I was interviewed by Press TV about the recall of the Palestinian Ambassador to the US, Dr Husam Zomlot, to Ramallah for ‘consultations’ on 1/1/2018
First published by the Middle East Eye on 30/8/2017
Just days after a US delegation visit to Israel and Palestine, Netanyahu declares that Israel will no longer uproot settlements. Any dreams of peace anytime soon are a long way off
Say what you want about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but he doesn’t mince his words.
“We are here to stay, forever,” he said earlier this week during an event in the settlement of Barkan, commemorating the 50th anniversary of Israel’s occupation of the West Bank.
“There will be no more uprooting of settlements in the land of Israel. It has been proven that it does not help peace. We’ve uprooted settlements. What did we get? We received missiles. It will not happen anymore.”
Coming just days after the visit of US President Donald Trump’s “peace team” to the region, led by his senior advisor and son-in-law, Jared Kushner, the timing of Netanyahu’s comments are highly significant.
The readout from the US team’s meetings with Abbas and Netanyahu was largely devoid of content. However, as brief as it was, it confirmed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ warnings that Trump’s peace process plans – and perhaps his White House overall – are in turmoil.
“I have met with Trump envoys about 20 times since the beginning of his term as president of the United States,” Abbas reportedly told delegates from the Israeli political party Meretz during a recent visit.
“Every time they repeatedly stressed to me how much they believe and are committed to a two-state solution and a halt to construction in the settlements. I have pleaded with them to say the same thing to Netanyahu, but they refrained. They said they would consider it but then they didn’t get back to me,” Abbas said, according to the delegates’ notes.
“I can’t understand how they are conducting themselves with us … Inside [Trump’s] country, there is chaos in the administration.”
The administration may indeed be in chaos, but whether intentionally or out of incompetence, it has kicked the peace process into the long grass and emboldened the Israelis in the process.
A peace plan mystery
Kushner and the rest of the Trump team’s recent visit to the Holy Land was preceded by a whistlestop tour of key Arab countries. It is important to note that no substantive messages emerged about Trump’s proposed peace plan.
The US embassy rstatement from the 23 August meeting between the Americans and Jordan’s King Abdullah II omitted any reference to discussions about the much vaunted two-state solution.
However, quoting a statement from the Royal Court, Jordanian media reported that “talks focused on efforts to push forward the Palestinian-Israeli peace process and relaunch serious and effective negotiations between the two sides based on the two-state solution, which is the only way to end the conflict”.
A subsequent report in Al-Hayat newspaper, attributed to a PA source, said that Trump’s team had indicated that a settlement freeze could not be a precondition for resumed peace talks and that building would continue.
However, a senior White House official told the Times of Israel that Al-Hayat’s report was “nonsense” and said that the comments were never made.
In their meeting with the Palestinians, the visiting delegation reportedly asked for a three to four month grace period to present their ideas. A former Palestinian negotiator Nabil Shaath also said that the Palestinians told the Americans that its demands are “the end of the occupation, the establishment of an independent Palestinian state on 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital, as well as the resolution of all permanent status issues, including the right of return for [Palestinian] refugees.”
These demands are the longstanding position of the Palestinians and have not shifted at all.
No room in ‘Netanyahu land’
While the Palestinian position remains consistent, Netanyahu, perhaps feeling emboldened more than ever, continues to harden Israel’s position.
When he promised during the 2015 elections that there would be no Palestinian state under his watch, those seeking to shield Israel from criticism claimed it was just electioneering.
However, this week, Netanyahu went further when he said there would be “no more uprooting of settlements in the land of Israel”. Netanyahu is not talking about two states with land swaps. He is not talking about “keeping the settlement blocks” along the Green Line. He is talking about all settlements. This has nothing to do with electioneering but rather his long-held beliefs.
There is no room in Netanyahu land for a Palestinian state.
In fact, in June, Israel recently laid the foundations for a new settlement. “After decades, I have the honour to be the first prime minister to build a settlement in Judea and Samaria,” Netanyahu said at the time, referring to the occupied West Bank with its biblical name.
Netanyahu sees the land of historic Palestine from the river Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea as Israel. There is no room in “Netanyahu land” for a Palestinian state.
Increasingly emboldened by the lack of pressure from the international community to move seriously towards peace or face sanctions, Netanyahu is moving the debate from the real issue – how to end a 50-year long occupation – to Israel’s security needs.
He told UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres on his first visit to the Holy Land this week that Israel’s “most pressing problem” is Hezbollah and Syria, claiming that the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) had smuggled weapons into Lebanon for Hezbollah.
“I will do everything in my capacity to make sure that UNIFIL fully meets its mandate,” Guterres responded, adding that the “idea, intention or will to destroy the state of Israel is something totally unacceptable from my perspective.”
Netanyahu also called upon Gutteres to “end the discrimination against Israel in some branches of your organisation”, an accusation shared by the US administration and frequently raised by US Ambassador to the UN Nicky Hayley who has promised to end it several times.
On Wednesday, two days after his meeting with Netanyahu, Gutteres called for Israel’s blockade against Gaza to end. It seems their meeting may not have gone as well as the Israeli president thought.
Sign of things to come
While it is dangerous to predict the future, I will take this risk today. As Netanyahu and Abbas prepare to address the UN General Assembly in September, we can read the signs from this week to guess what they will say.
Abbas will plead with the UN to bring decades of Palestinian of suffering to an end, halt illegal settlements and help protect the (non-existent) two-state solution. He is likely to be armed with a recent petition signed by thousands of Palestinian pupils calling on Gutteres and all defenders of human rights to intervene to protect them from Israel’s daily violations which Palestinians have endured for 50 years.
Abbas may ask for the UN to recognise the state of Palestine and may also indicate that if the peace process fails, he will be left with no options but to head to the International Criminal Court.
Netanyahu, on the other hand, may focus on the unfair criticism of Israel, on the real issues as he sees them – which amount to Israel’s self-defined and elastic-security needs. He will talk about the threats from Iran in Syria and Hezbollah in Lebanon, the failure of the UNIFIL to do its job and the need to rearticulate its mandate.
On peace with the Palestinians, he will say that settlements are not an obstacle to peace and argue that neither the unilateral actions by Palestinians, nor the imposition of a solution will bring peace. The real obstacle to peace, he will claim, is the Palestinian refusal to recognise Israel as a Jewish state.
He will laud the growing “under the table” relations with key Arab countries which share his concerns about Iran, but he will still portray Israel as the victim, not the Palestinians.
It seems that the ultimate deal President Trump seeks is a long way off and, any peace initiative, when it comes, will be biased in Israel’s favour.
Israel will continue to colonise and the Palestinians will continue to suffer a lack of peace or hope for the current and the next generation, neither of which will bring Israel any security.
– Kamel Hawwash is a British-Palestinian engineering professor based at the University of Birmingham and a longstanding campaigner for justice, especially for the Palestinian people. He is vice chair of the British Palestinian Policy Council (BPPC) and a member of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC). He appears regularly in the media as commentator on Middle East issues. He runs a blog at www.kamelhawwash.com and tweets at @kamelhawwash. He writes here in a personal capacity.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Photo: US President Donald Trump and Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wave after delivering a speech at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem
Interview by Muslim Press on 3/7/2017
Muslim Press has conducted an interview with British Palestinian academic and writer on Middle East Affairs Kamel Hawwash about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the role Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is playing in this regard.
“It seems Abbas has led the Palestinians to a dead end. Gaza is still under siege ten years on, the settlements continue to grow in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, over 6,000 prisoners still languish in Israeli jails, reconciliation with Hamas has failed and the refugees have not been able to return to their homes in historic Palestine,” Prof. Hawwash said.
Here’s the full transcript of the interview:
Muslim Press: Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has recently met with US President Donald Trump. What’s your take on this meeting? Does Abbas speak for all Palestinians?
Kamel Hawwash: Abbas’ first meeting with the American President in Washington seemed to have gone well. Donald Trump even tweeted that he was ‘honoured’ to meet the Palestinian President but he then deleted the tweet. He continued to repeat his belief that bringing peace between Israel and the Palestinians is the ‘ultimate deal’. The second meeting was less positive. Reports suggested that Trump focused on what Israel calls Palestinian incitement, which had been fed to trump during his meeting with Netanyahu, hours earlier. Trump is said to have accused Abbas of lying to him about his actions to end incitement. It also emerged that Trump had raised the issue of the PA’s monthly payments to families of Palestinian prisoners and martyrs (those killed while allegedly attacking Israelis, including occupation forces). As to the peace process then little emerged from the meetings to give the Palestinians hope. However, Abbas was still committed to negotiations, brokered by the Americans.
MP: Has Israel been pressuring the PA since Trump was elected?
Kamel Hawwash: Israel has been moving the goal posts again. It is now raising the issue of ending Palestinian ‘incitement’ as a major issue in advance of any negotiations and is requiring that the PA ends payments to families of prisoners and those the Palestinians see as martyrs. It has further been attempting to relegate the importance of reaching a deal with the Palestinians to a secondary issue that is part of a regional deal rather than important in its own right. This has to be set against the context of what Israel claims to be thawing relations with some of the Gulf States and the talk of partial normalisation between Israel and key players in the region including Saudi Arabia.
MP: What are the results of Abbas’s policies toward Israel for Palestinians?
Kamel Hawwash: It seems Abbas has led the Palestinians to a dead end. Gaza is still under siege ten years on, the settlements continue to grow in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, over 6,000 prisoners still languish in Israeli jails, reconciliation with Hamas has failed and the refugees have not been able to return to their homes in historic Palestine. In addition, the PA’s security coordination with Israel is seen as ‘sacred’ by Abbas which the Palestinians find difficult to understand when Israel continues to flout all agreements signed with the PA. The lack of hope is the most dangerous outcome from his policies, despite a small number of achievements, including the upgrade in Palestine’s status to a UN non-member observer state in 2012.
MP: Trump has said he will find peace between the Palestinian people and Israel. How would that be possible while Israel is still expanding illegal settlements?
Kamel Hawwash: It is difficult to see how Trump can bring peace between the two sides considering how biased his team of negotiators is and his in favour of Israel and his choice of US Ambassador. The three key players, his son-in-Law Jared Kushner, Jason Greenblatt and Ambassador Friedman, could easily be on the Israeli side as they support much of Israel’s policies, especially the settlement enterprise. Trump has not appointed a single adviser who could be seen as pro-Palestinian or indeed an American of Palestinian heritage. He has abandoned long standing US policy regarding the illegitimacy of the settlements and does not mind if the parties want a 2-state or one-state solution. His vision is rather confused.
MP: What’s the significance of Jared Kushner’s meeting with Netanyahu and Abbas?
Kamel Hawwash: This may have finally exposed the bias of the American team towards Israel. Reports indicate Kushner had left his meeting with Netanyahu for Ramallah effectively to pass on Israeli demands to the PA rather than offer some balance or provide an indication of his ideas for relaunching the peace process.
Kamel Hawwash is a British-Palestinian engineering professor based at the University of Birmingham and a longstanding campaigner for justice, especially for the Palestinian people. He is vice chair of the British Palestinian Policy Council (BPPC) and a member of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC). He appears regularly in the media as commentator on Middle East issues. He runs a blog at http://www.kamelhawwash.com and tweets at @kamelhawwash.
This article was published by the Middle East Monitor on 19/2/2016
The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement has been in the news recently following the British government’s decision to “ban” local authorities from applying their ethical procurement policies if this will result in boycotts of Israeli goods or companies complicit in the illegal occupation of Palestine. Significantly, this was announced not in Britain’s House of Commons but in Israel during a visit by Cabinet Minister Matt Hancock. The government moved swiftly to implement the policy without any parliamentary debate or vote. It issued a so-called procurement policy note informing public authorities that they would face “severe penalties” if they continue procurement boycotts on ethical grounds. The instruction notice said that “public procurement should never be used as a tool to boycott tenders from suppliers based in other countries, except where formal legal sanctions, embargoes and restrictions have been put in place by the UK Government.”
This move and similar steps taken previously by France and now possibly Canada to make boycotts of Israel illegal are at best illogical but, most worryingly, send a message to Israel that only it can determine whether to end the occupation and when. The tools to put civil society pressure on it to do so without delay are being stripped away.
On 20 October last year, France’s highest court of criminal appeal upheld the convictions of 12 Palestine solidarity activists for calling for a boycott of Israeli goods, finding them guilty “of inciting hate or discrimination”. Canada’s Trudeau government intends to join the Conservatives in condemning any individual or organisation participating in any boycott of Israeli products or services, including the United Church of Canada and the Quakers. They seem to be doing this with somewhat of a heavy heart, though, since they acknowledge that “most of the organisations and individuals supporting the BDS movement are doing so in good faith, believing it will somehow force an end to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and its control over Gaza, and maybe some sort of peace deal.”
The attacks on those responding to and promoting the BDS call are illogical. Since the occupation is not a static beast, the longer that it goes on, the less chance there is of realising a two-state solution, which is what each of these countries claims is its national policy. Their actions thus far to convince Israel to halt its illegal settlement activity and end the occupation have amounted to nothing. The number of illegal settlers has reached 650,000 in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. Will they only act when the number of illegal settlers reaches a million, or even more?
For its part, the Palestinian Authority has not fully embraced the BDS call, choosing instead to focus on boycotting settlement goods and, even then, doing so intermittently. This goes as far back as 2010 when the then PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad was seen tossing settlement products onto bonfires. However, away from the cameras there has not been a sustained effort to enforce a boycott to the degree that it has hurt the settlements.
In fact, President Mahmoud Abbas has been explicit in refusing calls for expanding this modest action to a full boycott of Israel in line with the BDS call. In 2103, he famously chose a trip to South Africa, of all places, during which he rejected the BDS campaign in the country. “No, we do not support boycotts of Israel,” he said, “but we ask everyone to boycott the products of the settlements because the settlements are in our territories. It is illegal.” This caused outrage among Palestinians and their supporters despite a clarification issued later by the Palestinian Embassy in South Africa.
Just over two years after Abbas’s statement, the Palestinians find themselves not only in a worse position on the ground but also almost abandoned by their Arab allies, and with Israel succeeding in convincing its allies to attack supporters of the BDS movement and refraining from any peace initiative not to its liking. The most recent example was Israel’s rejection of the French efforts to convene a peace conference to breathe life into the dormant peace process.
The Palestinians therefore need to take the initiative. The PA’s insistence on pursuing an end to the occupation through peaceful means is not utilising its most successful tool, which is BDS. This peaceful means of putting pressure on Israel is home-grown. The call came from Palestinian civil society in 2005. Its aims are explicit, moral and legitimate, calling for an end to the occupation, equality for Palestinian citizens of Israel and respect and promotion of the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Considering Israel’s intransigence, actions on the ground and the death of dozens of Palestinians, mostly youngsters in the current uprising, it is time that the BDS call became the call from both Palestinian civil society and the Palestinian Authority. This should happen alongside a sustained campaign to discourage Palestinians from working in the illegal settlements before moving on to a complete ban. This acknowledges the difficulty of immediate implementation but at least indicates the direction of travel.
It would also send a clear message to the international community that without a peace deal and with no protection for Palestinians from Israel’s murderous actions and continued land theft, the people of Palestine are united in calling for an escalation of BDS as a peaceful resistance tool alongside the internationalisation of the conflict and the pursuit of war crimes trials in the International Criminal Court. After nearly 50 years of the occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip, and twenty-two years of futile talks, it is time that the Palestinians played their part in delivering on US Secretary Kerry’s warning to Israel in 2014 that should his peace initiative fail, Israel could face “boycotts on steroids”.
Professor Kamel Hawwash is a British Palestinian engineering academic based at the University of Birmingham. He is a commentator on Middle East affairs and is Vice Chair of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign. He blogs at http://www.kamelhawwash.com. He writes here in a personal capacity.
The Middle East Monitor publiched my article on 15/1/2016
Image from the Middle East Monitor
In his first speech of 2016, Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas reviewed the situation facing the Palestinians and set out his approach for the forthcoming year. He started with the major achievement of 2015, the formal recognition of Palestine by the Vatican. He noted that the Pope had surprised the PA delegation by ordering the raising of the Palestinian flag during his last trip to Rome. He looked forward to further recognitions in the near future.
He did not refer to any other major achievements in 2015. However despite characterising the PA in the past as an “Authority without authority”, due to Israeli actions, this time he referred to its shear existence as a “major achievement for the Palestinian people”. He committed to not allowing it to collapse. He also committed to ending the “leaking” of Palestinian land to anyone else. He was referring to the ongoing campaign by Zionist individuals and organisations to purchase land from Palestinians through shady deals with owners. He was also possibly referring to the Greek Orthodox Church which had sold land to Israel.
As to the current situation, Abbas claimed that all Palestinian protests are peaceful but are met with brutal force. He elaborated that “a stone thrower is shot from a distance of 100 metres even if the stone only travels 10 metres, therefore not reaching the occupation’s soldiers”. This has resulted in the number of prisoners reaching 7,000, including many children some as young as ten. He warned: “It is dangerous for the young people to feel that the only option open to him is violence.”
Abbas claimed that he “will not allow the status quo to continue”. He wanted a halt to the “cancerous settlements” and reaffirmed that all settlements are illegal, including the so called large settlement blocks. He said “the settlers must leave as they did from Gaza”. He argued that that the Israelis continue to suffocate the Palestinians. “Leave us alone”, he said in desperation. His message to the Israelis was: “We are here and will not leave. We will not allow an Apartheid state. We want a fully sovereign Palestinian state.”
The PA President expressed his view that solving the conflict would end extremism and terror in the region, though he was not forthcoming with how he would change the status quo. “The Palestinians fulfil their obligations while the Israelis don’t,” he argued.
Despite all this, Abbas extended the hand of peace to the Israelis and committed the Palestinians to achieving this through “peaceful negotiations”. It is worth pausing for a moment to absorb this new term. Have the negotiations with Israel that have lasted over twenty years been anything but peaceful? Were the Israelis dragged to the negotiating table under threat of, or exercise of violence? Clearly this has not been the case; otherwise far fewer violations of international law would have been committed by Israel, including the growth of the “cancerous settlements”.
Negotiations with Israel over the past twenty two years have not only failed, they have been catastrophic. They have allowed Israel to expand settlements and to increase the number of settlers to over 600,000 in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. PLO Executive Secretary and the Palestinian Authority’s chief negotiator Saeb Erekat admitted this in interview withAljazeera in October 2015. He confirmed that he had given up on negotiations with Netanyahu, calling them “a waste of time”. He predicted that a decision about disbanding the PA would be made by the end of 2015. This contrasts Abbas’ promise in his recent speech not to allow the PA to collapse.
An attempt by Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat to restart talks was flatly rejected by his Israeli counterpart Silvan Shalom, following meetings in Amman and Cairo in July and August last year. Erekat told an IPSI dialogue audience that he warned Shalom that there would be a “sea of blood” if the current impasse continued but his warning fell on deaf ears. In November 2015, US President Barack Obama concluded: “Right now, barring a major shift, the parties are not going to be in the position to negotiate a final status agreement.” With the US effectively declaring an end to its engagement, at least until the end of Obama’s reign and with most US Presidential candidates declaring that they side with Israel, the status quo, which everyone claims to be unsustainable, is set to continue for years.
In his recent speech, Abbas reminded the audience that the Arab Initiative was still on the table. That once Israel ended its occupation of Arab land and the two-state solution was implemented, 57 Arab and Muslim states would normalise relations with Israel but that “Israel refuses to consider it seriously, therefore, what do they want”?
He called for an international conference that widens the group involved in seeking a solution, particularly since the Middle East Quartet had failed. He suggested that this conference should then set up a committee to find a solution, similar to that which oversaw the Iran deal.
However, with the world’s attention currently consumed by the threat of Daesh and how it can be defeated, and President Obama seeing his second term out, prospects for an international conference are negligible. No one, apart from Abbas, talks about it.
Meanwhile, the current escalation of violence continues. The PA is helpless to stop it. It has also failed or chosen not to nurture the escalations in-order for them to become a strong, peaceful intifada that is costly to the occupier. The PA’s repeated threats to re-evaluate its relationships with Israel, including the Oslo Accords and in particular the infamous security cooperation have to this date remained threats, further eroding the credibility of the PA with the Palestinian people. The PA supports a boycott of settlement goods. However, it does not support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign. This should be revisited as it is another peaceful and effective way of exerting pressure on Israel.
There are also no prospects of the US or bodies such as the UN, the Arab League or the Quartet intervening with an initiative unless Israel begins to feel the cost of the occupation. The Palestinians may feel that an investigation of Israeli crimes by the International Criminal Court in 2016 and joining more international bodies could pressure Israel. However, those steps are unlikely to be sufficiently costly on their own for Israel to change its ways.
Tis the season of good will and anyone looking at a horrible 2015 from a Palestinian perspective knows they would welcome some good news.
This year’s Christmas present came in the form of a call for another European Government to recognise Palestine. This time it was the turn of the Greek Parlisment to overwhelmingly call on its Governmrnt to recognise the state. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas was in attendance and warmly thanked Greece for this gesture.
This follows votes in anumber of European Parliaments including Britian and Ireland. However, only Sweden has recently recognised Palestine as a state at state level.
Aljazeera teports that the resolution is non-binding and not by the Greek state, so as “not to disturb good relations with Israel”, according to a statement released by the Greek foreign Ministry.
But at the same time, Greece has also been strengthening its ties with Israel. Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras recently visited Israel stressing the importance of the bilateral relations between Greece and Israel. More worryingly, while visiting Israeli President Rivlin he wrote in the guest book ” With great honor to be in your historic capital and to meet your excellencies.”
No state, except Israel recognises Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and all embassies are in Israel’s actual capital Tel Aviv.
But a more worrying development for Palestinians across historic Palestine has been the about turn of the Turkish Government in recent days. Turkey froze its relations with Israel following the latter’s deadly attack on the Mavi Marmara, part of the siege breaking flotila of 2010 which Israel raided in international waters and killed 10 turks.
Since then, Turkey has insisted on compensation for the attack and the lifting of the siege on Gaza. However, recently it ahs been reported that the two sides were very close to a deal to normalise relations and that the lifting of the sige on Gaza was not on the cards.
Israel has agreed to pay compensation to the families but “under the deal, all Turkish lawsuits against Israel will be cancelled, and Turkey will prevent senior Hamas operative Salah Aruri from entering its territory and acting from there, the source said”.
Hamas in particular is feeling the pressure exerted on Turkey by the USA and Israel. One of its top operatives, Salah Alaruri, had to leave Turkey as part of the new understanding with Israel.
Turkey and Greece are still good friends of the Palestinains. However, as Israel continues to oppress the Palestinians, and as the simmering Palestinian uprising continues, Palestinians need tangeable action to support them.
It is all very well for the Palestinian flag to fly at the UN and for rapturous applause to follow Parliamentary recognition votes ahich are all very welcome. However, while these serve to annoy Israel, it is only when states take a stand against Israel that it will begin to change course.
Israel’s Ambassador to the USA Ron Dermer, boatsted about sending gifts from the illegal settlements to ‘combat’ BDS. If one arrives at the Whitehouse, President Obama should not only retrun the gift but should ask his Secretary of State, John Kerry to summon Dermer to the State Department and censure him for this provocative act.
Israel continues to enjoy impunity to steal, judaise, abuct, imprison and kill at will. It will only end its serial breaking of international Law when it faces real action from states that claim to be democratic, civilised and upholders of International Law.
I am not sure of how long it took for the name of the Palestinian Authority to be conceived and then born after Oslo, but I would love to know what the alternatives were. What is beyond doubt is the fact that the PA now has little credibility amongst the People it supposedly has authority over. What is even more disturbing – and it should be worrying for senior members of the PA- is the repeated and now widely formed view that it is not Palestinian. This is not a play on words but a reflection on how Palestinians view it’s actions, particularly the ‘security cooperation’ with the brutal occupier Israel. In the current low level war Israel has launched on Palestine, PA security forces have been conspicuous by their absence, except (as it is reported) when coordinating with Israeli forces.
I wrote in an earlier blog that ‘The more Abbas appeals to the Israeli public, the more Netanyahu belittles him’. It seems also that the more security cooperation there is with the occupation, the more dismissive Netanyahu is of the PA’s efforts. Meanwhile the Palestinians are losing patience with a PA that rules over them whose term has expired and whose policies they have never voted for. It is bizarre that Israel, the illegal occupier of Palestine expects the occupied people to provide it with security in order to continue occupying. if anyone has come across another case in history where this was the case then please tell me.
Does Abbas believe that by providing this security cooperation and by expressing his heartfelt pain at the abduction of illegal settlers, he will deliver freedom for his people? Has his personal struggle and that of his people to rid themselves of the cancer that is the occupation not taught him that the ideology that is Zionism wants him and his people out? Sitting in the US at the moment as I write this the phrase “Jump and I say how high” comes to mind. Israel’s bar for ending the conflict rises with every piece of security cooperation, with every encouraging statement about the future and with every delay that Abbas announces for joining International bodies. Netanyahu and his advisers must chuckle every time the PA announces a concession. Their ‘not high enough’ and let’s raise the bar further follows immediately.
I take no joy from criticising Palestinians who believe their way is the only way for achieving our national objectives just for the same of it. I try to be encouraging but there is a limit. When PA forces turn their guns against the Palestinian people to ensure they provide peace and quiet to the occupier, rather than protect them from IDF and settler terrorism, they have crossed over the Green Line in their loyalty. Again it pains me to say this but it is increasingly difficult to try and understand and to explain, impossible to justify.
The PA’s authority expired years ago from a legal point of view. The Leadership’s authority expired years ago. The situation can hardly worsen if a new fresh leadership was allowed to try a different approach, but it might just begin to get better. Yes, there will be pain as the donors blackmail but an honest leadership that brings the people with it can count on the resilience of the Palestinains. That would also provide the Palestinian Authority with the renewed authority that has been damaged beyond repair.