Love of the Land: The Salam Fayyad show

The Salam Fayyad show

Economic growth in PA result of foreign aid, not prime minister’s actions


Avi Trengo
Israel Opinion/Ynet
25 April '10

Salam Fayyad has been stating time and again that he is working towards declaring independence across all “occupied territories” in August 2011. He says that although he is willing to engage in negotiations with Israel, he does not view this as a requirement for Palestine’s establishment. The Palestinians demand the application of international laws on self-determination, he says, adding that Israel is not the only player in this game.

Fayyad has also threatened to act unilaterally: “"We are not relinquishing negotiations as a method to establish a state, but in case this doesn't work we are preparing for a second possibility – to turn our dream into a reality."

Fayyad is not a military leader. He is building himself up as a political leader, yet there is no better way to judge his actions than to examine his deeds on the economic front, thereby exposing the immense gap between his words and intentions.

Had his intention indeed been to be the Palestinian Ben-Gurion, he would have been acting for the sake of economic independence and the building of an infrastructure for the state in process. Instead, Fayyad dedicated the huge funds he’s been receiving from the world to paying salaries, in a bid to boost his support. He remembers well that the party he established years ago won less than 2% of the vote in the elections. Just like any politician, this is what truly interests him: building a support base.

Recently, he started rewarding not only the 150,000 employees of the Palestinian Authority and its security arms. Fayyad established a fund (seemingly for development purposes) that hands over funds directly from donor states to salaries in more than 500 city halls and local councils established in the PA. In the past 16 years, these grew fivefold.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: The Salam Fayyad show

Love of the Land: Watch the Themes, Not the Headlines

Watch the Themes, Not the Headlines

Barry Rubin
The Rubin Report
24 February '10

A basic principle is to look at the underlying interests and perceptions of specific governments, not the immediate headlines. Over and over we see stories that prove false in a few days yet probably leave a lasting impression to the contrary on readers.

That thought is prompted by a recent flurry of stories that the Palestinian Authority is about to return to negotiations with Israel. In fact, for reasons I’ve outlined repeatedly in this blog (relating mainly to the radical nature of internal Palestinian politics) that isn’t going to happen for a long time.

Another story we keep hearing is about how Russia or China are about to support real sanctions on Iran. Yet every time an official from those countries makes a statement it is to the contrary.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: Watch the Themes, Not the Headlines

Love of the Land: 5 Questions on Vote Rigging at Palestinian Journo Union

5 Questions on Vote Rigging at Palestinian Journo Union

Honest Reporting/Backspin
11 February '10
Posted before Shabbat

The PA hijacked recent elections held by the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate to ensure key positions for Fatah cronies.

Ramallah journo Hani al-Masri told the Jerusalem Post :

About 300 “journalists” who participated in the election had nothing to do with journalism, he said. “Some of them were members of the Palestinian security forces, while most of the journalists who were registered as members of the syndicate’s generals assembly were actually employees of the Palestinian Authority or political activists,” he added.

The Maan News Agency further adds:

Another scandalous flaw blemishing the new Union is the so-called quota system which means that the union seats are divided among PLO factions in accordance with an anachronistic system dating back to the early 1980s.

Pursuant to this system, Fatah receives the lion’s share of the seats, followed by the PFLP and its former ideological sister, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP), followed by a myriad of small factions, most of which have few followers and supporters on the ground.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: 5 Questions on Vote Rigging at Palestinian Journo Union

Love of the Land: Punishing the Innocent Instead of the Guilty

Punishing the Innocent Instead of the Guilty

Evelyn Gordon
Contentions/Commentary
17 January '10

You have to admire Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s negotiating savvy. Someone less shrewd might have assumed that with the whole world seemingly desperate to restart Israeli-Palestinian talks, the party that refused would be penalized. Abbas correctly calculated that by refusing to talk, he could reap concrete benefits even before negotiations began.

He has already secured a 10-month settlement freeze from Israel. Initially, that was supposed to be matched by gestures toward normalization from Arab states. But the Arab states refused; Washington declined to press; and in the end, Israel gave something for nothing.

Yet Abbas still said no. So now the world is busily seeking more unilateral Israeli concessions to entice him to the table. Haaretz reported today that at a Quartet meeting last Wednesday, the European Union and Russia proposed demanding that Israel allow Orient House (the PA’s de facto foreign ministry) and other PA government offices to reopen in East Jerusalem. That is effectively a demand that Israel concede Palestinian sovereignty in East Jerusalem even before the talks begin: while embassies are located in foreign countries, government offices are usually located in one’s own.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Punishing the Innocent Instead of the Guilty

Love of the Land: Mahmoud Abbas, drama queen

Mahmoud Abbas, drama queen

Elder of Ziyon
14 January '10

Mahmoud Abbas is really big on making big, dramatic statements that get headlines but are meaningless.

The most famous recent example was when he claimed he would not run for President again. He said this with the full knowledge that there will be no elections in the near future, and that the president of the PA is subservient to the chairman of the PLO - which just so happens to be Mahmoud Abbas. He has no intention of relinquishing power any time soon, but when he makes threats like these (and he has done it numerous times before) he gets headlines and a modicum of support from the Fatah faithful (for whom he is also the leader.)

Today, he came up with a new one. He told an Egyptian newspaper that it is possible that Israel will assassinate him, just like they assassinated Arafat. He compared himself to Arafat by saying that just like Arafat was a man of peace who signed agreements with Israel, so is he, and just like Israel killed Arafat, so might he be killed by Israel. But he believes in Allah so it's no biggie.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: Mahmoud Abbas, drama queen

Love of the Land: The Palestinians' Unilateral "Kosovo Strategy": Implications for the PA and Israel

The Palestinians' Unilateral "Kosovo Strategy": Implications for the PA and Israel

Dan Diker
Institute for Contemporary Affairs (JCPA)
No. 575
January-February '10

Mahmoud Abbas' new precondition that the international community recognize the 1967 lines in the West Bank as the new Palestinian border bolsters the assessment that the Palestinians have largely abandoned a negotiated settlement and instead are actively pursuing a unilateral approach to statehood.

Senior Palestinian officials note that Palestinian unilateralism is modeled after Kosovo's February 2008 unilateral declaration of independence from Serbia. European and U.S. support for Kosovo's unilateral declaration has led the Palestinian leadership to determine that geopolitical conditions are ripe to seek international endorsement of its unilateral statehood bid, despite that fact that leading international jurists have suggested that the cases of Kosovo and the Palestinian Authority are historically and legally different.

The Palestinians are legally bound to negotiate a bilateral solution with Israel. Unilateral Palestinian threats to declare statehood have been rebuffed thus far by the European powers and the United States.

The Palestinian "Kosovo strategy" includes a campaign of delegitimization of Israel, seeking to isolate Israel as a pariah state, while driving a wedge between Israel and the United States. The unilateral Palestinian bid for sovereignty will also likely turn the Palestinians into the leading petitioner against the State of Israel at the International Criminal Court. Although the PA is not a state and therefore should have no legal standing before the court, the petition it submitted to the court after the Gaza war was not rejected by the ICC.

Finally, a unilateral Palestinian quest for the 1947 lines may well continue even if the 1967 lines are endorsed by the United Nations. The PLO's 1988 declaration of independence was based on UN General Assembly Resolution 181, which recognizes the 1947 partition plan for Palestine, not the 1967 lines, as the basis for the borders of Israel and a Palestinian state.

(Read full report)

Love of the Land: The Palestinians' Unilateral "Kosovo Strategy": Implications for the PA and Israel

Love of the Land: Abbas sponsors birthday celebrations honoring terrorist Dalal Mughrabi, killer of 37

Abbas sponsors birthday celebrations honoring terrorist Dalal Mughrabi, killer of 37

The text on the giant banner carrying Mughrabi's portrait at the birthday ceremony read:
"Under the auspices of President Mahmoud Abbas
The Political and National Education Authority
Ceremony on the anniversary of the birth of the bride of the cosmos
The Shahida (Martyr) Dalal Mughrabi."

Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik
Palestinian Media Watch(PMW)
31 December 09

This week Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas once again honored the memory of the terrorist Dalal Mughrabi - this time by sponsoring a ceremony celebrating the 50th anniversary of her birth. Mughrabi led the worst terror attack in Israel's history in 1978, when she and other terrorists hijacked a bus and killed 37 civilians. Present at the ceremony were Palestinian dignitaries and a children's marching band. Earlier this year, Abbas sponsored a computer center named after Mughrabi.

The PA further glorified Mughrabi on the date of her birth when the Governor of Ramallah announced the naming of the "Dalal Mughrabi Square".

An article by Fatah spokesman Jamal Nazal in the official PA daily defined the terrorist Mughrabi as "the heroine of Palestine's heroines."

[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Dec. 30, 2009]

(Read full report)

Love of the Land: Abbas sponsors birthday celebrations honoring terrorist Dalal Mughrabi, killer of 37

Love of the Land: Abbas turns 3 latest terrorists into Palestinian heroes

Abbas turns 3 latest terrorists into Palestinian heroes

Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook
Palestinian Media Watch (PMW)
29 December 09

Rabbi Meir Avshalom Hai -- a 45-year old Israeli and father of seven children - was killed in a drive-by shooting last Thursday. The Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, part of Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah movement, took responsibility for the killing. On Friday night, Israeli forces located and killed three of the terrorists involved in the attack. The fourth surrendered to the PA police.

The response of the PA has been unequivocal support and backing for the terrorists. Since Friday, the leadership of the PA, the heads of Fatah, the heads of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades and the PA-controlled media have continuously portrayed the killers as Palestinian heroes and Shahids -- holy Martyrs -- while describing Israel's killing of the three terrorists as "murder in cold blood" and "assassination."

PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas declared the killers "Shahids" (holy Martyrs) and sent his personal emissary to visit the families:
"Secretary General of the Presidents Bureau, Tayeb Abd Al-Rahim, conveyed condolences on behalf of President Mahmoud Abbas to the residents of Nablus and to the families of the three Shahids [Martyrs] for the Martyrdom of their sons, who were assassinated by Israeli occupation forces yesterday morning. He conveyed to the fighting families letters of condolences from the President [Abbas] and updated them as to [Abbas's] decision to declare them as Shahids [Martyrs] of the Palestinian revolution..."
Tayeb Abd Al-Rahim: "Without doubt, what the [Israeli] occupation authorities have carried out is a wild and barbaric act and a deliberate, malicious assassination in cold blood."
[PA TV (Fatah) News, Dec. 27, 2009]

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Abbas turns 3 latest terrorists into Palestinian heroes

Love of the Land: "Palestinians spend $500m on settlement goods"

"Palestinians spend $500m on settlement goods"

Elder of Ziyon
20 December 09

From Ma'an:

Palestinians spend about a half billion US dollars every year buying products made in Israeli settlements, Palestinian Minister of Economy Hassan Abu Libdeh on Sunday.

Abu Libdeh, speaking during a meeting at the Chamber of Commerce in Nablus in the northern West Bank, was explaining the Palestinian Authority’s (PA) decision to crack down on the sale of settlement products.

He told investors, business figures, and local officials that his ministry decided that 2010 would be the last year settlement products would be allowed the Palestinian market.

But, despite some reservations, the PA will continue to abide by the Paris Protocol, the 1994 agreement that dictates that there are no economic barriers between it and Israel.

This number seems very high. According to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, in 2007 the PA imported some $2.3 billion of goods from Israel altogether. It seems unlikely that over 20% of their goods imported from Israel originate in the territories.

(Continue reading)

Love of the Land: "Palestinians spend $500m on settlement goods"

Love of the Land: Shalit deal motivates more kidnappings and strengthens Hamas

Shalit deal motivates more kidnappings and strengthens Hamas

Itamar Marcus/Nan Jacques Zilberdik
Palestinian Media Watch
06 December 09

As both Arab and Israeli sources report that an impending prisoner exchange will trade kidnapped Israeli hostage Gilad Shalit for Palestinian terrorists serving life sentences for murder, Palestinian sources report that this move will increase the motivation to kidnap Israeli soldiers. PMW has reported similar statements in the past in response to earlier prisoner exchanges.

In addition, the deal will improve the position of Hamas internationally and internally: Internationally, because Israel's demand that the world boycott Hamas will be weakened as Israel itself has negotiated this release with Hamas; and internally, because Hamas will be strengthened among the Palestinian population as the movement that succeeded in releasing prisoners.

The following are the recent articles:

Headline: "The effect of the prisoner exchange deal on the Palestinian map"
"The degree of influence of the prisoner exchange deal [on Palestinian society] is dependent on the conditions of the deal and whether it follows Israel's criteria, which include not freeing those serving lengthy prison terms ("whose hands are stained with blood") [parentheses in original] ...
The information thus far shows that Israel's criteria have largely been shattered, while the Palestinian criteria have been breached to a lesser degree...
Completing the deal according to Palestinian criteria means:
a. Israel understands only the language of force, since kidnapping is the only thing that leaves open the gates of hope for freedom for prisoners with long prison terms. This encourages others towards self-sacrifice for the sake of the homeland and to respond to the mandatory call to resist the occupation and to cause it loss of life.

(Continue article)

Love of the Land: Shalit deal motivates more kidnappings and strengthens Hamas

Love of the Land: Why All the Excuses for Palestinian Intransigence Don’t Make Sense

Why All the Excuses for Palestinian Intransigence Don’t Make Sense

Barry Rubin
The Rubin Report
05 December 09

The Arab-Israeli, or Israel-Palestinian, conflict is the most misrepresented subject in the entire world. The most basic facts are often distorted and the most fantastical of narratives provided, even in college classrooms, about what has actually happened.

On the most single important issue in this framework—why isn’t there peace, who wants and doesn’t want peace, and how can peace be achieved—there is a common set of arguments against Israel. It goes like this:

How can the Palestinians make peace when they are suffering so much and when Israel builds settlements, or Israeli leaders make statements saying they want to keep some of the territory or won’t give up east Jerusalem, or do a variety of other things? The idea that the Palestinians don’t year for peace, are eagerly trying to make some kind of agreement, but are only stopped by Israeli intransigence seems completely self-evident to the point that any challenge of this idea is ridiculed, ignored, or treated as some kind of dishonest manipulation.

People think that when they've made these points it constitutes some kind of devastating, unanswerable rebuttal proving why there is no peace and why Israel is responsible. In fact, these statements are all either long outdated or simply beside the point.

In addition, many of the things said are factually wrong. Israel has neither constructed new settlements nor expanded their boundaries for fifteen years. But for the moment let’s leave aside the factual issues. It is easy to show that these claims are inaccurate but either ears are shut or the columns of the publications are closed to such responses.

Still, nothing could be simpler than to answer these claims.

Here’s the answer:

If the Palestinians are so miserable, they feel their situation intolerable, and want to get rid of settlements, they have and have had a very simple solution. Drum roll, please:

Make peace as fast as possible in a way that settles almost all their ostensible claims.

Yet they have refused to do so on numerous occasions going back for decades. In fact, this is the thirtieth anniversary of the Egypt-Israel agreement at Camp David which first opened the door to a Palestinian state. Then there was the Reagan plan and U.S.-PLO dialogue of the 1980s, followed by the peace process of the 1990s, the Camp David 2 and President Bill Clinton offers of 2000, and most recently the offer of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert (who was absolutely desperate for a deal in order to save his political career) and most recently the Israeli cabinet’s peace plan in which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu explicitly agrees to accept a Palestinian state.

(Continue article)

Love of the Land: Why All the Excuses for Palestinian Intransigence Don’t Make Sense

Love of the Land: Regime Change of the PA Via Annexation

Regime Change of the PA Via Annexation

Prof. Alan Friedlander
Jerusalem Defender
02 December 09

Were I a member of the Netanyahu Administration I would have voted against the building freeze in the territories. They are sending a confusing message of negotiating against their own position even before the PA regime returns to the negotiation table with them. This was only to placate a foreign power, not in pursuance of good policy for their people. The destructively self effacing courtship of friendship from the anti Jewish PA must cease so that Israel’s penchant for kindness and patience no longer be used against it by anyone. Fair play begins with being willing to play by the rules.

The Israeli government’s blunder, however, has a silver lining that is found in their special treatment of East Jerusalem in the face of Western linkage of East Jerusalem with Judea and Samaria. It illustrates that they believe that the State of Israel, at least potentially, has absolute authority over the lands conquered in the defensive Six Day War, otherwise how could they assume that their annexation of East Jerusalem is valid? Thus the silver lining in the dark cloud that the Netanyahu Administration performed is that they have incidentally taken a real step in disputing those who erroneously say that U.N. resolutions 242 and 338 make lands conquered in defensive wars barred from annexation by the defensive conquerors. One of the leading foundations in the conflict over the territories is this very dispute.

(To full article)

Love of the Land: Regime Change of the PA Via Annexation

Love of the Land: Painting Israel into a corner

Painting Israel into a corner

Moshe Dann
Israel Opinion/Ynet
02 December 09

Israel is being duped into a classic negotiating trap – and, it seems, quite willingly.

Forcing Israel to negotiate over Jerusalem neighborhoods, like Gilo, and dithering about threats from Iran, sets up Israel for strategic concessions. Moreover, temporarily freezing Jewish building in Judea and Samaria accomplishes nothing.

This bartering is calculated to divert Israel's attention away from the dangers of a second Arab Palestinian state and the obstacles that prevent that from happening.

By making it seem that Israel is getting something, e.g. reducing pressure against building in Jerusalem, the US is leveraging against Israeli interests elsewhere.

PM Netanyahu knows this game well, but is faced with a difficult choice: alienating an openly hostile American president, or turning against his own constituency. Tying to achieve some balance, he wants to appear that he is gaining something, and, that he is the victim of American pressure. In the end, he satisfies no one.

Agreeing to freeze Jewish building in Judea and Samaria, even temporarily, simply to get the PA to resume negotiations sets a dangerous precedent, one that will make it harder to withstand opposition to resume building after the time has elapsed.

Meanwhile, hilltops north of Ramallah are covered by new Arab housing projects, funded by the Overseas Private Investment Corp (OPIC), a US government agency, and the Middle East Investment Initiative (MEII), a project of the Aspen Institute, which has put up half the money (about a half billion dollars), and the Palestinian Authority's Investment Fund, International Finance Corp (World Bank) and local banks putting up the rest.

The Aspen Institute, World Bank, and other forums bring together political and economic elites at the highest levels, pursuing policies behind the scenes, for example, the two-state delusion. They were the active elements (along with Peres, Beilin, etc. on a local level) behind the Oslo Accords, the withdrawal from Gaza, etc.

(Continue reading ...)

Love of the Land: Painting Israel into a corner

Love of the Land: Anti-Israeli Swedish government pushes EU towards backing unilateral declaration of Palestinian state and division of Jerusalem

Anti-Israeli Swedish government pushes EU towards backing unilateral declaration of Palestinian state and division of Jerusalem

Robin Shepherd
RobinShepherdonline.com
01 December 09

Sweden, which currently holds the rotating presidency of the European Union, is pushing the EU to make an official statement next week backing both a unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood and also the division of Jerusalem, a draft resolution obtained exclusively by Israel’s Haaretz newspaper shows.

EU foreign ministers may now make a declaration along such lines at a meeting on December 7. It would be the first significant foreign policy initiative following the creation of a de facto EU foreign ministry under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty which came into effect today.

Israel is still reeling from the refusal of the Swedish government to distance itself from a report during the summer by the country’s top selling newspaper, Aftonbladet, which alleged an international Jewish conspiracy in which the Israel Defence Forces were said to be harvesting the bodily organs of Palestinian children for sale on the black market. Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt was, however, among the first to condemn Switzerland for its decision on Sunday to ban the construction of Muslim minarets which he described as “an expression of quite a bit of prejudice and maybe even fear”, adding that it was “a negative signal in every way.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Love of the Land: Anti-Israeli Swedish government pushes EU towards backing unilateral declaration of Palestinian state and division of Jerusalem

Love of the Land: Questions people are afraid to ask Salam Fayyad

Questions people are afraid to ask Salam Fayyad

David Bedein/Arlene Kushner
JPost/Opinion
28 November 09

In his column of November 20, "Salam Fayyad builds Palestine," Jerusalem Post Editor-in-Chief David Horovitz describes "two staunch Jewish supporters of Israel" - Sen. Joe Lieberman, former vice presidential candidate, and Rep. Howard Berman, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee - "nodding their encouragement" at a recent Ramallah press conference, where Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad explained how he was preparing Palestinians for statehood. The piece goes on to outline a Palestinian state in formation, regarding security forces, the economy and civic institutions, with an optimistic sense of what the PA is achieving.

Regrettably, Lieberman and Berman did not use the press conference to raise some troublesome questions.

Since these American elected officials let that opportunity pass, perhaps it was Horovitz's journalistic responsibility to explore these matters, to offer a more balanced picture. Instead, he alluded to "staunch supporters of Israel nodding their agreement" - conveying the notion that, except for some technical problems, all is well.

Questions that Lieberman, Berman or Horovitz could have asked would have included:

• Renunciation of the PLO state of war with Israel.

The charter of Fatah - the predominant element in the PLO and the PA - to this day continues to call for the destruction of Israel. Written in 1964, before Israel controlled the West Bank and Gaza, it uses the term "Palestine" to refer exclusively to Israel within the Green Line. The charter declares that "Liberating Palestine is a national obligation," and that "Armed public revolution is the inevitable method" for doing so. This cannot be dismissed as an irrelevant anachronism. Last August, Fatah held its first General Congress in 20 years. Hope was held out for a charter revision, with violence officially renounced, but it never happened. Instead, Fatah continued to unambiguously embrace "armed resistance" to liberate Palestine. Why is this so?

• Cessation of incitement via changes in PA-produced textbooks.

(Continue reading...)

Love of the Land: Questions people are afraid to ask Salam Fayyad

Love of the Land: Analysis: Virtual diplomacy, real damage

Analysis: Virtual diplomacy, real damage

Jonathan Spyer
Mideast/JPost
22 November 09

The statement by French President Nicolas Sarkozy in Riyadh last week expressing French willingness to mediate talks between Syria and Israel is the latest indication of Syria's emergence from diplomatic isolation.

Damascus has largely rebuilt its links with Europe and the Arab world. There is now a real possibility of a revival of indirect talks between Israel and Syria. Such talks, if they take place, are almost certain to get nowhere.

Still, the near guarantee of failure of any talks does not render Sarkozy's offer insignificant. It is to be hoped that the Netanyahu government resists the temptation to reopen the Syrian track.

Why might the government be tempted to enter indirect negotiations with Syria at this point? It is an article of faith among European countries and in the current US administration that a peace process between Israel and one or other of its enemies is essential. Israel's international diplomatic position currently leaves a lot to be desired. The perceived US distancing from Israel has emboldened those very considerable elements in Europe who would like to see increased pressure on the Jewish state.

There appears to be little hope of substantive movement in stalled talks between Israel and the troubled, perhaps moribund Palestinian Authority. Talks with Syria could provide the illusion of diplomatic motion which could help alleviate claims that Israel represents an intransigent barrier to progress toward regional stability.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Analysis: Virtual diplomacy, real damage

Love of the Land: Frolicking in the Quicksand: How the Obama Administration Keeps Making Huge Mistakes in the MIddle East

Frolicking in the Quicksand: How the Obama Administration Keeps Making Huge Mistakes in the MIddle East

Barry Rubin
The Rubin Report
19 November 09

Of course, the Obama Administration has its defenders. They either ignore criticism of the Administration’s foreign policy or claim it is all partisan and ideological. And yet the truth is that if you watch the government's policy on a daily basis it is truly remarkable how many dumb, avoidable mistakes are made.

I won’t supply a long list here but instead will talk about the latest one. Let’s take it step by step to see what a mess is being created.

Background: Israel announced in 1993, at the time of the Oslo agreement with the PLO, that it did not view construction on existing settlements as a violation. The Palestinians, during the ensuing 16 years, never made this a big issue. The U.S. government, while it can say it technically opposed this, was pretty quiet about it, never did anything.

Then President Barack Obama came to office and made the construction issue the centerpiece of his Middle East policy, sometimes it has appeared to be the keystone of his whole foreign policy. It may seem like an exaggeration but often it seems as if the administration believes that if Israel stopped building 3000 apartments all the region’s problems would go away.

So far, the Administration has wasted almost ten months in this pursuit. First, it shouted at Israel as if it were some servant to do it fast or else. Then when Israel didn’t, the Administration realized that perhaps Israel should get something in exchange for the concession. So it went to Arab states and asked—presuming, wrongly, that they are desperate for a peace agreement—for some compromise but got nothing.

Now it had destroyed its own policy since the Palestinian Authority (PA) refused to come to negotiations until there was a complete freeze. How could it be less hardline than the president?

But there was a solution, sort of. Israel agreed to stop all construction once the apartments currently being built are finished. And naturally, Israel said, this didn’t apply to east Jerusalem.

The United States accepted the deal, with Secretary of State Hilary Clinton exulting about what a huge concession Israel was making. Aside from everything else, the U.S. government knew how big a risk Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was taking with his coalition.

Ok. Sorry to give you all this background but it is necessary to understand how the Administration loves to jump in the quicksand.
(Continue reading...)

Love of the Land: Frolicking in the Quicksand: How the Obama Administration Keeps Making Huge Mistakes in the MIddle East

Love of the Land: Diplomatic Warfare: Palestinians Threaten Unilateral Statehood

Diplomatic Warfare: Palestinians Threaten Unilateral Statehood

Will they try it? And how will Israel respond?

P. David Hornik
PajamasMedia.com
16 November 09

The rhetoric is flying these days in Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said that “there is no substitute for negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority and any unilateral path will only unravel the framework of agreements between us and will only bring unilateral steps from Israel’s side.”

He was responding to threats by chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat that the Palestinian Authority would ask the UN Security Council to recognize a Palestinian state in all of the post-1967 territories with its capital in East Jerusalem — part of Israel’s united capital of Jerusalem and formally under Israeli sovereignty for over four decades.

Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority and universally acclaimed moderate, has joined the fray with some immoderate words,saying: “God willing, we will soon have an independent state with its capital in Jerusalem. … Today we are renewing our commitment to the entire Palestinian people — the martyrs, the wounded and the prisoners … to continue the path to victory, the path to a free and independent Palestine.” Given that “martyrs” refers to suicide bombers and “prisoners” to convicted terrorists in Israeli jails, these words would be regarded as endorsement and encouragement of terrorism if someone less diplomatically protected and anointed than Abbas had uttered them.

Israeli leaders have fired back some warning shots.

Even some visitors from abroad have gotten into the act. Bill Clinton, speaking at the Yitzhak Rabin Center in Tel Aviv,said: “In the last 14 years, not a single week has gone by that I did not think of Yitzhak Rabin and miss him terribly. Nor has a single week gone by in which I have not reaffirmed my conviction that had he not lost his life on that terrible November night, within three years we would have had a comprehensive agreement for peace in the Middle East.” For many Israelis who lived through the drastically increased terrorism of the early “Oslo process” and then through the three years of greatly reduced terrorism during Netanyahu’s first term as prime minister, the second sentence of that quote from Clinton is more than a little problematic.

To top it off, Arnold Schwarzenegger is here too, though he appears to be keeping his remarks mercifully neutral and anodyne.

What’s behind the rhetoric? The idea of a unilateral Palestinian push for statehood was broached recently by Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad and has been gaining steam. The Palestinians say that with the Israeli-Palestinian diplomatic talks frozen, they have no choice but to try and get their state by their own means. A quirk in that position is that, ever since Barack Obama became U.S. president, it’s Abbas who has steadfastly refused to meet with Netanyahu whereas Netanyahu has been constantly affirming his readiness to meet with Abbas and start negotiations on the two-state solution.

Page 1 of 2 Next ->

Love of the Land: Diplomatic Warfare: Palestinians Threaten Unilateral Statehood

Love of the Land: Think Tank “U.S. Aids Terror Group At War With Israel”

Think Tank “U.S. Aids Terror Group At War With Israel”

Samuel Sokol
5 Towns Jewish Times
12 November 09

A new report releaed by the Center for Near East Policy Research, a Jerusalem based think-tank, discusses the possible connection between American military aid and Palestinian terrorism. The report, Implications of US Military Training of Palestinian Security Forces, was authored by center chairman David Bedein and deals with the Office of the U.S. Security Coordinator (USSC), run by Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton.

This report is especially relevant following remarks by a senior Fatah official last week, stating that the Palestinian Arabs may revert to “popular warfare.”

According to World Net Daily correspondent Aaron Klein, Palestinian fighters have made use of American training to engage in violent attacks against Israeli civilians.

Established in 2005, the USSC manages a multi-national team of advisors, whose role is to restructure the PA security forces and train personnel.

American tax dollars pay for advanced military and constabulary training for the Palestinian security forces at bases in Jericho in Israel and Giftlik in Jordan. The cost of training an entire battalion of National Security Forces (NSF) troops in Jordan is $11 million.

Since 2008 approximately 2,100 troops, enough to make four battalions, have been trained by Americans in Jordan. The American government utilizes advisors from the DynCorp International Corporation for training Palestinian forces.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Think Tank “U.S. Aids Terror Group At War With Israel”

Love of the Land: Call Abbas’s Bluff

Call Abbas’s Bluff

Martin Krossel
FrumForum.com
11 November 09

At a Tel Aviv rally on Saturday night commemorating the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin, the country’s president Shimon Peres called on the head of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas to reverse his decision to resign. Peres reminded Abbas, by name, that they together had signed the 1993 Oslo Accords,and he implored, “I turn to you, don’t let go.”

Peres was hardly alone among prominent politicians and statesmen who were calling on Abbas not to resign. While Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu refused to comment on the resignation publicly, the Israeli daily Haaretz reported that he told officials behind closed doors that it was in Israel’s interest to have a strong Abbas who could move negotiations forward. French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner publicly expressed regret over Abbas’s planned resignation, calling it “a threat to peace.” White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said that Abbas had been a “true partner” of the United States. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accepted Abbas’s announced resignation at face value, but she expressed the hope that she would be able to work with Abbas “in any capacity.” She also told the press that when she had met with Abbas the previous weekend, “He reiterated his personal commitment to do whatever he can to achieve a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, something that he’s actually been working on since 1972.”

Middle East observers of all political stripes agree on why Abbas is threatening to resign. In light of his popularity with American presidents and other world leaders, Abbas reasons that his threat will spur the Obama Administration and other governments to pressure Israel to freeze settlement growth. Presumably, once this happens, then somewhere further down the road, Abbas will re-issue his threat in order to get the international community to force Israel to dismantle the settlements and eventually to retreat entirely from the territories captured in the 1967 war. What is much less obvious is why Abbas is so popular internationally and consequently why such gambits have even a chance of working.

In the past few weeks, I have been struck by the difference in the way that the Obama Administration, other national leaders, and much of the press look at Afghanistan’s Hamid Karzai and Abbas. The Palestinian government under Yasser Arafat and Abbas has proven to be every bit as corrupt and ineffective as Afghanistan’s. But the Karzai government is at least clearly superior to its Taliban alternative. There is little such difference between Abbas and his political rivals. The Jerusalem Post’s Evelyn Gordon noted this weekend on Commentary magazine’s Contentions blog that:

in 2005, his one year in sole control over the PA before Hamas’s electoral victory, Palestinians killed 54 Israelis and wounded 484 while 1,059 rockets were fired at Israel from Gaza. Yet not only did Abbas never order his forces to combat this terror; he explicitly and repeatedly refusedto do so. He first cracked down on Hamas only in 2007, after its violent takeover of Gaza convinced him that Hamas threatened him, not just Israel.

But the problem with America’s and the rest of the world’s approach to the Arab-Israeli conflict goes far deeper than Abbas, and their never-ending delusional attempts to identify a Palestinian “peace partner” for Israel. International efforts to resolve the conflict have always focused on getting Israel to make concessions to Arabs, which would supposedly encourage Arabs to make peace. Yet the source of the trouble has always been found on the other side of the line: the refusal of Israel’s neighbors to accept a Jewish state in their midst.

Until that happens, all efforts to settle the Arab-Israeli conflict will be futile.

Love of the Land: Call Abbas’s Bluff