Hamas-Fatah ‘Unity Government’!

Posted on April 30, 2011 by rehmat1| 

Hamas political leader Khaled Meshaal will meet Fatah leader and acting Palestinian Authority Chief Mahmoud Abbas in Cairo to sign the deal, AFP reported on Friday.

American Jewish organization, Americans for Peace Now, which works to help the Zionist regime achieve a secure peace with Arab states and the native Muslim and Christian Palestinians – has welcomed the Hamas-Fatah deal with the hope that Islamic Resistance Hamas will eventually disapear, leaving secularist Fatah, an Israel-friendly Palestinian faction, in power.

“Clearly, it would be preferable if Hamas – a US-designated foreign terrorist organization with a long history of bloody attacks on Israel – could be completely wished away. However, five years of U.S., Israeli, and international efforts to sideline Hamas have failed. The reality today is that the Gaza-West Bank split is a hurdle to peace efforts, raising questions about the capacity of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to implement an agreement,”APN President and CEO Debra DeLee stated.

The reaction from the Zionist-regime and its poodles in the western capitals was typical knee-jerk. From Shimon Peres to the White House, they’re all irked by Abbas’ making peace with the elected government of PA (Hamas) than the terrorist regime in Tel Aviv.

Elliott Abrams, was the most hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the Reagan Administration’s State Department. He is US-Israel dual citizen. Abrams pled guilty in 1991 to two misdemeanors and was sentenced to a year’s probation and 100 hours of community service. A year later, former President Bush Sr. granted Abrams a full pardon. On April 27, 2011 Abrams wrote a column in CFR magazine, entitled ‘A Hamas-Fatah Coalition?’.

“It is hard to see how Israel could negotiate with a Palestinian government half or more of which represents a terrorist group dedicated to attacking the Jewish State (sic). ……. Will Congress vote aid funds for this new half-Hamas government? What will lawyers at the Treasury and State Departments say about the participation of a terrorist group in the PA government?  Will it even be legal to give funds to the PA?” wrote Abrams. Indirectly, the warmongering Jew is advising Obama government to slam sanctions on PA even though similar sanctions have failed to turn Palestinians against Hamas.

Personally, I am least optimistic about any deal with the double agent Abbas. However, a unity government’s unilaterally declaration of an independent Palestinian state (Gaza, West Bank with East Jerusalem its capital) would carry more weight under international laws.

Under US-Israel-EU pressure through funding, Fatah parted away from the other PA member, Islamist Hamas resistance after the later came into power in 2006. Last week both groups reached an initial agreement on all controversial issues including the elections within a year and the formation of the interim unity government. The scheduled elections were postponed by Abbas in January 2009.

Hamas official from Gaza Mahmud Zahar said although the movement was committed to its strategy of “no recognition and no negotiations” with Israel, it would not insist that Fatah stop negotiating with Tel Aviv.
“If Fatah wants to bear the responsibility for negotiating on nonsense, let it. If it manages to get a state, good for them,” Zahar said. “We didn’t view what was happening as a peace process, so we didn’t take part in it,” he said.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

IOA says no negotiation with PA unity government

[ 29/04/2011 - 11:03 AM ]

NAZARETH, (PIC)-- The Israeli occupation government has decided Thursday not to negotiate with any Palestinian unity government after Hamas and Fatah Movements inked the Palestinian reconciliation paper in Cairo a couple of days ago.

According to the Hebrew Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper, the mini ministerial council chaired by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met on Thursday and took that decision but refrained from taking any additional decisions in this regard.

The IOA also decided to closely monitor developments in the occupied Palestinian territories, and to abort any attempt to revive negotiations with the PA leadership in Ramallah, the paper added.

Netanyahu had earlier asked PA leader Mahmoud Abbas to choose between making peace with "Israel" or reconcile with Hamas after both Palestinian Movements decided to restore Palestinian unity.

For his part, rightist Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman warned Abbas that Israel possesses "big arsenal" of measures that could be taken by the Zionist entity to punish the Palestinian Authority for reconciling with Hamas.

"The PA has crossed the redline, and we have big arsenal of measures to punish them like denying them the VIP cards that would restrict their movement in the West Bank, and we could freeze the money of taxes due to them among other measures," Lieberman said in an interview with the Israeli army radio.

Moreover, the extremist minister opined that holding an election in the Palestinian territories next year would pave the way for Hamas to control the West Bank.

However, Haim Ramon, one of Kadima party leaders, suggested that the Israeli occupation government should present a peace plan to present it to the world, saying that remaining indifferent would bring political and security catastrophe to "Israel".

He also warned that Israel's reluctance to initiate a political initiative would force the Quartet committee to recognize and negotiate with Hamas.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Palestinians too shall Witness a New Dawn…

Sara Taha

A complete transformation has hit the Middle Eastern region to provide its people with hope to surpass difficulties that have been plaguing them for decades.

The atmosphere of revolution and change that hit various spots in the region has reached Palestine that chose to revolt against the ruling occupier that imposes his will, settlers, and settlements in arrogant and violent methods.

Despite the deep gap between their strategies, policies, plans and allies, both parties were able to put all the differences behind and reconcile, for the sake of their dispersed land, and give the people their right to choose and decide.

“The two sides focused on procedural methods in their reconciliation meeting, like methods of forming the Supreme Committee for elections, the electoral court, the Supreme Security Committee, the election’s date and the establishment of the government, Palestinian Political analyst Majed Azzam said.

In an interview with Al Manar news website, Azzam assured that “the political differences were all left behind and the focus during the meeting was over administrative approaches to ending the conflict, building the Gaza strip, and handing the final decision to the people”.

“The reconciliation stipulates two main points.
First is in Gaza, where there will be pacification that should be used to reconstruct and settle national Palestinian issues.

Second is in Ramallah, as the authority there is convinced that it has reached a dead-end with the Israelis and that there won’t be any negotiations in the near future”, Azzam told Al Manar.

He pointed out that “Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas has recently expressed despair from US President Barak Obama, and considered that the United States neither puts serious pressure on Israel, nor works on ending the Palestinian crisis”.

According to the Palestinian political analyst, who seemed optimistic with this reconciliation, “the revolution in Egypt and the change of regime was one of the reasons that led to this successful step, as “now there is a serious and significant role for Egypt, as the main barrier back then was the absence of trust between Hamas and the Egyptian government”.

“Furthermore, the revolutions in the Arab world, the thought of referring to the public opinion, and the execution of free and just elections, are factors that will give further success to this reconciliation.

The Israeli and the US stances that rejected this internal agreement, and will work on obstructing it, will not affect the renewed national unity as the regional developments have proved their declined and limited influence in the region”, Azzam added.

On its part the Zionist entity received the news with shock and concern and immediately unleashed threats and condemnations.

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu demanded Abbas to choose peace either with Israel or with Hamas. However, the PA responded right away favoring national unity over an occupying settlement constructer.

Azzam assured that Netanyahu’s speech was arrogant and interfered in internal Palestinian affairs.

Furthermore, he said “Netanyahu tried to portray Israel as the good and peaceful, and Hamas as well as the Palestinian people as evil, neglecting the fact that he has been in post for two years and so far failed to achieve any settlement. The entire world is aware that Netanyahu does not want peace”.

“We cannot imagine a government that has Netanyahu, Lieberman and Barak to be a peaceful one; they only seek surrender from the Palestinians”, the Palestinian analyst pointed out.

Zionist newspaper Haaretz reported Thursday that this reconciliation could serve Israel in obstructing the United Nation’s declaration of a Palestinian state in September, as these “renewed relations between Hamas and Fatah could shed a different light on Abbas' intentions, and Netanyahu, who is due to speak before both houses of Congress next month, will be able to present the agreement as proof that Abbas doesn't really want peace”.

Azzam assured that any step Netanyahu would take to benefit from this new situation will fail.

“He is not capable of persuading 130 states against recognizing a Palestinian State with Al Quds as its capital. After coming out in September, this resolution could face various challenges, but let us not forget that Lebanon’s resolution 425 came out in 1978, however it was not implemented until year 2000 with the efforts of the wise resistance at the political, media and economics levels”, he said, pointing out that “the resolution in September will be the beginning of a renewed battle for Israel on various fronts”.

• In case you missed it: "Nothing short of FULL LIBERATION of Palestine is acceptable!"
• In case you missed or forget it: The "Palestinian" IDIOT on domesticating Hamas - Two State Solution VS Two stage solution

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

US weapons to Israel are disincentives to peace

Via MCS

- 24. Apr, 2011

Against the background of Israel’s contempt for international law and violations of Palestinian human rights, and as Washington now considers raising the debt ceiling and making even more substantial cuts to the 2012 budget, Josh Ruebner argues that “the moral, financial and political costs of arming Israel can no longer be ignored”.

—By Josh Ruebner

Israel may be forgiven for failing to realize the current fiscal woes of the United States. After all, US military aid to Israel not only sailed unscathed through last week’s passage of the 2011 budget, but reached the record level of 3 billion dollars.
The United States additionally provided Israel 415 million dollars for procurement, research and development of joint US-Israeli missile defence projects, including 205 million dollars to fund Israel’s newly-deployed Iron Dome system.
This anti-missile battery already has altered significantly the strategic balance in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict when Israel successfully shot down incoming rockets fired from the Gaza Strip earlier this month. With the assured diplomatic backing of the United States to prevent Israel from being held accountable by the international community for its illegal blockade, Iron Dome will embolden Israel to tighten its siege and escalate its attacks on the occupied Gaza Strip by providing its citizens with additional protection against retaliatory fire.

US funding of Iron Dome is but one example of many of how US weapons transfers to Israel enhance Israeli military dominance over Palestinian freedom and create perverse economic disincentives for Israel to defy US policy goals, such as halting Israel’s colonization of Palestinian land, ending its collective punishment of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and negotiating in good faith a lasting peace agreement.

As long as US weapons continue to flow, Israel will feel free to disregard the Obama administration’s mild blandishments and half-hearted attempts to bring Israel to the negotiating table. Unfortunately this disincentive structure is set to be reinforced over the coming years.

Under a Bush-era agreement, US weapons transfers to Israel are scheduled to total 30 billion dollars during 2009-18, an annual average increase of 25 per cent above previous levels. With this 2007 Memorandum of Understanding, the United States solidified Israel’s position as the largest recipient of US military aid this decade. In line with increases proposed under this arrangement, President Obama asked for a record-breaking 3.075 billion dollars of weapons for Israel in his 2012 budget request.

A new online database – How Many Weapons to Israel? – casts doubt on whether the United States can afford, either morally, financially or politically, to continue transferring weapons to Israel at taxpayer expense without examining the ramifications of this policy.

During 2000-09, the United States licensed, paid for, and delivered to Israel more than 670 million weapons and related equipment, valued at nearly 19 billion dollars, through three main weapons transfer programmes (Foreign Military Sales, Direct Commercial Sales and Excess Defence Articles). These weapons transfer programmes accounted for nearly 80 per cent of the more than 24 billion dollars in military aid appropriated to Israel during these years. The bulk of the remaining money was spent by Israel on its own domestic arms industry, a unique exemption written into law for Israel. All other countries receiving US military aid are required to spend the whole sum within the United States.

Military aid to Israel ran the gamut from the patently absurd – one used food steamer valued at 2,100 dollars – to the lethal – 93 F-16D fighter jets valued at a total of nearly 2.5 billion dollars. With nearly 500 categories of weapons transferred to Israel, the United States is pervasively, intricately and comprehensively involved in arming its military.

These weapons transfers also make the United States deeply complicit in almost every action the Israeli military takes to entrench its illegal 43-year military occupation of the Palestinian West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip and the apartheid policies that undergird its government’s stance toward Palestinians.
From September 2000 to December 2009, roughly the same period during which the United States transferred these 670 million weapons to Israel, the Israeli military killed at least 2,969 Palestinians, of whom 1,128 were children, who took no part in hostilities, according to the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem.
For example, Israel killed 446 unarmed Palestinians, including 149 children, with missiles fired from helicopters. The Pentagon classifies the number, types and value of missiles transferred to Israel; however, the United States gave Israel nearly 200 AH-64D Apache, Sikorsky CH-53 and Cobra helicopters from which at least some of these lethal missiles were fired. It was likely one such US-supplied missile from a US-supplied helicopter that Israel fired in the Jabalya refugee camp in the Gaza Strip on 29 December 2008, which killed five sisters, Jawaher (age four), Dina (age seven), Samar (age 12), Ikram (age 14), and Tahrir Baulusha (age 17) during an attack on a nearby mosque.

Israel’s misuse of US weapons to commit human rights abuses like these against Palestinian civilians should trigger sanctions against, rather than increasing amounts of military aid to, Israel. The Arms Export Control Act limits the use of US weapons to “internal security” and “legitimate self-defence”. Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip is defined by the US government as a foreign military occupation, and the killing of thousands of unarmed civilians in support of a military occupation cannot be justified as legitimate without distorting the meaning of self-defence.

In addition, the Foreign Assistance Act strictly prohibits US foreign assistance to any country that “engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights”. The State Department’s recently released  2010 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices documents amply, if not comprehensively, Israel’s human rights abuses of Palestinians.

As Washington now considers raising the debt ceiling and making even more substantial cuts to the 2012 budget, the moral, financial and political costs of arming Israel can no longer be ignored.

If the Obama admininstration is serious in its efforts to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and genuine in its stated commitment to the universality of human rights, then it must utilize the significant leverage the United States wields over Israel through its military aid programme. By terminating weapons transfers to Israel at least until Israel upholds its obligations under US and international law, ends its illegal military occupation of Palestinian land and negotiates in good faith a just and lasting peace with Palestinians, the United States can create an incentive structure to achieve its frustrated policy goals.
Source: Redress

Josh Ruebner is National Advocacy Director of the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, a national coalition of more than 350 organizations working to change US policy toward Israel/Palestine to support human rights, international law and equality. He is a former Analyst in Middle East Affairs at Congressional Research Service.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Hamas: Obama peace plan threatens refugees' right of return

[ 23/04/2011 - 03:50 PM ]

GAZA, (PIC)-- Hamas's refugee affairs department has condemned a plan by US President Barack Obama to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as it poses a serious threat to the Palestinian refugees' right of return to their occupied homeland.
The Palestinian resistance movement called on the Arabs and Muslims to support the Palestinians in their struggle towards returning to and liberating their land.
In a statement released on Saturday, Hamas expressed utter rejection of the draft and emphasized the legal, unwavering right of Palestinian refugees to return to their land.
”Statements such as these will only increase the Palestinians' determination to stick to their rights, to their land, and to their right of return,” the Hamas statement says.

The refugees department called the US plan an attempt to ”circumvent the right of return and infringe on the fate of millions of Palestinian refugees”. It added that the US's use of its veto power to strike down a UN decision to end settlement activity in the Palestinian territories further proved that objective.

Hamas called on the Palestinian parties that continue to hold that negotiations are the way to victory and liberation to re-assess their views and reject the US proposal.
The plan consists of four items, namely that the Palestinians relinquish the right to return, Israel recognizes a Palestinian state based on 1967 borders, Jerusalem becomes the capital of both Israel and Palestine, and Israel is guaranteed security.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Netanyahu's latest empty manoeuvre

April  21-2011 

Aiming to take the initiative out of Palestinian hands, Netanyahu is getting ready to table another faux peace plan, writes Khaled Amayreh in occupied Jerusalem

---

In another disingenuous feat meant to undercut Palestinian efforts to obtain recognition at the United Nations of a state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is considering a new "peace plan" that would throw the proverbial ball back into the Palestinian court.

The Palestinian Authority (PA) is saying it will ask the UN General Assembly to formally recognise the "State of Palestine" in September, unless a real breakthrough is reached in long-stalled peace talks with Israel.

Israel has consistently refused to give up the spoils of the 1967 war and has kept up expanding Jewish colonies in the West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem, which neutral observers say is killing whatever chances remain for the establishment of a viable and territorially contiguous Palestinian state.

Israel is also adamantly refusing to allow for the repatriation of millions of Palestinian refugees who were uprooted from their homes in what is now Israel when the Jewish state was created in 1948.

Already dismissed by Palestinian officials as another mendacious exercise in public relations, Netanyahu's plan is slated to be outlined in a speech before a joint session of US Congress on 24 May.

Though strongly rejected by the Palestinians, and likely to be dismissed by the Europeans and other players involved in the peace process, Netanyahu hopes to convince Congress of his sincerity and goodwill.

Congress is considered a bastion of support for Israel with most of its members beholden to the powerful US Jewish lobby.

Notorious for his dishonesty, prevarication and trickery, Netanyahu has not spelled out the content of his plan. However, according to reports in the Hebrew media, the plan, which is subject to modification and addition, includes a repositioning of Israeli occupation forces in parts of the West Bank and some improvements of Palestinian daily life.

"We are rather talking about a long process the implementation of which will take at least five years, during which Israel will allow Palestinians to move more freely throughout the West Bank," wrote Alex Fishman of the prominent Hebrew daily, Yediot Aharonot.

In addition, Israel would transfer to PA control parts of territories classified according to the Oslo Accords as "Area B" and "Area C" where Israel maintains total or majority security control.

In reality, however, Israeli forces have reserved the right to enter "Area A" territories (supposedly under Palestinian control) at will, without coordination with Palestinian authorities.

Pursuant to the Netanyahu plan, not a single Jewish settlement would be dismantled.

Hence, Netanyahu's so-called peace plan is empty of content that would lead to the end of the decades-old Israeli occupation. Viewed at face value, the plan is merely another effort aimed at deceiving the international community and buying yet more time for Israel to change "facts on the ground".

According to Israeli and US sources, Netanyahu has been under pressure from "Israel's friends" in Washington to help the Obama administration derail the PA plan to seek formal UN recognition in September. All concerned parties realise that the Netanyahu's purported plan is merely tactical in nature and can produce no genuine breakthrough towards peace in the Middle East.

In recent weeks, Israeli intellectuals and veteran politicians have warned that Israel stands to lose as a result of revolutions sweeping the Arab region, especially Egypt. The Israeli media has also quoted retired Israeli political and military figures as describing the dramatic collapse of the Mubarak regime as a "strategic loss".

Successive Israeli governments have taken it for granted that Mubarak would protect Israel from the worst criticism in regard to Palestinian matters. Israel expressed satisfaction, for example, with the Mubarak regime's position during Israel's devastating onslaught on Gaza more than two years ago. Sources spoke then of "connivance and collusion" between Israel and the Mubarak regime in "punishing" Hamas and keeping Gaza under siege.

Israel and its allies are now extremely worried about the probable negative impact of Arab revolutions on the standing of the Jewish state. One Israeli intellectual intimated recently that while the Israelis are trying to reassure themselves that everything will be fine, there is a panic under the surface. "The geopolitical reality we have been building brick by brick for over 50 years is suddenly collapsing before our eyes; and we can do virtually nothing to redeem it."

Last week, a group of Israeli security and business leaders who met at Tel Aviv University warned that time is not on Israel's side. "The changing landscape of the Middle East and Israel's international image demands a new Israeli peace initiative." Speaking at the same forum, former Shin Bet Director General Yaakov Perry described the current status quo in the West Bank as "presenting a moral threat to the State of Israel".

Perry continued: "Our continued presence in the (occupied) territories is a threat to Zionism. With every passing minute, further damage is done for the State of Israel. One thing is clear, the Middle East is changing, dramatic things are happening around us, we are witnessing historic changes towards reform, most of which are not being led by extremist groups ..."

In a noted speech at Bar Illan University on 14 June 2009, Netanyahu spoke of a diminutive and deformed Palestinian state without sovereignty and territorial contiguity that is firmly subservient to Israel in every conceivable sphere of life. In light of his so-called new peace plan, there appears evidence that Netanyahu wants now to impose it.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Hamas disapproves new US plan about Palestinian state

[ 23/04/2011 - 08:26 AM ]

GAZA, (PIC)-- The Hamas Movement said it rejects the plan about a Palestinian state without the right of return which the US administration intends to declare soon.

Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri told the Palestinian information center (PIC) that his Movement refuses this American overture and considers it an attempt to terminate the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes they were expelled from in 1948.

Spokesman Abu Zuhri warned that the US administration is planning to extract a waiver of the right of return from the Palestinian Authority (PA) in exchange for an empty pledge of a Palestinian state.

The spokesman stressed that what is needed is a genuine international support to end the Israeli occupation and not to establish an illusionary Palestinian state.

The US plan stipulates that Israel should recognize a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders, and in return the Palestinians should waive the right of return to "Israel's territories", accept occupied Jerusalem as a capital for the two states and protect Israel's security.

For his part, senior Hamas official Wasfi Qabha expressed his belief that this US plan is an attempt to circumvent the Palestinian people's right to freedom and independence.

"America wants to establish a Palestinian state on paper just like someone selling fish still in the sea," Qabha opined in a press statement to the PIC.

The US wants to show itself as keen on the establishment of a Palestinian state while it has used its veto against a resolution calling on Israel to end its settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian lands, the Hamas official said.

He added this plan is part of the US support for Israel's oppressive and barbaric policies against the Palestinian people.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

STUART LITTLEWOOD : Dead as Monty Python’s parrot

- 21. Apr, 2011

“This peace process is no more… This is an EX-PEACE PROCESS!”

Stuart Littlewood / My Catbird Seat

JEFF HALPER (ICAHD)

Jeff Halper now focuses on Palestine’s Big Chance: its application for statehood

In an article Mobilizing for September? Jeff Halper, Director of The Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD), shares his thoughts on the collective action that must be taken between now and when the window of opportunity for applying for statehood opens in September.

As he rightly says, the Palestinian Authority over the years “has failed to mobilize its greatest resource and ally, grassroots activists the world over”. It also needs to provide them with guidance and leadership. “We have no idea where the PA is heading.”

So it has been left to the likes of Halper to explain the Palestinians’ options in September and inject some semblance of debate into the situation facing supporters, activists and that shabby excuse for a government in Ramallah that’s more of a hindrance than a help.

To start with… no more pointless talk of negotiations. “The interminable peace process, says Halper, “serves one purpose only: prolonging the Israeli Occupation.”

Many would go further and say that the US, Britain and the EU have connived with Israel to prolong the Occupation to the point where they hope it will become irreversible.

Washington and London won’t take kindly to a declaration of statehood unless it’s made clear to them by a coming-together of civil society across the world that there’ll be trouble, with a capital T, if they don’t do the right thing by the Palestinians and curb the twisted ambition of their Zionist bosom-pals.

Although Clinton and Hague still chirp about “re-starting talks”, the idea is as dead as the parrot in the famous Monty Python sketch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vuW6tQ0218, which might have been written specially for the Quartet ‘peace boutique’ and its gormless salesman…

Palestinian Authority: I wish to complain about this peace process what I purchased not half an hour ago from this very boutique.

Quartet’s Gormless Salesman: What’s wrong with it?

PA: I’ll tell you what’s wrong with it, my lad. ‘E’s dead, that’s what’s wrong with it!

QGS: No, no, it’s resting.

PA: Look, matey, I know a dead peace process when I see one, and I’m looking at one right now…

And so on… If you’re a ‘Python’ fan you’ll know the ending says it all.

PA: ‘E’s passed on! This peace process is no more! He has ceased to be! ‘E’s
expired and gone to meet ‘is maker!
‘E’s a stiff! Bereft of life, ‘e rests in peace
! If you hadn’t nailed ‘im to
the perch ‘e’d be pushing up the daisies!
‘Is metabolic processes are now ‘istory! ‘E’s kicked the bucket, ‘e’s shuffled off ‘is mortal coil!!
THIS IS AN EX-PEACE PROCESS!!
(pause)

QGS: Well, I’d better replace it, then…

No, please don’t. This is where we finally close the chapter on ‘Pointless Talks’ and fast-forward to ‘Law and Justice’. Whatever Mr Obama, Mrs Clinton, Mr Cameron, Mr Hague, et al may think, applying for statehood is now the only game in town.
“Ideally,” says Jeff Halper, “the response of the other three Quartet members [referring to the United Nations, the European Union and Russia] would be to formally declare the ‘peace process’ ended, opening the way to the only other alternative, the acceptance in September of Palestine as a member state of the UN within recognized borders…  it is crucial that the Palestinians declare it, making it clear that it was Israel that led to the collapse of negotiations. Only in that way can they prepare the ground for an independent state in September.”
In his analysis Halper paints two scenarios:

The first has a Palestinian state within already-recognised borders – the 1949 armistice lines – accepted as a full member of the UN. There would be no need to negotiate territorial swaps, ‘adjust’ borders to accommodate Israeli settlements or accept exaggerated Israeli security demands.

Admission to the UN, says Halper, “would also end all ambiguity over occupation itself, which has allowed Israel to avoid accountability under international law…  East Jerusalem is Palestinian. Period.

The Israeli presence in sovereign Palestinian territory is illegal. Period.
Continued occupation by Israel, which would now clearly violate the most fundamental principle of sovereignty upon which the entire international system is based, would become intolerable. This would activate international sanctions on Israel that could not be prevented by the US and Europe.”

And the settlements? “Easy. All settlements built on private Palestinian land must be removed.

As to the others, including the large settlement blocs, the Palestinian government could simply say: you, the settlers, are welcome to stay in your homes, but you will be living in Palestine, subject to Palestinian laws, with Palestinians free to purchase homes in your communities.”

Furthermore, by taking its place formally among the member states of the UN, Palestine would have full-ranking ambassadors in the capitals of the world and enjoy unmediated access to all the instruments of the international community: the right to introduce UN resolutions, to participate fully in international conferences and to pursue the application of international law against the Israelis, including access to the International Court of Justice.

You can imagine the steam coming out of AIPAC’s ears at the very thought of the international community actually doing the right thing…

And how would all this come about? The Palestinian ‘leadership’, assuming that anything worthy of the name and remotely credible can be brought into being by September, submits an application to the Secretary-General, confirming its obligations to the UN Charter. The application then goes to the Security Council. If it gains support from nine of the 15 Security Council members and all the five permanent members, a recommendation for admission goes to the General Assembly, which must approve it by a two-thirds majority.

Assuming the US vote in the Security Council is a “yes” or an abstention, the Palestinian application would receive near unanimous approval, according to Halper, But he adds: “The chances of the US actually allowing a Palestinian state to emerge in September is minimal, if only because Congress would not allow it.”

The second scenario sees Palestine’s application failing. It does not become a member state of the UN – at least, not straightaway. If the Security Council declines to recommend Palestine for membership, the General Assembly may send the application back to the Council asking it to reconsider. The American veto might then become an abstention, but all this would take time and the Palestinians would be unlikely to get a result in September. After that we’re into the tedious run-up to the 2012 US election.

Halper seems to feel the Palestinian Authority might then crumble and collapse, forcing Israel to re-occupy, which it could not afford to do even with all its US subsidies. “Merely the threat of that would inflame the entire Muslim world – and beyond. Even the threat of such a thing happening would force the hand of the international community. Whether the US would be pulled into joining international efforts to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict once and for all or whether the rest of the world would simply pass it by is an open question, but the status quo would become intolerable.”

The present deadlock, if not resolved by the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state with recognized borders, “will lead to collapse and chaos”. Halper expects the demise of the exhausted ‘peace process’ to provide new openings and possibilities, a new logic and strategy, and even introduce new players.

Members of the pro-Palestine movement, inside and outside the Occupied Territories, owe thanks to this courageous Jewish friend, Jeff Halper, for his clear thinking. Meanwhile much needs to be done to prepare the ground for the Palestinians’ Big Chance in September, little more than 100 days away.

There are many pea-brains eager to block the Palestinians’ bid for freedom. And they don’t all reside in the White House. Just a few weeks ago the British prime minister, David Cameron, was saying: “I want to be clear, we will always support Israel. For example, when Iran flouts its international obligations Britain is and will remain at the forefront of the international community in ratcheting up the pressure with tough sanctions.



So, When will they learn ?



 We will not stand by and allow Iran to cast a nuclear shadow over Israel or the wider region.”

It’s perfectly OK, apparently, for Israel to flout its international obligations and cast a nuclear shadow over the region and even Europe. People who are capable of such daft and dangerous pronouncements may stop at nothing to make Israel’s enemy Britain’s enemy. They’ve already done it with the Hamas government and with Hezbollah, as well as Iran, although none is a threat to Britain. That’s the mentality we’re up against.

So when can we expect to see Palestinian unity, leadership, integrity and promotional strategy all geared up to seize September’s Big Chance? When do we get mobilized? Has the PA got what it takes to secure a rightful future for its long-suffering people?

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Stuart Littlewood is a marketing specialist turned writer-photographer in the UK. His articles are published widely on the web. He is author of the book Radio Free Palestine, which tells the plight of the Palestinians under occupation.

Read Full Bio

More posts by the Author »

Must Read Related articles:

• PALESTINIAN STATEHOOD ON THE AGENDA
• US PUBLIC SUPPORTS PALESTINE STATEHOOD
• House vote against Palestinian statehood actually showed that Israel lobby is losing its grip

"... I don't think we have yet decided that there is some alternative to Assad..."

Via FLC

"... the situation in Syria seems to pose a particular and puzzling riddle for the United States.

While anti-government protests in Egypt, Tunisia, Bahrain and Yemen have challenged U.S.-allied regimes, anti-government protests in Syria threaten a regime that Iran would hate to see fall. By the logic of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend," Washington would seem to welcome the growing protests in Syria against President Bashar al-Assad's regime ..., the United States still appears to view the Syrian unrest with caution..., the Obama administration has not called on Assad to step down (as it did with long-time ally Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Muammar Gadhafi in Libya). The seeming ambivalence has several explanations. Reports initially suggested that the U.S. and its European allies didn't see the Syrian protests as having critical mass. Washington then became distracted by the war in Libya ...

"Syria is very tricky for us," said Ellen Laipson, president of the Stimson Center and a former senior National Security Council official. While the United States "is actively worried Iran could be exploiting unrest in region, I don't think we yet have a clear position ourselves on the turmoil in Syria," Laipson said. "I don't think we have yet decided that there is some alternative to Assad that we can embrace and support in some way."

Still, the newfound U.S. urgency comes as the Syrian unrest is taking on an increasingly sectarian nature, said Andrew Tabler, ...."The specter of that is very frightening for the United States and also for other countries in the region," Tabler said. "That is the reason why the United States is being very careful in my opinion. Once that is on fire, it is difficult to put out, as we have seen in Iraq."..."

Posted by G, M, Z, or B at 4:58 PM

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Palestinians must reject new American tricks

[ 13/04/2011 - 10:34 PM ]

By Khalid Amayreh

The Obama administration is reportedly planning to launch a new "peace initiative" in the Middle East. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton suggested the US would make fresh efforts to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict over the occupation of Palestine by Zionist Jews who supported and backed by the West, especially the United States.

According to reports from Washington, President Obama will lay out US policy toward the Middle East and North Africa in the coming weeks. Obama had laid out his administration's policy numerous times, only to discover that Israel's supporters in Washington possessed a real veto power over the administration's policy toward the Zionist regime.

"The president will be speaking in greater detail about America's policy in the Middle East and North Africa in the coming weeks," Clinton said at the US-Islamic World Forum, a gathering sponsored by Qatar and the Brooking Institution, a Washington Think Tank.

The planned American activation of the so-called peace process, which has long been proved futile and fruitless, comes against a backdrop of popular revolutions in the Arab region that have toppled long-time tyrannical and pro-American regimes in Tunisia and Egypt.

It is really hard to give renewed American peace efforts the benefit of the doubt. Consecutive American administrations introduced numerous initiatives which failed even to make a dent in Israeli insolence and intransigence.

In fact, far from achieving any progress toward real peace, the US kept up enabling Israel to steal more Arab land, build more Jewish settlements and constantly erode the possibility of creating a viable and territorially contiguous Palestinian state.

Indeed, one would have to be a real idiot to think that an administration which stood quite powerless to prevent Israel from demolishing a single Arab home in East Jerusalem or stop the illegal seizure of a small plot of Arab land in the West Bank would be able to force Israel to return to the borders of the 4th of June, 1967.

Clinton and her boss at the White House may sound as speaking occasionally authoritatively with regard to the Palestinian issue. However, when it comes to implementation, we all know who has the final say. It is Israel and her powerful lobby, which holds Congress by the throat.

This is not pessimistic prognostication or, as some naïve people would put it, "not giving peace a chance."

e have given a thousand chances for a dignified peace settlement but to no avail. The reason was and remains simple, namely the fact of Zionist insolence, arrogance of power and rapacity for more Arab land. Needless to say, Zionist insolence, arrogance and territorial expansion wouldn't have paralyzed peace efforts had it not been for the simple reason of unlimited and unrestricted American backing of Israel.

Yes, the US may occasionally declare a certain stand that is not completely harmonious with Israeli whims, especially territorial aggrandizement. However, at the end of the day, Israel is allowed to have its way.

I don't have a shred of doubt that the planned American effort to revive or promote the moribund peace process will meet the same fate and same failure which past efforts had met.

One doesn't have to be a political genius to locate the fault lines in the long-standing American policy toward the Palestinian plight. Indeed, with a long history of complicity with Israel and acquiescence to her Nazi-like aggression and bellicosity, there should be no illusion about what the US can and can not do.

It is widely expected that the Obama administration will try to take credit for the democratic revolutions in the Arab world. There are also fears that the administration might try to trade off democratic successes in the Arab region, which by the way occurred in spite of Washington's wishes, for possible Arab and Palestinian concessions to Israel. That would be scandalous, to say the very least.

There are two main reasons preventing the Obama administration from crossing the Rubicon with regard to the Palestinian issue. First, the Obama administration has entered the second half of its term, which means that it has to choose between pressuring Israel to give up stolen land in the West Bank on the one hand and preparing for a second term in office on the other. Needless to say, the two tasks are not compatible at all since pressuring Israel to dismantle settlements and give up stolen land would nearly certainly weaken Obama's chances for re-election.

Likewise, failing to pressure Israel to be forthcoming for peace would most likely embolden the Zionist state and encourage her to build more colonies, steal more land and make the goal of establishing a viable Palestinian state utterly unrealistic and even far-fetched.

Second, there is also no doubt that the balance of power between the Obama administration and the Zionist lobby, which, as mentioned above, holds congress by the throat, is seriously tilting in Israel's favor. This means that Obama will face a serious dilemma: If he dares challenge the lobby, he will seriously jeopardize his chances for re-election, and if he doesn't, his peace efforts in the Middle East will evaporate into nothingness.

I understand that it is probably unwise to ignore, let alone challenge the only superpower in the world. However, it is even more unwise, to put it mildly, to give up our inalienable national rights just because some Zionist Jews happen to be in tight control of American politics and policies.

Eventually, any real and durable peace must be based on truth and justice. Otherwise, it wouldn't withstand the test of time.

PLO hints approval to resume peace talks


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian