July 15, 2009
http://www.gloria-center.org/
Now we may be at the start of another Palestinian implosion, this time in Fatah, the ruling party of the Palestinian Authority (PA), and the PLO, the less-important but still existing Palestinian political umbrella group.
The latest development is a very public feud between Fatah leader and long-time PLO “foreign minister” Farouq Qaddumi, and PLO and PA head Mahmoud Abbas. With the word “moderate” endlessly—and exaggeratedly—applied to Fatah, it is easy to forget that the group’s perennial most popular leader is Qaddumi, a man who opposed and still openly opposes the Oslo agreement and a two-state solution.
Given this opposition, Qaddumi, unlike many other Fatah leaders, long refused to move to Gaza or the West Bank. It should be stressed, however, that Qaddumi could probably—if a conflict broke out—muster more support in the organization than the bureaucratic and uncharismatic Abbas. Indeed, the only real asset Abbas has is the Western aid which subsidizes the PA and, indirectly, Fatah and the PLO.
Qaddumi has now accused Abbas of murdering former PLO, PA, and Fatah leader Yasir Arafat, in partnership with Israel no less! Of course, Israel is often blamed for this even by supposedly “moderate” Palestinian leaders or intellectuals aligned with Abbas. The truth is that Arafat, who was always in poor health and never exactly a physical fitness fanatic, received poor medical care, further delayed by the movement’s refusal to deal with the reality of his illness.
Let’s pause here for a moment. If Palestinian leaders lie about each other so shamelessly, shouldn’t Western journalists, politicians, and human rights’ groups consider how much more of an incentive they have to lie about Israel? Israel is accused of all sorts of misdeeds based on statements by Palestinians who view such lies as part of their propaganda effort. Shouldn’t that be taken into account and such claims discounted without hard proof?
Let’s return, however, to the Palestinian political action. Why this feud between the two top non-Islamist Palestinian leaders?
1. Western observers think peace processes are one-way streets but fail to understand that the closer successful negotiations might appear, the more determined are extremists to wreck it. In other words—it isn’t really paradoxical—even the potential prospect of diplomatic progress raised the level of violence and conflict. In this case, the new feud is in part a response to U.S. efforts to heat up the process by those who want to ensure the conflict doesn't end.
2. Abbas is perceived as becoming too close to America and there's fear of the PA and Fatah becoming U.S. satellites. A key factor here is U.S. training of Palestinian security forces. Fatah isn’t a movement so much as it is a militia; the PA is not so much a government as it is an assembly of gunmen. If the United States seems to gain influence over the security forces, militants believe it could get control of the movement. Many in the movement want to sabotage this efort. Remember these are people who have spent decades hating and mistrusting America. (Arafat used to lead meetings in a rousing version of a little ditty entitled, "America is the head of the snake.")
3. Qaddumi has always been Syria’s man. Syria keeps insisting that it is the key to stabilizing Iraq, Lebanon, the Palestinians, Arab-Israeli peace, contacts with Iran, and just about everything else. The Syrians want to assert its own influence over the movement and ensure the United States doesn’t get too much. (And since Syria also sponsors Hamas one can see what that would lead.)
4. Finally but most significantly, the battle to be the next PLO leader has just begun. Abbas is not in good health. Will he really last more than a year? Prime Minister Salam Fayyad is a Western-backed bureaucrat with no base of his own. Qaddumi is too old. There is no leading candidate, or even candidates, for the top job. But within the next year they will emerge. Each one will have a faction behind him. And don’t forget that each of these candidates will also be thinking about whether he wants to fight Hamas or get its backing in the battle for leadership.
In August, Fatah is supposed to hold a general congress, but these meetings are often postponed. Internal elections have been repeatedly postponed. Indeed, the reelection of the PA’s leader has also been postponed, in part due to the fact that the PA can’t control elections in the Gaza Strip and cannot be entirely sure it would defeat Hamas on the West Bank.
Palestinian politics, in short, are in a gigantic mess. They aren’t going to get better for a long time and might get worse. The PA and Fatah could descend into anarchy, or an even more radical leadership could emerge, putting its priority on an alliance with Hamas.
Western aid and hope of Western diplomatic support (not for a compromise peace but to make Israel give the Palestinians whatever they want with no reciprocity or compromise on their part), keeps people talking about a "two-state" solution in English. But they are chomping at the bit to demand openly that all of Israel become part of Palestine. They already do it in Arabic every day.
And these are the leaders and the group and the regime that U.S. and European policy depend on to make the tough compromises needed for peace with Israel? These are the shaky leaders and unstable organizations which much of the world is rushing to give control over a state?
To paraphrase what they say in the movies' legal declaimers: Any coincidence between the dominant Western analyses and actual Palestinian politics is purely coincidental.
13 comments:
OBAMA'S REAl AGENDA
by Anne Bayefsky
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1246443849765&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull
President Barack Obama last Monday met for the first time with leaders of selected Jewish organizations and leaks from the meeting now make one thing very clear. The only free country in the Middle East no longer has a friend in the leader of the free world. Obama is the MOST HOSTILE SITTING AMERICAN PRESIDENT in the history of the state of Israel.
Thankfully, Obama has just handed another $200 million dollars to his peace partners in Palestine and now that he is stopping the flow of military hardware to the evil Zionists, peace may finally be achieved in the region.
Defense Secretary Gates has continually reaffirmed that Washington would continue to provide its close ally, Israel, with "robust" military aid to counter what he called a "growing threat posed by rockets and missiles."
And now you have the rest of the story.
Again Mike, you believe words have a greater meaning than actions??? The US has stopped attack helicopter sales, put the F35 sales on hold, and you believe the words of Secretary Gates over the actual actions of the Obama administration. The helicopter sale went through to Egypt, but not Israel.
AS for the rest of the story... since you prefer to ignore reality and only look at words, I doubt you will ever get a clear picture of what is happening.
I am trying to find out the entire truth, Bruce.
I don't want to condemn someone who has been under constant bombardment from the right, including an entire Station, Fox News, which has no agenda other than destroying the First African-American President.
It is difficult to separate the hate based smears from the accurate information.
If you deny this Bruce, you are being disingenuous.
Perhaps you saw through the smear campaign, or accepted some and discarded some.
To most Americans, the formerly respected opposition has lost credibility.
Give me some time.
If it turns out that Obama is another Carter, I will not cease my efforts to expose him.
The American people love Israel.
I know, some extreme leftists have this lock-step sycophantic anti-Israel obsession, but they are as immaterial in real importance as are the far rightists, the Palinists and Limbaugh fans, etc.
Everything Obama says these days in speeches and press conferences,is now filtered with what is becoming a fear on my part that he may be turning on Jews and Israel.
If this turns out to be more than a fear, and more than just more smears from the right, as I say, I will contribute my small, insignificant voice to portraying his reality.
Well Mike, it is a start. I take it that you have finally seen enough to start questioning your devotion to Obama.
But you spent the last eight years screeching that Bush wasn't what he appeared to be and when someone tries to do it to Obama, you won't hear of it. The evidence for Obama's turning on Israel is out there for all to see if they want to. But I think I have told you before that I doubt Obama himself setting off a nuke in Tel Aviv wouldn't be enough to convince you anyway and I still hold that opinion.
But I am glad to see you have at least partially opened your eyes. I just pray that it is not too late for Israel and that she is able to hold off the eight years of an Obama presidency. And Mike, you should have no fear that Obama is going to turn on Jews and Israel. He was never on their side.
Obama honors enemy of Israel
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/07/obama_honors_an_enemy_of_israe.html
Another proud moment for our President.
Hello Mike. I was hoping to hear your thoughts on President Obama honoring Mary Robinson. I would like to hear how proud you are of our president for this action.
I guess I still remember Bush honoring Saudi leaders, in fact, inviting them to his home.
So you remember Bush giving Saudi leaders the highest civilan honor the USA has to offer?
You are a putz. So you obviously agree with our President in honoring Mary Robinson? Is it her approval os Jew murder that made you a believer?
I left Jerusalem Posts because I got sick of the name calling.
Don't bring that crap here, OK?
If you want to discuss issues, I'm up for that, aggravation and name calling, no.
OK, Let's discuss. I would like to hear your thoughts on Mary Robinson and not some deflection that Bush did this. Obama is now President. Let's deal with that. So do you agree with President Obama that Mary Robinson is someone that deserves our highest civilan honor? I know I keep repeating myself, but I would like an answer to that question and not some strawman.
I see that you are not willing to discuss this issue. I see that you are in agreement with our President that Mary Robinson deserves the highest civilan honor America has to offer and that you agree with her positions on the middle east conflict. It is nice to know where you stand on issues.
And you didn't leave the Jerusalem Posts because of name calling. You left because you couldn't stand to see your hero laid bare and you prefer to think of Obama as some sort of messiah. And since you ignore all evidence that is presented in an argument and believe that whatever you spout is the last of an argument, even debating with you is pointless. I came here because I wanted to engage you in a conversation. But you can't even do that on your own blog. So I will leave and not come back to this place you have created. I see no reason in trying to engage in thoughtful discussion when your mind is made up and could care less about reality.
Post a Comment