I was interviewed by Press TV on 12/10/2017
I was interviewed by Press TV on 8/10/2017
First published by the Middle East Eye on 29/6/2017
The president has hit a new low, cutting the salaries and electricity of Palestinians in Gaza. The next intifada will be against the Palestinian National Authority and this should worry Israel and Abbas
The embattled 81-year-old Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, has been in power since 2005. His reign has not brought the Palestinian people any closer to freedom and independence, but where is he leading them to now?
Abbas was elected president of the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) in January 2005 following Yasser Arafat’s death under suspicious circumstances in November 2004. He is president of the state of Palestine, leader of Fatah and chairman of the PLO. He is committed to negotiations with Israel based on a two-state solution, and has been since he signed the 1993 Oslo Accords on the White House Lawn to great cheers.
In short, he has played a hugely significant role in leading the Palestinians as a negotiator, a prime minster and a president and, while the blame for his administration’s failure can be shared among a number of key personnel, he set the overall direction of travel and must therefore carry the can for its disastrous consequences.
Under his watch, the Palestinians scored a small number of successes, including an upgrade of Palestine’s membership of the United Nations to a non-member observer state in 2012 allowing it to join several international organisations including UNESCO and the International Criminal Court. This was part of a strategy to internationalise the conflict.
Abbas may well argue that another of his successes has been the security coordination with Israel instigated under Oslo. It is one of the strongest cards Palestinians have to threaten Israel. Abbas has, however, called it “sacred”, arguing, “If we give up security coordination, there will be chaos here. There will be rifles and explosions and armed militants everywhere,”
Beyond this list, it is difficult to point to any other significant successes. On the contrary, Abbas’ setbacks and failures have put the Palestinian cause in the worst position it has been since Israel’s creation in 1948.
The Oslo Accords were meant to deliver a Palestinian state within five years. Twenty-four years and countless negotiations between the Israeli and Palestinian side, mostly led for the Palestinians by Saeb Erekat, later, and there is no Palestinian state
And while 136 member states of the UN recognise Palestine, of the so-called international community, only Sweden has afforded this recognition to the Palestinians. Significantly, neither Israel, nor the US recognise Palestine as a state, arguing recognition should only come at the negotiation table.
The last significant attempt at peace talks, led by US secretary of state John Kerry, ended in complete failure in 2014 and was followed by Israel’s third war on Gaza in which more than 2,000 Palestinians were killed. As he was leaving office, Kerry laid much of the blame for failure of the talks at Israel’s door, singling out its settlement policy led by the “most right-wing” government in its history.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu promised the Israeli electorate that there would be no Palestinian state under his watch in 2015. A significant number of his cabinet colleagues are against a state ever materialising and believe in the annexation of significant chunks of the West Bank to Israel.
Abbas remains committed to restarting negotiations with Israel and is now banking on the Trump administration to launch another initiative.
In 1993, the number of settlers in the West Bank including East Jerusalem stood at 148,000. By the time Abbas had taken over as president, they had reached 440,000. Under his presidency, the number has risen to almost 600,000.
They live in 127 illegal settlements “recognised” by the interior ministry as “communities” and about 100 illegal “outposts”. In 2005, Israel vacated 16 settlements in Gaza under Ariel Sharon’s unilateral “disengagement” plan.
The ever rising number of settlers and settlements has for many analysts already ended the prospect of a viable Palestinian state emerging.
Relationship between PNA and Hamas
Ever since its creation in 1987 shortly after the start of the first intifada, Hamas has pursued a significantly different approach to the conflict than Abbas’s Fatah party based on the liberation of historic Palestine and the establishment of an Islamic state in the area.
Left with no hope of a just solution that brings them freedom, the Palestinian people will rise again
In 2006, it decided to combine its military strategy with participation in the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) elections which it won handsomely. Abbas accepted the results and asked Ismael Haniyeh to form a government, which was then boycotted by the international community.
Following a bloody confrontation between Fatah and Hamas in Gaza in 2006, Israel imposed a siege on Gaza which continues to this day. The Egyptian border crossing at Rafah has effectively been closed since January 2015.
Despite many attempts at reconciliation between the two factions, the division between Hamas and Fatah remains deep. Hamas rules Gaza and Fatah rules the West Bank. The two million Palestinians of the Gaza Strip have paid a heavy price for this division.
Price paid by Palestinians in Gaza increases – again
Frustrated by a lack of progress in ending the division, but perhaps playing to the Israeli and American gallery under US President Trump, Abbas has recently undertaken several steps to pressure Hamas which may result in the formal separation of Gaza from the West Bank.
In recent weeks, he slashed the salaries paid to 60,000 civil servants in Gaza and informed Israel that the PNA would no longer pay for the electricity it supplies to Gaza which has reduced the supply to the strip to a couple of hours a day.
This hits not only ordinary Palestinians hard, it also hurts vital services such as hospitals and sewage treatment works. The PNA has also reportedly cut its funding to the medical sector depriving it of badly needed equipment and medicines.
However, reports that the PNA has been blocking the treatment of Palestinians in Gaza outside the strip have truly angered Palestinians everywhere.
Many that I have spoken to both inside Palestine and in the diaspora described this as “shameful”. “How can Abbas impose collective punishment on his own people while maintaining security cooperation with Israel?” one asked.
If Mahmoud Abbas thought his actions would hurt Hamas and bring it to heal, then he has once again miscalculated badly. Reports have emerged of talks between Hamas and Abbas’s arch-rival Mohammed Dahlan which could see the latter return as leader in Gaza.
And if Abbas thought his hard-line approach against Hamas would endear him to Trump and his senior advisers then his recent, frosty meeting with Jared Kushner surely confirms the opposite. The more he gives, the more Israel and its American backers led by a fanatically pro-Israel team will want.
This time his actions against Hamas may give the Americans something Israeli leaders crave: a final separation between Gaza and the West Bank. This would certainly fulfil Israeli Education Minister Naftali Bennet’s vision of a Palestinian state “only in Gaza” and the annexation of the West Bank, giving the Palestinians limited autonomy there.
Whatever strategy Abbas has followed is unravelling. He is leading the Palestinians to further fragmentation and separation.
It is time he admitted this and stood down. If not, then his own miscalculations could hasten the end of his rule. Even those around him that have benefited handsomely from his rule must now realise the game is up.
Left with no hope of a just solution that brings them freedom, the Palestinian people will rise again. This time it will be against their own expired leadership which has now denied babies and cancer sufferers in Gaza medical treatment for political purposes. The next intifada will be against the Muqata’a. This should worry Israel as much as Abbas.
First published by the Middle East Monitor on 12/12/2016
From the Middle East Monitor
2016 will be remembered for a new phrase that came to characterise popular uprisings against “the establishment” in the West. From the UK to the USA, “taking back control” struck a chord with the voters when it was adopted by Donald Trump in America and the leaders of BREXIT in the UK. The now infamous image in the golden lift at Trump Tower of President-elect Trump and UKIP’s Nigel Farage was made possible because voters wanted to take back control and thought they would secure it.
The Palestinians too want to take back control of their destiny but how can they achieve this?
In a year which saw their dreams of liberation, freedom and independence dashed once again, they feel their reliance on others to deliver these aims has simply failed. In reality though, it is their leadership which has failed because it has chosen to rely on others to deliver Palestinian rights, but also because it relies on others to ensure its very existence through funding. The Palestinian Authority has also suffocated attempts by the people to rise up against the occupation either collectively or through individual endeavours. As President Abbas has declared repeatedly, the “security cooperation” with Israel is “sacred”, though he does not admit that it only works one way, protecting Israel and never the Palestinians.
Fatah’s seventh congress
Fatah, the ruling party recently held its congress in Ramallah, the seventh since its establishment in 1959. It included a marathon three-hour speech by its past, present and future (elected by acclimation) Chairman Mahmoud Abbas in which he reiterated his strategy for delivering Palestinian rights. In summary its internal strategy included reconciliation with Hamas, holding parliamentary and presidential elections, holding the Palestinian National Council. Its external strategy included continued negotiations with Israel, a “smart intifada”, pursuit of Israel through the ICC and continued “internationalisation” of the conflict through membership of organisations.
The reconciliation with Hamas is essential as a united Palestinian people and leadership can put to bed Israel’s claim that there is no Palestinian partner to negotiate with or that the “moderate” Abbas cannot deliver on any agreements because Hamas runs Gaza. Reconciliation would also allow the Palestinian elections, long overdue, to finally take place. Abbas was firm in his insistence that “there can be no Palestinian state without the Gaza Strip.”
Abbas was not very forthcoming on what he meant by the “smart intifada” or “intifada of brains” though he did ask “the leadership” to be out there resisting peacefully with the people.
Peace talks have been dormant even since US Secretary of State John Kerry’s initiative failed back in 2014 and the subsequent Israeli war on Gaza. Attempts at bringing the two sides together have failed to this day and despite Abbas’ brief meeting with Netanyahu at Shimon Peres’s funeral, the two men have not met. It has not been for lack of trying. Abbas confirmed that although he had accepted an invitation from Russia’s President Vladimir Putin to meet Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, the latter declined the same invitation.
Attempts by France to bring the two men together and to hold a peace conference have also met with Palestinian acceptance and Israeli rejection. Israel’s spin on the reason for the rejection is that the meeting would follow a French-led peace conference, which it considers an effort to impose a settlement on it. Netanyahu spoke to Hollande and said that “if there is no international conference in Paris, the prime minister will come to meet Abu Mazen [Abbas] for direct talks without preconditions.” Israel further claimed that it will “not take part in an international conference that will not contribute to achieving peace”.
In reality, Israel is watching with satisfaction the transition from the Obama to the Trump administration in the US and expecting to be shielded further from any attempts to make a Palestinian state a reality. Why then should it engage wit Putin, Hollande or any other “broker” when Trump will move the US Embassy to Jerusalem and his team do not see the two-state solution as explicitly part of his administration’s strategy?
Options for the Palestinians
The Palestinian leadership has largely relied on unwavering support for the Palestinian cause from the Arab and Muslim world. It regularly consults both about steps it plans to take to ensure they are on board. They in turn have been steadfast in their support for the Palestinians and condemnation of Israel, particularly in international bodies. The Arab League also adopted the Arab Peace Initiative back in 2002, offering Israel normalisation of relations in return for ending the occupation of Palestinian and other Arab land. US Secretary of State John Kerry pushed the Arab states further to including “land swaps” in the initiative back in 2013. Israel has still not accepted the initiative to this day.
Arab states have also worked closely with the Palestinians in the United Nations, putting down resolutions both to the General Assembly and the Security Council. Their efforts in the Security Council have been scuppered by the US veto or US pressure on members that haVE led to potential resolutions falling by default. This included a resolution for the admission of Palestine as a full member. This pushed the Palestinians to the General Assembly to secure an upgrade in Palestine’s status to “Non-Member Observer state” in 2012, perhaps their most notable success in recent years. This was not only because it again demonstrated the overwhelming support for Palestinian rights, but because it allowed Palestine to join a multitude of international organisations and accords. This included the International Criminal Court (ICC) and UNESCO.
The ICC is still considering whether it can bring cases against Israelis involved in the 2014 war on Gaza and illegal settlements. The wheels of justice move slowly and to date the ICC has not declared whether and when it will bring cases against suspected Israeli war criminals. However, in a recent report, the court significantly confirmed that Israel was still in occupation of Gaza and that Jerusalem was illegally annexed. Israel suspects this indicates a leaning by the ICC towards the Palestinian view.
The ICC is one plank of the Palestinian “internationalisation of the conflict” strategy. Another important body is the UN Human Rights Council, which – due to a lack of US veto – often calls out Israeli actions in contravention of international law. The UNHRC produced an important report on the 2014 Gaza war which accused both Israel and Hamas of possible war crimes.
A further significant plank of internationalisation is seeking protection for Palestinian cultural and religious sites through UNESCO’s membership. This again showed some success when UNESCO adopted a motion condemning Israel’s activities around Muslim sits in Jerusalem and while this eventually watered down under pressure from Israel’s supporting states; it still showed what the Palestinians can achieve through careful diplomacy and through their own efforts.
On the ground a recent refusal by PA security forces to allow Israeli army vehicles to enter Jenin is very much in line with the Oslo accords which included Jenin in “Area A” which handed security in the city to the PA. Again, an example of how Palestinians can take matters into their own hands using existing accords and international law.
As President Trump moves closer to the White House and having declared his support for Israel including a commitment to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem, the PA is still banking on a last minute move by the Obama administration. It is sending a delegation to Washington to seek support for or at least an abstention, for a possible UNSC resolution condemning settlements. Despite suspicions that in its last few days the Obama administration may support such a move, I am not hopeful.
This should signal to the Palestinian leadership that relying on the US or other countries that support Israel when it really matters is unlikely to yield results. They must continue to explore and pursue avenues over which they can exercise some control. It seems that pursuing Israeli violations through international bodies is a sound strategy and the more avenues it can pursue for this the better. Internationalising the conflict is part of the Palestinians “taking back control” of their destiny.
The Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu is on a mission to finally end the chances of a two-state solution to the Palestine Israel problem. His strategy seems to have the following elements:
There is no occupation
He is now regularly repeating the absurd statement that the whole of historic Palestine belongs ‘to the Jewish people’ who gave had a ‘continuous presence for three thousand years’. Therefore, the indigenous Palestinian people are merely squatters with no rights. The quicker they return the land to its rightful owners the quicker we have peace, or at least the Zionists will.
In addition, the names of places must reflect the reality of the theft of Palestine. Extremist Minister, Naftali
Bennet on a visit to recently taken homes of Palestinians in Silwan that the area was ‘formally called Silwan, now the ‘City of David’.
Hamas is ISIS and therefore the Unity Government is a terrorist Government
He is equating Hamas, whatever you think of it’s strategy with the violent Islamic State (ISIS, ISIL or IS). But he couldn’t be more wrong. Hamas is a national liberation movement, which also holds an Islamist allegiance.
It is interesting though how quickly gullible supporters of Israel, particularly in the US have regurgitated Netanyahu’s analogy without question.
He argues that Israel cannot deal with a Palestinian Government backed by the ISIS like Hamas. The reality is that he does not want to deal with a United Palestinian people.
There are more important issues in the Middle East than the Palestinians
Netanyahu and his spokesmen and his ministers are working overtime to once and for all divert what they consider to be disproportionate attention to the Palestinian issue. There’s Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, ISIL and if course Iran.
Once all of the above has been sorted out then come back to talk about the Palestinians, that is if there is anything left to talk about.
How dare anyone criticise illegal settlements?
This is a real beauty. The recent mild rebuke by the Obama Administration about another batch of illegal Jewish only home units in illegally occupied East Jerusalem was in his view ‘going against American Values’. He claimed that Arabs can buy homes in West Jerusalem so why can’t Jews buy private homes in East Jerusalem. He even claimed some of the new units were designated for Arabs. Both statements are blatant lies.
You can only recognise Palestine on Israel’s terms, basically never
The new Swedish Prime Minister announced in his inaugural speech that Sweden would recognise the state of Palestine. All hell broke loose as the Moldovan turned Israeli Foreign Minister summoned the Swedish Ambassador to tell him effectively what an ignorant Prime Minister Sweden gas, that thus step is damaging to ‘the peace process’ and that there were more important Middle East issues to worry about.
Netanyahu further talked about the need for a new definition of sovereignty (to suit Israel of course). This is dealt with below under the old chess nut, security.
Israel’s security needs require a continued occupation
To put it simply, Netanyahu argues Israel has to maintain the military occupation to guarantee its security. This is code for there can never be an independent sovereign Palestinian state anywhere west of the river Jordan. Any such entity would be another ISIS, he argues.
All of the above amounts to a ‘no solution’ and a perpetual conflict. Further, there is no Pslestinian problem so stop talking about it.
But supporters of justice and those not gullible enough to fall for Netanyahu’s new strategy must stand up to him.
Sweden, having taken its principled stand on recognition of Palestine must see it through quickly. No backtracking please.
The British Parliament votes on a motion to recognise Palestine on the 13th of October. Those UK MPs that support the two state solution out of belief and those pro Israelis that use it to justify endless negotiations have no excuse. They must vote for recognition. The more countries that recognise the state of Palestine, the more pressure will be applied on Israel to end the occupation of a neighbouring state.
Tell Netanyahu to shove his new strategy to liquidate the Palestine cause where the sun don’t shine!
I watched Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu today (20 August) at his press conference, which he held with his Defence Minister Ya’alon. I had a flashback. I remembered the fall of Baghdad. The particular image was that of Mohammad Saeed Al-Sahhaf, Iraq’s Information Minister at the time. He was speaking to the media, denying the Americans had reached Baghdad but unbeknown to him, American tanks were in the background. He was living in denial.
Today Benjamin Netanyahu too was living in denial. At his press conference, he was at pains to point out Israel’s successes in the attack on Gaza and in particular successes against Hamas. He failed to mention that foreign airlines were cancelling flights to Tel Aviv for fear of Hamas rockets. Just half an hour before Netanyahu’s press conference, Alqassam Brigades spokesman, Abu Obeidah was warning foreign airlines to avoid Ben Gurion airport from 3 am GMT ON 21 August.
Whatever you think of Hamas and whichever side you support, it is clear that the military capability of the resistance groups in Gaza appear to be largely intact. The rockets are still being launched and are reaching Tel Aviv and Israelis in the settlements on the edge of Gaza are still within reach.
Netanyahu claims that the IDF has destroyed all the tunnels but Hamas has broadcast footage of tunnels and fighters demon starting how they survived during the fighting and their still current capability.
Netanyahu has failed to achieve what became rolling objectives from the terrorist campaign on Gaza. Initially it was all to do with the kidnapping and killing of three settlers near Hebron, not by anyone from Gaza but allegedly ordered and financed by Hamas. Then it was about eradicating the rockets. Later it became about the tunnels. Eventually it was about disarming the resistance.
None of the above objectives have been achieved to date. Instead, as the ceasefire collapsed on 19 August, Israel returned to the targeting of family homes. On that evening, Israel bombed the Aldalou family home in Beit Hanoun. It later became apparent that they thought they had targeted Mohammed Aldaif, Head of the AlQassam Brigade. In fact, he was not hit but his wife and seven month old baby were murdered as Widad was breast feeding Ali.
Netanyahu was clearly hoping to announce a major ‘kill’ but instead he killed more women and children. He and his spokesmen repeatedly compare Hamas with the Islamic State (IS). He referred to their use of children as human shields which all but Zionists have refuted. He talked of IS murdering children. Well, he and his defence minister are responsible for the murder of over 500 hundred children. The comparison of a resistance movement, working to end Israel’s occupation (whatever you think of their methods) with a murderous rogue group IS is a false one. Slaughter of civilians with a knife is little different to slaughter with the press of a button, which drops a one tonne bomb on a family home. IS are the two first letters of ISrael.
Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Olmert enjoyed periods of rule during which the Palestinians, or to be more accurate Fatah and Hamas, have been divided. The divisions which started in 2007 have remained largely intact since then and through pretty turbulent times in the Middle East. Repeated attempts at reconciliation under the auspices of a number of Arab countries failed. That is until President Abbas realised that the ‘peace talks’ were faltering and Israel was acting to ensure they failed.
Events moved quickly then and suddenly the two factions came to what seemed an uncomfortable truce. This was the. Quickly followed with the announcement of a Palestinian Unity Government, which had no partisan ministers. Netanyahu had to quickly invent the phrase ‘backed by Hamas’ as he could not say including Hamas. Either way Netanyahu quickly demonstrated that who ever sat in front of him from the Palestinian side either to administer the territories or to negotiate was not acceptable. In fact anything resembling a just peace would be unacceptable.
Netanyahu’s attempts to pressure the International Community to boycott the new Government failed because his actions during the talks had even pushed the Americans to the limit. They deiced to work with the new Government and to judge it by its actions. That continued until three Israelis went missing in the West Bank, hitch hiking back to their homes.
Israel responded as expected, with intimidation and collective punishment of the Palestinians in Hebron but then more widely in the West Bank and even in Gaza. The claim was that the Israelis were taken by Hamas in the West Bank. This, five days later is still unproven. Even Abbas is warning of consequences to the reconciliation deal if it is proven that Hamas was behind the incident.
Abbas has appealed for the release of the settlers and warned of the dire consequences to the Palestinain Authority of failure to do so speedily. Netanyahu responded with his usual arrogance, belittling this effort despite the acknowledgement of good cooperation between the two security forces. He has called on Abbas to end the unity Government as a demonstration of his seriousness. But Netanyahu can hardly place the blame for the incident on the Unity Government. It has only been place for days, has ministers with no political affiliation and Abbas said it was following his policies. So why call for its end? What would this achieve?
The division between Hamas and Fatah has for years resulted in a low cost occupation and a lack of seriousness, to put it mildly, by Israel to negotiate for peace. The recent incident in Hebron and Israel’s reaction can easily trigger a third intifada. That will further unite the Palestinians.
Netanyahu is on a run of failed policies including that of rallying support for an attack on Iran. His attempt to drive a wedge between Hamas and Fatah seems to be a continuation of his recent failure. It looks like the divide and rule policy is also unravelling.