Mahzor

New York Public Library

Churches

Sarajevo Haggadah

Mah Nishtanah

Sarajevo haggadah

Antaea Darom

Israeli women's art

Action

Torah as music

Ben Heine

Action

ceramic bowl

Mohammad Said Kalash, "Offering Reconciliation" exhibit (photo: Ilan Amihai)

Action

Punch and Judy/Pinchas and Jamila

Avi Katz

Action

David Grossman

Ben Heine

Action

Eldrige Street shul

Lower East Side

Action

Dove

Ben Heine

Action

Two birds

Hoda Jamal

Action

Israeli and Palestinian boys

from documentary, Promises

Action

Cat in the Hat

Yiddish version

Action

Daylight through the Wall

Banksy: graffiti art on Separation Wall

Action

Maurice Sendak's Brundibar set

New Victory Theater (photo: Nan Melville/NYT)

Action

Daniel Barenboim, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra

Palestinian-Israeli musical ensemble (photo: Kerstin Joensson/AP)

Action

Great Day on Eldrige Street

N.Y.'s klezmer greats celebrate shul rededication (photo: Leo Sorel)

Action

Joint Appeal for Peace

(Avi Katz)

Joint Appeal for Peace

Ketubah, Ancona, Italy (1772)

(Jewish Theological Seminary library)

Ancona ketubah

Posts Tagged ‘fatah’

Abbas to Head Fatah-Hamas Unity Government Till Planned Elections

Tuesday, February 7th, 2012
meshal abbas meeting

Khaled Meshal and Mahmoud Abbas meet in Qatar

Mahmoud Abbas and Khaled Meshal have reached an agreement that would provide for Abbas to head a Palestinian unity caretaker government until elections, which would happen sometime in the coming months.  The deal comes on the heels of the abject failure of four rounds of Jordanian sponsored peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians in which the Israeli side offered a deal for a Palestinian state that essentially followed the contours of the Separation Wall.

Israeli reaction was swift, negative and predictable:

…Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warn[ed] Mr. Abbas that he could have peace with Israel or unity with Hamas, but not both.

Actually, the truth is Abbas could have peace with Israel if he accepted a neutered Palestine and permanent divorce from Gaza, the other half of the Palestinian nation.  What sort of peace would that be?

This Israeli formulation too drives me crazy:

Mr. Netanyahu disagrees that Hamas is changing. He noted in his statement on Monday that until Hamas recognizes Israel, abandons violence and accepts previous agreements with Israel signed by the Palestinian Authority — the three conditions that the United States and the European Union demand of Hamas, which has rejected them — it remains a renegade that must be shunned.

I would suggest a corollary set of Palestinian demands: until Israel recognizes a Palestinian state, abandons violence against Palestinians, and accepts previous peace deals (Oslo, Road Map, etc.) that it signed with the PA–then it remains a renegade that must be shunned.

Congress has boxed the Obama administration into a corner by mandating that any Palestinian government including Hamas within it, must be defunded.  That would remove $450-million of the $1 billion Palestine receives in foreign funding.  But given the expanding role that Qatar is taking in bringing the Palestinians together and possibly becoming the  new home in exile of Hamas, U.S. aid may no longer even be necessary.  Idiots like Gary Ackerman and the rest of the Lobby boys in Congress who devised this brilliant piece of legislation, should think about what it will be like to have the U.S. entirely cut out of having any influence with the Palestinians.  That’s what will happen if we cut the Palestinians loose.

It won’t hurt the Palestinians since they may have alternate sources of Arab funding.  But it will hurt the Israelis because they will continue their own obdurate ways as international pressure mounts against them.  Pretty soon, the only ally Israel will have left is the U.S., which will veto all necessary Security Council resolutions criticizing Israel.  But in the long-term, Israel cannot sustain this status quo.  The future will be grim.

Fatah Source Claims Meshal Ordered End to Terror Attacks Against Israel

Thursday, December 29th, 2011

Haaretz journalists are reporting a story (Hebrew) that a source within Fatah has informed them that Khaled Meshal has ordered Hamas’ military wing to cease terror attacks against Israel both from Gaza and the West Bank.  The supposed order came in the context of unity talks held between Mahmoud Abbas and Meshal in Egypt recently.

If the report is true, it would be a very important development.  But I’m not completely convinced.  First note that one of the two reporters is Avi Issacharoff, whose accuracy is sometimes wanting.  Second, the source is from Fatah, which is a sworn enemy of Hamas.  It wouldn’t surprise me if this was leaked by Fatah in order to force Hamas to deny it.  Such a denial would further diminish that group’s stature as an acceptable, reliable partner for future peace talks.  But this is the skeptical side of me speaking.  I’d like to be proven wrong on this one.  If it is true it could mean that Hamas is traveling farther down the road to pragmatism and realism noted in Joel Greenberg’s Washington Post story I posted about a few days ago.

The Haaretz reporters also note a statement by Meshal that Hamas is willing to join Fatah in accepting a Palestinian state within 1967 borders, though it will not recognize Israeli explicitly at this point.  The Hamas chief also noted that this decision was endorsed by the group’s Politburo including all of its senior leaders.  Add to that the announcement following the Cairo talks that Hamas intends to join the PLO, and you have further proof that Hamas is moving in a more pragmatic direction.

The story goes on to speculate that there may be elements within Hamas in Gaza who refuse to accept the directive and who will attempt to mount terror attacks in order to torpedo it.  Though this sounds more like the speculation of Israeli intelligence officials who seek to demean or diminish any change in Hamas policy.  That group generally shows enormous discipline in adhering to positions adopted by its leadership, and I doubt there could be the same kind of fragmentation and dysfunction seen within Fatah in the past.

According to the Haaretz report, Israeli intelligence sources are continuing to misplay Hamas by claiming they know nothing of any substantive change in the group’s ideological or strategic direction.  If there is any change, they claim, it is simply in its tactics and nothing deeper.  This is of a piece with both Israeli and U.S. attempts to discredit Hamas as a legitimate player in Palestinian politics.  This is precisely what they both did during the Arab Spring when popular uprisings shattered the foundations of some of the formerly most stable regimes, ones that Israel and the U.S. relied on to further their own interests in the region.  Both nations had better recalibrate their analysis or they’ll be left looking foolish and irrelevant when the Palestinians announce they’ve completed a unity agreement, presuming this does happen.

Washington Post’s Israel Correspondent Sees ‘New Hamas Pragmatism’ in Light of Arab Spring

Wednesday, December 21st, 2011

I just read a story by the Washington Post’s Israel correspondent, Joel Greenberg which makes me retain some hope that this media outlet isn’t a hopeless slave to the pro-Israel hasbara line advocated in the Op-Ed section by Fred Hiatt. Though I don’t follow the Post as closely as I do the NY Times, I’m fairly sure Greenberg must be newish to the assignment as I remember they had another reporter there until recently. If that’s the case, it could bode well for the future independence of WaPo coverage there.

Greenberg was a reporter for the NY Times in Israel from the early 1990s through the early 2000s. Though accusations made against him during the Ethan Bronner IDF fiasco noted that Greenberg served in the IDF while he was covering the country for the Times, they did not note that he became an early seruvnik by refusing to serve in Lebanon in 1983. This was an especially brave act in those days and remains so today.

Greenberg’s reporting on the first Intifada exposed some of the worst excesses of the IDF in suppressing it, which was another brave reportorial choice for which he deserves credit. He is also the son of one of the most brilliant and respected Bible scholars of the era, Moshe Greenberg. I had the honor of studying with him twice, once as an undergraduate in Israel and once as a grad student. He was a towering figure intellectually and Jewishly. His students stood in awe of him.

Larry Cohler Esses, who updated my earlier incomplete reporting about Joel Greenberg’s background, informs me that the Bible scholar published a searing critique of racism among the most right wing Orthodox movements like Chabad. In fact, he accused such groups of advocating notions of Jewish genetic superiority that remind one of an earlier era (his way of politely referring to the Nazis).

Today’s story about the increasing moderation and pragmatism in Hamas’ political pronouncements is very acute reporting. Greenberg notes that the Arab Spring has proven a potential game-changer, not just for the Arab states which have toppled dictators, but for Hamas as well. He points to Hamas’ increasing distance from Bashar al-Assad’s tainted Syrian regime (as opposed to Hezbollah and Iran, which appear to have learned little from the bloodbath ensuing there).

He notes Hamas’ increasing convergence with the new Egyptian political reality and the Muslim Brotherhood there, which may form a majority government after elections are completed. If the moderate Islamists form a coalition that includes non-Islamists, that will send a strong signal to Hamas that it can and should do the same.

The proof of course is in the pudding, and it remains to be seen whether Hamas can overcome its antipathy to Fatah and join in a unity government, as it has been threatening to do for what seems like years now.

Hamas is now looking to nations like Turkey, Egypt, and Tunisia for it’s models of political Islam and not to its soon to be former patrons in Damascus and possibly Teheran.

What is important about Greenberg’s story is that he’s rejecting the storyline spoon fed by Israeli politicians to the media and the west, that the Arab states are transitioning from an Arab Spring to an Islamist Winter. This is utter nonsense of course and corresponds to almost nothing in the current Arab reality. Though it does correspond to an Israeli narrative which sees the Arabs as evil and Israel as the sole remaining western bulwark against radical Islam (see my recent post about Bogie Yaalon’s foreign press briefing last week).

It remains to be seen whether Hamas can truly capitalize on these massive changes in the Arab world. But any reasonable observer’s money has to be on Hamas rather than Israel as most likely to take advantage of the transformation and exploit it to their advantage.

One factor Greenberg didn’t mention is Hamas’ massive success in freeing 1,500 prisoners from Israeli jails in return for the freeing of Gilad Shalit. Not only is this seen as a success inside Gaza, but in Palestine as a whole, and even beyond. Israeli and U.S. media have been filled with stories proclaiming the biggest winner in the prisoner swap as Hamas (and not Israel).

If this is the quality of future reporting that Greenberg brings to this assignment, then I’ll have to branch out from my reliance on the Times for my main dose of U.S. MSM coverage of the conflict. Thanks for

UN General Assembly Campaign for Palestinian State Gathers Momentum

Tuesday, April 12th, 2011

declaring palestinian stateA new campaign to declare a Palestinian state by the UN General Assembly this coming fall is gathering momentum.  Both supporters and detractors are already in full battle dress.  Israeli president Shimon Peres has already met with Ban Ki-Moon to tell him that such a proposal would be disastrous.  Salam Fayyad and Mahmoud Abbas are scouring European capitals for support for the proposal.  Barring any unforseen developments, it seems clear that supporters would find overwhelming support in the GA.  Unlike in the Security Council, this type of resolution could not be vetoed.  So even if the U.S. or European countries lobbied hard against it, they couldn’t stop it.  The only thing that could is a full court press in which we call in all our chits and attempt to use our muscle to prevent other countries from joining in the effort.  But I doubt even this can stop this train.

Ironically, this would be the same GA which in 1948 voted for Israeli statehood.  All this would mean that Palestinian statehood for the first time has been recognized by an international body.  Once this happens, it puts enormous political pressure on Israel to do the same.  Given that the GA resolution will recognize Palestine within 1967 borders, this will mean that this will be the starting point for any serious negotiation to resolve the conflict.  If Israel temporizes as it has for decades, it can no longer duck responsibility.  Such delay and obfuscation could now be met with legitimate, sustained and muscular international sanctions which might even have the weight of the UN behind them.  It would be at this point that the global BDS movement could combine with UN resolutions to bring overwhelming pressure on Israel to end the Occupation and withdraw from territory conquered in 1967.

Another specter lurks if Israel fails to heed these international resolutions.  There could very well be a third Intifada in which hundreds or even thousands of Palestinians are killed along with scores of Israelis.  We’ve seen the precursor of this with the recent launching of scores of Hamas missiles into southern Israel and counter-attacks which killed 18 Gazans over the past few days.  This would be kids’ stuff compared to what might happen if there was a general uprising in both Gaza and the West Bank against Israel.  It should be noted that the PA leadership of Abbas and Fayyad is quite different to that of Arafat, who orchestrated the first Intifada.  The current leaders are much more quiescent and less prone to support such an insurrection.  But in the right circumstances, if they prove inadequate to the task of mounting a vigorous defense of Palestinian prerogatives, then an uprising might find universal favor within Palestine.

The train of Palestinian statehood is gathering steam and come September will leave the station.  I hope as many nations as possible get on board.  As Curtis Mayfield sang:

People get ready, there’s a train a comin’…
You don’t need no baggage, you just get on board

There ain’t no room for the hopeless sinner
Who would hurt all mankind just to save his own…

Enhanced by Zemanta

Abusisi’s Co-Workers: Shocked at Israeli Kidnapping, Say He Criticized Hamas

Sunday, April 3rd, 2011

Walla publishes a persuasive article interviewing two of Dirar Abusisi’s long-time colleagues at the Gaza power plant where he served as deputy director, who deny emphatically the claims of Israeli prime minister Benyamin Netanyahu that the engineer was affiliated with Hamas:

“It’s easy to identify Hamas supporters,” said Muhammad Shambari, a fellow power plant worker.  You can tell who they are by their behavior, by their speech.  From the point of view of a devout Hamas follower, Abusisi was not religiously devout.  He was accustomed to pray as we all do, but no more so [as Hamas followers would].  I was in his house and their are no pictures [of Hamas leaders] and no Hamas flags.  Abusis is a completely ordinary man with no connection to Hamas.”

…Ibrahim Abu Shames, another plant worker said: “If he was a Hamas follower and shouted Hamas slogans wew would’ve noticed this.  But every day he spent at the plant and every night he went home to his family.  That’s all.  He lived his life quietly with no connection to Hamas.  We are certain of this.”

Shambari revealed that as deputy director of the plant Abisisi even criticized the Hamas authorities for the manner in which they regulated the electrical power.  “He demanded that they activate the turbines but the authorities insisted on blacking out the enclave…He disagreed with this criticized this behavior.”

Shambari also reveals the surprising fact that in the Jabaliyeh refugee camp in north Gaza there is a Fatah office, and it is named after…Abusisi’s uncle!  “Who knows, maybe he’s even a Fatah follower like a large portion of the rest of his family.”

“We don’t know why he was arrested,” say Abu Shames.  Everyone here is asking themselves why.  We were shocked when this happened and believed at first he’d been kidnapped by the Ukrainian mafia.  We couldn’t imagine that Israel would do this.  Abusisi is a decent man, a professional, serious individual.  We await with apprehension the charges that are to be filed tomorrow.  Though we can’t discount the possibility that he may confess to the charges under extreme duress.”

Here you have the possibility that Israel is attempting to turn a sow’s ear into a silk purse.  Abusisi’s family is widely known among his colleagues to be Fatah.  Yet Shabak has somehow turned him into Hamas’ chief rocket designer under direct Iranian tutelage (or was he the guy who arranged for the arms shipment aboard the ship Victoria?).  Does this even remotely pass the smell test?

I’m beginning to believe that this is yet another deeply cynical move by the Israel Mukhabarat to kidnap a key Gaza infrastructure worker and hold him for ransom–the ranson being the freedom of Gilad Shalit.  The purpose of the adventure would be to harrass Hamas and the residents of Gaza saying they will pay an ever steeper price for their continuing intransigence in freeing the IDF soldier.

It may or not be relevant that Hamas yesterday announced the failure of the mediation of the German foreign minister who was attempting to negotiate for Shalit’s freedom.

Arab Democratic Revolution: Bringing It All Back Home–to Palestine

Monday, February 28th, 2011
palestinian non violent resistance to occupation

Palestinian non-violent resistance to Occupation

Larry Derfner wrote a suggestive column in the Jerusalem Post about what he hopes is the coming Palestinian democratic revolution.  AP’s West Bank reporter also traces developments on the ground there.

All this got me to thinking about how such a thing might happen.  Before I lay out my ideas I want everyone to understand that I do this not as a Palestinian, so I assume a certain humility in suggesting that others do things based on my own vision of how a Palestinian non-violent revolution could evolve.  I’m also aware that what Larry and I suggest in both our pieces may end in the death or maiming of Palestinians.  The only thing that heartens me about this is that such sacrifices will bring their people closer to realizing its national dreams and also ending an Occupation which is disastrous for the Israeli people as well.  What I hope to do is start a dialogue with my Palestinian and Israeli brothers and sisters.  It may be that what I suggest below is useful.  It may not be.  “You take what you need and leave the rest” as The Band used to sing.

While I admire Larry for his courage in being one of the lone lefty columnists at the Post and for the power of his voice, I think his column omits some critical differences between the Palestinian condition and those of other Arab nations where protests have toppled, or threaten to topple a powerful dictatorial elite.  These differences render a potential Palestinian revolution much more complicated.  First, you have two Palestinian populations, one in Israel which faces huge levels of disenfranchisement and discrimination; and another in Palestine which faces severe fragmentation given the alienation between Hamas and Fatah.  While both populations would benefit tremendously from such a movement for true democracy, their conditions and needs are quite different.  Israeli Palestinians need equality within Israel’s political and economic system.  Palestinians of the Territories need to rid themselves of the Occupation regime and gain sovereignty over their own land in an independent state.  While there are elements that tie these two conditions together, they are not the same and this complicates the situation for those seeking radical change.

Second, the Arab revolutions of Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, Bahrain, Libya, etc. are indigenous revolutions within a discreet country in which the masses have arisen against their own leaders.  Palestine, on the other hand is occupied by an outside nation, Israel.  While the PA and Fatah are largely discredited politically, I don’t see any evidence that the masses of West Bankers are eager to chuck Fatah, nor do I see Gazans seeking to topple Hamas.  The problem for Palestinians (at least as they see it) is not so much their own leaders as Israel itself.  Yes, Palestinians need democracy and unity.  They need new elections and to be ruled by a single, coherent government in the form of a PA that includes both Fatah and Hamas and other political groupings.  But besides this indigenous political problem, there remains that 900 pound gorilla, Israel.

This makes the Palestinian revolution that much more difficult since they seek to topple not their own leaders, but an Occupation regime which Israel has installed and maintains.  So to an extent Palestinians will need to enlist the support of Israelis themselves and to a greater or lesser extent the outside world to dismantle this system of oppression.  This makes their task almost insurmountable in my opinion given that Israel shows absolutely no interest in doing so and world powers are equally disinclined to intervene forcefully.

Building on some of the elements of Larry’s column, here are some of my thoughts about how to create a Palestinian revolution:

Within Israel, Palestinians should attempt to build a mass movement that will formulate a few basic, easy to understand demands.  Then, following the example of Egypt, Tunisia and Bahrain, hundreds of thousands should march from their villages to Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Haifa and occupy Rabin Square (Tel Aviv), Tzion Square (Jerusalem) and a similar central location in Haifa as Egyptians did Tahrir Square.  Israeli Bedouin should prepare to march en masse on the Negev villages from which they’ve been displaced.  Israeli Druze should mass in the Golan for reunification with their families on the Syrian side of the border.  Gazans should mass at the Israeli border crossings and demand their opening and the end of the siege.

menachem froman with korans for burned mosques

Rabbi Menachem Froman bears new Korans for burned Palestinian mosque

Israeli Jewish activists have a role to play here as well.  Instead of demonstrating only on Fridays at Sheikh Jarrah, they must create massive encampments to blockade the settler enclaves there which have dispossessed Palestinians from homes they’ve occupied for generations.  I would like to see Israeli Jews and Palestinians linking arms as Dr. Martin Luther King did in Selma with Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel.  Let’s see the forces for change led by Rabbis Menachem Froman and Arik Aschermann on the Israeli side and non-violent Palestinians like Mustafa Barghouti on the Palestinian.  Let’s call it the March Toward Freedom or something of the sort.  Let us dare the forces of repression to confront us and then allow the world to judge who is right and who is wrong.

American Jews have a role as well.  Jewish Voice for Peace, American Friends of Peace Now and other anti-Occupation forces should prepare to lobby strenuously for U.S. intervention to maintain the peace and end expected Israeli violence.  If prevailing assumptions are derailed by this massive resistance, then the consensus to maintain the status quo may be undermined.  Openings for new ideas and bold action can be created by such an explosive crisis.

Again, there are severe obstacles facing Israeli Palestinians that did not face Egyptians.  The latter regime was undemocratic, corrupt and sclerotic.  Israel is a quasi-democracy and at least nominally responsive to its citizens.  Its security apparatus is far more robust than Egypt’s.  No Israeli police will refuse to fire on demonstrators if ordered to do so.  No military personnel will mutiny and join the resistance.  Israel’s security forces will be disciplined and implacable.  There is no overtly corrupt elite on which the recruits will turn.

I have no doubt that Shabak will react harshly to any plans of the sort I’ve outlined.  They’ll arrest leaders en masse before such a plan gets underway (which is why it would be important to follow the Egyptian model and not have a single leader or even group of leaders–this much be a mass, decentralized movement).  The police-intelligence apparatus will mobilize huge levels of force to prevent such a march and they’ll do everything in their power to prevent Israeli Arabs from reaching their destinations.  The resistance should designate secondary targets if they are prevented from accessing their primary ones.  They should bring their tents and provisions and prepare to stay for the duration or until they are assaulted by the security apparatus.

Even if they fail, I think the level of brutality used against them will severely tarnish Israel’s reputation.  With each new massacre, with each war, with each new challenge to the Israeli system, the contradictions and inequities become ever more apparent.  Whatever the outcome of this effort, it will continue a progression toward an elemental, even existential crisis, an ongoing process of fragmentation of Israel’s dysfunctional political system.

As for Palestine, the strategy here must be different.  Palestinians must target more directly the symbols and presence of Occupation.  They should identify several key settlements (Ariel would be one) and mass hundreds of thousands to gather around them and lay non-violent siege to them.  This would be a perfect mirror of what Israel is doing to Gaza and I imagine would cause an immediate end to the Gaza siege.  Unlike in Gaza though, I don’t advocate starving settlers.  Rather their daily lives should be severely disrupted.  Their contact with the outside world (Israel) should be severed.  They should not go to work.  They should not leave their settlements.  They should not have electricity or telephone or television.  They should be made to feel how isolated they are.

If the IDF wants to break such sieges with violence then go right ahead.  A non-violent siege broken up with massive levels of violence would further and perhaps fatally wound the Occupation as a viable concept in the eyes of the world and perhaps even the most die-hard Israelis.

The Bilin protests against the Apartheid Wall should be escalated.  They should be brought to multiple villages which face losing access to their fields and land.  Palestinians should rally at places where the Wall isn’t complete and non-violently demand its dismantling.  If possible they should enter Israel, sit down just across the Green Line and symbolically occupy a few meters of Israeli territory.  Again, given the levels of brutality the IDF and Border Police have used against Bilin demonstrators I have little doubt that they would continue with such a policy of suppression.  However, if there were tens of thousands at these protests instead of hundreds as there are now, it would be much harder for Occupation forces to disrupt them.

Palestine is ripe for such a process of radical democratic change.  The question is how Israel will react.  Whether it will show the true ugly form of Occupation to the world, or whether it will succeed in finessing such a crisis and defusing it with little damage to its reputation.  If, as I believe is possible, Israel reacts with enormous levels of violence, this could sow the seeds of intervention by the international community to end Israel’s domination of Palestine.  It could set the state for a radical transformation both within Israel and Palestine.

What are the chances of this happening?  What were the chances on January 24th that Egyptians would topple the Mubarak regime?  You’ve got to start somewhere. And as the current Arab movements for change have shown, you’ve got to think big.  And you’ve got to try.  Just because you’ve failed 100 times before doesn’t mean the 101st time you’ll fail again.

Wikileaks: Shabak Told U.S. Hamas Wouldn’t Take Over Gaza

Tuesday, December 21st, 2010

There seems to be a meme among a certain conspiracy minded portion of the left that the Israeli government has colluded with Wikileaks to reveal information that casts Israel’s enemies in a derogatory light and casts no aspersions on Israel.  According to this theory, Julian Assange is in the Mossad’s pocket and made a deal with them to go lightly on Israel.  Frankly, I don’t buy it mainly because there IS damaging information among the Wikileaks cables about Israel.  I’ve already written two posts detailing such material.  In my report yesterday on the Israeli TV story on Israeli sabotage of Iran the segment referred to another cable in which the Mossad’s Meir Dagan advocated to senior State Department official, Nicholas Burns, that the U.S. join Israel in fomenting regime change in Iran.

Tonight, I’m going to report on a cable that is unflattering toward Yuval Diskin, the Shabak’s soon to be outgoing director (we’ve named his replacement here, though the name is under wraps within Israel and pretty much everywhere else).  In a June, 2007 meeting between Diskin and then U.S. ambassador Richard Jones, Diskin conceded that Fatah was in a shambles and Hamas ascendant, but added:

Speaking before the dramatic events of June 12-13 in Gaza, Diskin qualified that Hamas is currently not in a position to completely destroy Fatah. Diskin said that he opposes USSC LTG [Keith] Dayton’s proposal to equip security forces loyal to Palestinian Authority President Abbas and Fatah, as he is concerned that the provisions will end up in the hands of Hamas.

…The difference, he explained, is between the “quality” of Hamas, and the “quantity” of Fatah’s security apparatus that is loyal to Palestinian Authority (PA) President Abbas. Hamas is dominant in most areas. In the Gaza Strip, it can win every fight with Fatah, but Fatah can do it harm in its “chaotic” way of fighting. Diskin said that some Fatah members are being paid by National Security Advisor Muhammad Dahlan, while others are being paid by Abbas

Only one day after this meeting, Hamas did precisely what Diskin said was unlikely, obliterating Fatah power in Gaza and taking control of the enclave. Later in the cable, Diskin reveals that forces loyal to Mohammed Dahlan, the Fatah strongman in Gaza, were so desperate they were asking Israel to attack Hamas on their behalf!  You’ll note also that Shabak opposes the one U.S. security initiative that most observers say has immensely improved security in the West Bank.  If Diskin had anything to say about it, it wouldn’t have happened and the West Bank would likely be even more chaotic than it was then.

Diskin praised Israel’s relationship with the Palestinian security services on the West Bank but added this strange addendum:

They understand that Israel’s security is central to their survival in the struggle with Hamas in the West Bank…

This is how he described the leader of one of the two main West Bank security organizations:

…Psychopathic, cruel, dangerous and prone to extreme mood swings…Diskin said that he hopes to meet with Tirawi the week of June 17 to dissuade him from “doing stupid things…”

Sounds about right for a Fatah security officer. And he wasn’t even describing Dahlan!

This nifty piece of racist nonsense about sums up the level of “expertise” the Shabak brings to bear in its “intelligence analyses:”

Diskin lamented that the current situation suggests that nobody can now assume leadership of Fatah. Dahlan, he said, can only lead in the Gaza Strip — if that — and Marwan Barghouti can lead in the West Bank, but not the Gaza Strip. “It is something in their blood,” he said, “the leaders of the West Bank cannot rule the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and vice versa.”

How would he know? Has Israel even allowed Barghouti the opportunity to run in an election?

Contrast this level of Israeli intelligence with that of the IDF, whose chief, Amos Yadlin correctly predicted a Hamas victory in a Gaza “shoot-out.” One caveat, Yadlin was speaking to Ambassador Jones one day after Diskin, and in the middle of the turmoil in Gaza. But here is what Yadlin said:

Yadlin said the IDI has been predicting armed confrontation in Gaza between Hamas and Fatah since Hamas won the January 2006 legislative council elections. Yadlin felt that the Hamas military wing had initiated the current escalation with the tacit consent of external Hamas leader Khalid Mishal, adding that he did not believe there had been a premeditated political-level decision by Hamas to wipe out Fatah in Gaza. Yadlin dismissed Fatah’s capabilities in Gaza, saying Hamas could have taken over there any time it wanted for the past year…Although not necessarily reflecting a GOI consensus view, Yadlin said Israel would be “happy” if Hamas took over Gaza because the IDF could then deal with Gaza as a hostile state. He dismissed the significance of an Iranian role in a Hamas-controlled Gaza “as long as they don’t have a port.”

…Yadlin described Gaza as “not Israel’s main problem,” noting that it ranked fourth in his hierarchy of threats, behind Iran, Syria, and Hizballah.

In light of subsequent developments, this is very interesting. You have the head of Israeli military intelligence saying Hamas is Israel’s best “friend.”  Is it any wonder that Israel has consistently demonized Hamas since 2006 and treated it as if it was a combination of Jack the Ripper and Typhoid Mary? Is it any wonder that Israel went to war only two years later with a force which the IDF’s chief spook said wasn’t anywhere his list of top threats to the nation? Nothing justifies Israel’s continuing Occupation and maintenance of the cursed status quo more than a Hamas bogeyman.

Further, Yadlin’s statement that Iran’s role in Gaza does not overly worry him flies the face of Bibi’ invocation of “Hamastan” and his portrayal of the Islamist movement as Iran’s alleged proxy.

What is curiously missing from discussions described in these cables is any mention of the planned coup fomented by State Department staffers David Welch and Eliott Abrams during meetings with Mahmoud Abbas.  From these cables, it appears Fatah couldn’t have engineered a coup that commanded control of Gaza even if it wanted to.

In these cables, we see the Israeli intelligence élite at their most candid and relatively truthful. These statements put the lie to the mendacious public statements made by Bibi, the political echelon and the generals which whip up fear and loathing against Israel’s ‘existential’ enemies and threaten a future national Holocaust without further draconian action.

Wall Street Journal Notes Hamas-Hezbollah Shift Toward Non-Violent Resistance

Sunday, July 4th, 2010
palestinian non violent resistance

Palestinian non-violent resistance--speaking truth to power

Holy S*!t Batman, who’d a thunk the Wall Street Journal would write anything positive about Hamas and Hezbollah??  A report today notes a shift in tactics by Hamas and Hezbollah toward non-violent resistance in recognition of the fact that violence tends to generate sympathy for Israel and non-violence tends to generate violence by Israel–and hence sympathy for the Palestinian cause:

Hamas and Hezbollah, groups that have long battled Israel with violent tactics, have begun to embrace civil disobedience, protest marches, lawsuits and boycotts—tactics they once dismissed.

For decades, Palestinian statehood aspirations seemed to lurch between negotiations and armed resistance against Israel. But a small cadre of Palestinian activists has long argued that nonviolence, in the tradition of the American civil rights movement, would be far more effective.

Officials from Hamas, the militant group that controls the Gaza Strip, point to the recent Israeli raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla, in which Israeli troops killed nine activists, as evidence there is more to gain by getting Israel to draw international condemnation through its own use of force, rather than by attacking the country.

“When we use violence, we help Israel win international support,” said Aziz Dweik, a leading Hamas lawmaker in the West Bank. “The Gaza flotilla has done more for Gaza than 10,000 rockets.”

I think this underlies a tectonic shift in if not public support, at least growing public sympathy for the cause of Palestinian statehood and disenchantment with the Occupation and Israeli policy.  Even only a few months ago you simply would not have seen such a report in WSJ.  You still won’t likely see it in the NY Times.  Certainly, no one can accuse the WSJ of going weak in the knees over the Palestinian cause.  Which makes such reporting all the more remarkable.

The WSJ notes in particular the change in Hamas’ thinking and approach:

Hamas’s turnaround has been more striking, said Mustapha Barghouti, a prominent Palestinian advocate for nonviolent resistance. “When we used to call for protests, and marches, and boycotts and anything called nonviolence, Hamas used these sexist insults against us. They described it as women’s struggle,” Mr. Barghouti said. That changed in 2008, he said, after the first aid ship successfully ran the Israeli blockade of Gaza.

“Hamas has started to appreciate just how effective this can be,” Mr. Barghouti said.

Hamas has started organizing its own peaceful marches into the Israeli-controlled buffer zone along the Gaza border and supported lawsuits against Israeli officials in European courts. Hamas says it has ramped up support for a committee dedicated to sponsoring similar protests in Gaza.

…Salah Bardawil, a Hamas lawmaker in Gaza City, says Hamas has come to appreciate the importance of international support for its legitimacy as a representative of the Palestinian people and its fight against Israeli occupation, and has adapted its tactics. Hamas hasn’t claimed responsibility for a suicide bombing in years and now denounces the tactic as counterproductive. Since an Israeli military incursion into the territory in December 2008-January 2009, it has also halted rocket attacks into Israel.

Hamas used to believe [international support] was just empty words,” said Mr. Bardawil. “Today it is very interested in international delegations … and in bringing Israeli officials to justice through legal proceedings.”

These are almost precisely the same words used to describe the PLO in the period preceding 1988 when it renounced violence and recognized Israel.  While I am not claiming that the PLO’s political evolution and Hamas’ will be the same; or that they have similar political agendas–I do think that just as Fatah underwent a political transformation during this period, so Hamas has and will continue to evolve politically.  No one in their right mind would predict that Palestinian militants will turn against violence, but we just may be seeing a tipping point that augurs well on that score.  Of course, much of this depends on Israel’s actions.  Another war could throw all of these gains out the window and we shouldn’t put something like this past Bibi and the gang.  But I tend to think that events militate against a return to full-scale armed conflict and terror at least from the Palestinian side.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE