

“Wars end not through good will but through victory,’’ Pipes writes, defining victory as one side compelling the other to give up its war goals. Since 1948, the Arabs’ goal has been the elimination of Israel; the Israelis’, to win their neighbors’ acceptance of a Jewish state in the Middle East. “If the conflict is to end, one side must lose and one side win,’’ argues Pipes.

Diplomacy cannot settle the Arab-Israeli conflict until the Palestinians abandon their anti-Israel rejectionism. US policy should therefore be focused on making them abandon it. The Palestinians must be put “on notice that benefits will flow to them only after they prove their acceptance of Israel. Until then - no diplomacy, no discussion of final status, no recognition as a state, and certainly no financial aid or weapons.’’

So long as American and Israeli leaders remain committed to a fruitless Arab-Israeli “peace process,’’ Arab-Israeli peace will remain unachievable. Let the newest Nobel peace laureate grasp and act upon that insight, and he will do more to hasten the conflict’s end than any of his well-meaning predecessors.


Israel Matzav: How to end the Arab - Israeli war

Israel Matzav: Fatah signs a peace agreement

Israel Matzav: Fatah signs a peace agreement

Another Blood Libel

Another Blood Libel

I suppose this will somehow be construed as legitimate criticism of Israeli policies, or as the unimportant ravings of some lunatic, or as another wearying chapter in the endless story of the Jews not getting along with their neighbors "over there", or as the whirlwind the Israelis are reaping for the storm they have sown.

It's not.

It's a blood libel. Jews kill non-Jewish children in cold blood, because that's what Jews do. Blood libels have been around for centuries, they have nothing to do with Israeli policies, or any actions taken by Jews. This one is broadcast, so we're told, on prime time TV, on a government sanctioned television station.

Let the burning of Turkish embassies begin.
Originally posted by Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...