There have been so many miscalculations going into the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks one hardly knows where to begin in portraying them. First, let’s start with Hamas’ military wing, to whom we owe thanks for their gruesome point-blank killings of four Hebron Hills settlers including two women, one of whom was pregnant.
Thanks to the foolhardy campaign of isolation against Hamas engineered by Israel and the U.S., Hamas believes the only way to make its voice heard is through the barrel of a gun. But if the gangsters who planned this killing had bothered to think about anything more than drawing Israeli blood, they would’ve realized the peace talks are destined to fail. They don’t need killings in order to ensure this. In fact, that the Hamas military wing butchers headquartered in Damascus felt the need to kill indicates how insecure and desperate they are. If they had been smart, as in any political campaign, when your opponent is about to fall flat on his face you don’t do anything to make him more attractive to voters. This is precisely what Hamas did.
Further, in Israel an intense debate was underway provoked by theater artists about boycotting Israeli settlements. Their refusal to perform in the new Ariel cultural center was drawing sympathy from many Israelis. Now, any sympathy engendered has been drowned by preservation instincts that kick in whenever there’s a terror attack.
One might suspect that the Hamas extremists who executed this attack don’t want peace at any price. And that’s just what they’ll get if they continue on this road. Endless war and a struggle to the death ending perhaps in mutually assured destruction of both Israel and Palestine. Do they want the region to be a smoking rubble? Will that satisfy?
But let’s not leave the Israelis and Americans off as passengers on this ship of fools. Bibi Netanyahu is about to embark on peace talks when he has nothing whatsoever to offer the Palestinians. He’s refusing to renew the settlement freeze. Along with his U.S. partner in grime, Dennis Ross, he’s preparing a proposal that would be a freeze in name only and allow Israel to continue building in settlements it is “likely” to control after a peace agreement. Of course, such a proposal would undermine any negotiation since it would de facto assign Israel control of territory on whose behalf it is supposed to be negotiating.
If I were Abbas I would demand in return for approving this sham freeze a parallel set of building permits for building in Israeli Palestinian towns, which almost never can get Israeli approval for new construction.
What will Bibi offer the Palestinians? A few less roadblocks and checkpoints, a few more towns under Palestinian control. What will he not offer Abbas? Dismantling of illegal settlements, Right of Return (in even a modified form), return to ’67 borders. In short, he’s got nuttin’. Another sham.
As for the U.S., what is Obama thinking? How can he possibly want to invest political capital in such a shambles of a negotiation? My impression of presidential power is that it should be wielded when there is a reasonable chance of success. There isn’t in this case. So Obama is wasting his time and energy. Here is a perfect example of the Alice in Wonderland quality of the administration’s thinking going into the talks:
…The Obama administration, according to officials, is calculating that once the two leaders are in face-to-face negotiations, neither side will be willing to take actions that would capsize the talks in the first month. Mr. Netanyahu, this thinking goes, will offer a compromise that, while it may fall short of an extension of the moratorium, will satisfy the Palestinians that construction will be curbed.
Of course Bibi will be willing to capsize the talks. What does he stand to lose from doing so? His job? His coalition? His power? Of course not. And what can Obama do to threaten him politically or otherwise? Nothing. Will Obama dare to cut aid in an election year? Will he dare to anything that has teeth in the face of Israeli recalcitrance? Of course not. So who are we kidding here? Nothing good will come of this.
If you should doubt that proposition, just read Ethan Bronner’s “good time Mahmoud” account in today’s Times, Outlines Emerge of Future State in West Bank, you’ll see why the talks are bound to fail. Bronner’s eternal sunshine of the Zionist mind reels off his typical tedious list of Israel-Fatah West Bank “successes”: the requisite man in the street interview with a satisfied Palestinian customer praising the new found economic boom. The tantalizing prospects of the removal of a few checkpoints and a few new areas in which Palestinian police will be permitted to patrol (until Israel needs to pursue a terrorist or criminal, in which case it forgets it no longer has control and does whatever the hell it wishes anyway). All of this of course equals that “emerging Palestinian state.” That is if you’re in a drug-induced stupor that prevents you from seeing what is in front of one’s nose.
What is missing from Bronner’s account (except in a single-paragraph dismissive aside)? One word: Hamas. And that one word was reintroduced to the political landscape by today’s terror attack. What the terror attack showed to anyone with a brain and eyes in their head is that Hamas will shatter any arrangement unless it includes them in some meaningful form. Negotiating a peace agreement or proclaiming an emerging state as Bronner and his buddies Obama, Abbas and Bibi are trying to do, will founder on the rocks if it attempts to do so without a significant proportion of the Palestinian population, those who support Hamas.
This is not a promotion of that group. I don’t agree with Hamas’ agenda. But I do understand democracy and governing with the permission of the governed. Obama should too since that is the basis of American democracy. Hamas may not be what I’d prefer to govern Palestine and they may not do so if there is a future election in Palestine. But it is clear as day that they are a force that must be reckoned with in some form. Otherwise, all will be lost. That’s why the current formulation of peace talks is destined to fail.
And before any readers hop on the “beat up Palestinians” band wagon, note this telling passage from the N.Y. Times article linked above:
…The attack took place in an area of the West Bank that is under full Israeli security control, and where the Palestinian security forces have no responsibility and are not allowed to operate.
Abu-Mazen is a Mossad Mole. He does’nt even “talk” as a Palestinian. The “Palestine” that Bibi and Abu-Mazen will bless will be a confederation of Jordan, Israel, and the WestBank (its inhabitants may call it palestine, yesha, yehuda, or samaria), and Gaza which may join the confederation in the future if it meets some conditions. This Bibi will accept. What he will not accept is the “DeJure” recognition of a sovereign “Republic of Palestine” in the WestBank and Gaza. A Republic of Palestine that disjoins Jordan or Israel from being part of it but a Republic of Palestine that may join Israel and Jordan in a “Confederation of Jerusalem”. If I am dreaming then you’ll soon find that it is the most realistic dream around. Unless you stick to the core issues, the discussion and counter-jabs on this site are superficial to say the least, harmful at their worst. Ask Delta (one of the discussants here) a simple question: Will you personally accept a DeJure recognition of a Republic of Palestine in the West Bank and Gaza? if you answer is conditional yes than what are your “realistic” conditions? and What if all your realistic conditions are met by a majority of Palestinians in the WestBank and Gaza, then will you accept a DeJure recognition of a Republic of Palestine in the West Bank and Gaza? I suspect Delta’s answer will be No. I know Likud-Bibi’s answer will definitely be No. Likud-Bibi can definitely count on his MossadMole to accept “Palestinian Sovereignty over their own affairs” but never over “their own Land”. That’s where the Hamas factor comes into play as a counter point to the MossadMole. So please “All of you including Richard” start talking about meaningful things and stop repeating the obvious and shouting at each other while doing it. It’s really boring. To all of you my brothers and cousins “Salaam and Shalom”, Eid Ramadan Tov and Shanah Mubaarakat.
I agree a lot with Richard. I think, the problem is, that US, Israel and Abbas left Hamas without political options. Since Abbas election, it became widely known that his family got their money from the US:
link to menassat.com
Abbas term of presidency ran out in January 2009. Abbas since them called off all elections where he and his men could be defeated. Abbas PA militia is widely regarded as a US puppet force, and that is no coincidence:
link to jta.org
The US is widely regarded as biased pro Israel or even submissive to Israel. The latest submission of Barack Obama to Bibi Netanyahu in the question of building settlements in Jerusalem has shown it once again.
Abbas ignored calls from Hamas and many others from civilian Palestinian society not to negotiate with Israel anything, while Israel continues with the expansion of settlements.
Now Netanyahu, Obama and Abbas negotiate the future of Palestine in secret negotiations where Palestinian rights shall be sold out to Israel. So what political option was left for Hamas to stop Abbas from doing this?
But in one point I more agree with Hamas analysis. Richard, you said: “If I were Abbas I would demand…”
As far as I have seen Hamas does not think, that Abbas thinks of the Palestinian people and that he will not demand anything. They believe Abbas knows that he will have no chance in any future election and is now just securing some more US money for him and his family. As Abbas is seen as a US-puppet these peace talks are considered as a conspiracy against Palestine.
Sad situation.
Hamas has repeatedly vowed vengeance after the Israel killing of Hamas members such as the assassination in Dubai. Israel has killed dozens of Palestinians this year in addition to the flotilla massacre.
Right and killing known terrorists is the same as murdering pregnant women and children.
I have no idea what a “known terrorist” is. Nor do you. For you, it’s anyone the IDF says is a terrorist which casts an awfully wide net that can include unarmed police cadets on a parade ground graduating fr academy. 250 of them mowed down all at once as the first act of Israel’s massacre/war.
Can you assure me that the two husbands were gentle law abiding citizens who’d never harmed a Palestinian? No, of course you can’t since to settle in the Hebron Hills you by defintion have to hate Palestinians so much you’re prepared to kill them. And many of these settlers have done so in cold blood. Now, I don’t know anything about these particular victims & don’t support their murder. But let’s be honest & candid. These particular settlers are not there to have a picnic nor merely to settle the land of Israel. They’re there to participate in a catacylsmic existential war bet. Israel & Amalek. And as far as they’re concerned, these people are martyrs for the cause in the exact same way that Palestinian shahids are martyrs for their cause.
Hi Richard,
“Thanks to the foolhardy campaign of isolation against Hamas engineered by Israel and the U.S., Hamas believes the only way to make its voice heard is through the barrel of a gun.”
Do you really believe that murdering parents of six children and another pregnant women is justified because they are settlers ?
Do you actually believe that “isolation” drives someone to kill 4 innocent people ? Its far deeper than that. To kill with the wonton disregard Hamas does, takes real hatred that stems from something much deeper than occupation.
Its a shame you only see the surface and superficial, and almost a crime that you use this tragedy for such callous political commentary. Where is your heart ?
I guess you can’t read, because that’s most definitely NOT what I wrote. But don’t let that stop you fr. mangling my views.
Ah yes, the old canard Jew-hatred, etc. What noxiousness. Where did you come from?
I hope you’ll fulfill that promise that this will be yr last visit here.
“…The attack took place in an area of the West Bank that is under full Israeli security control, and where the Palestinian security forces have no responsibility and are not allowed to operate.”
Why is this relevant? Israel claims full security control much of the West Bank (in reality over all of it, and if you consider the blockade, over Gaza as well.)
The land where this happened is in Palestine. If Hamas wanted to commit such acts inside Israel, it would do so.
And still no concrete example from the Ultra leftist arab sypathiser. Just name calling. How about it Rich ? Just give us one ?
Is ‘Arab sympathizer’ a dirty word? Is it bad to sympathize with Arabs? Any Arabs, or only some?
It is always racists who use such terms: ‘niggerlover’, ‘Judenfreund’. Please realize what company you are in.
And if we have the good manners and respect to capitalize the words Jews and Judaism, then please show the same respect for Arabs and Islam.
Yes it means that you are biased and one sided to the arab side. And thats a big problem. No balance at all,
You haven’t a clue about my views about Israel & dedication to its cause. You’re an utter ignoramus who can’t read & I have no patience for you.
I get it now: The term Judenfreund in your worldview would mean: “You are biased and one sided to the Jewish side. And that’s a big problem. No balance at all.” The same for ‘nigger lover’. Thanks for the explanation.
The current round of peace talks are almost upon us; indeed, they’ve probably started already. But, sadly, four Israelis and a potential fifth were shot to death yesterday and reprisals for this can easily be imagined in the days to come. And, all the while, 60+ years of pointless killing and pain would seem to count for nothing; this cycle of violence still continues and, as things stand, only its amplitude has changed – and not for the better. Talks that might have stood some small chance of success now seem to promise so much less than before, even though expectations weren’t all that high to begin with. The voice of the gun is still able to dominate above all others.
But it’s no good banging on about how evil and unfit this group or that just happens to be. None of them are likely to fade from the scene on that opinion alone.
It’s no good cataloging how much the other side’s crimes are so much worse than one’s own. From an objective point of view, if there can be such a thing, this is largely irrelevant.
Neither can it be of any help anticipating some rapid change of heart in any of the contending parties; things are as they are and no amount of fine tuning will be able to change them all that much.
.
If bemoaning the situation will not help, the question that remains is this. What will? If we want to see the rule of law rather than that of the gun become the dominant factor, what then is it that we have to do??
Hasn’t the problem always been that, for some, the gun works only too well, thereby increasing the difficulty in its removal.
Removal: One way might be to degrade its function, degrade it by ensuring that all guns and other similar implements now include an inbuilt defect, a tendency to explode spectacularly in the face of the user now and then. With such unreliable weaponry deployed, the case for its use could soon become about as obsolete as the dodo.
http://yorketowers.blogspot.com
Maybe our expectations need not be so low after all.
Maybe that, in itself, has been the problem all along.
One might suspect that the Hamas extremists who executed this attack don’t want peace at any price. And that’s just what they’ll get if they continue on this road.
RICHARD,
Please can you provide one concrete example that Hamas wants anything but the destruction of the state of Israel. You are making the classic ” Chamberlain mistake”. Seeing Hamas through your western bias. i.e. these are reasonable people who really want peace, they only kill and murder because they are impoverished, frustrated and angry. Could it possible be that they actually mean what they say ? THey fight to destroy Israel ( and the west), they are not fighting so Israel will give them something, they are fighting to destroy !!! I take them at their word. Why can’t you ?
Dave
So let’s just assume they really want to “destroy Israel”, whatever that means (transform it into a majority Arab state? Expel some Jews? All of them? Disenfranchise them? Kill them all? What do you think?)
You see, one of the purposes of negotiating, of engaging in a political process, can actually be to change opinions. But even failing that: People, even Hamas, can compromise on their principles in order to achieve a less than optimal, but acceptable result. That’s another thing negotiations can bring about. But it’s a possible result, not a precondition (hello Mr. Netanyahu!)
If you or people thinking in the same way as you had had their way, Israel would never have negotiated with Egypt or Jordan.
Jeez, everyone seems to forget that the latest “terrorist” attack by Hamas against Israel was conducted in occupied territory against Zionist settlers who have usurped Palestinian land in the West Bank, and NOT in Israel. I certainly, in no way, condone violence, but to deny the Palestinians the right to resist the occupation is wrong, and that is what Hamas is doing. Doing it on the eve of so-called peace talks is a signal that the proposed talks are a farce because those who truly represent the Palestinians have not been included. Abbas does not represent the Palestinians – he is no longer even president. Like Obama, he is another Uncle Tom (A person who will do anything to stay in good standing with “the white man” including betray his own people).
Murdering civilians is not the same as “resisting occupation”.
No? Is it also not the same as “self-defense”? Because, you might know, Israeli forces murder civilians all the time. And I mean “murder”.
In WW2, Partisan forces casually murdered German civilians in occupied territories (for example railroad workers) as well as citizens of their own countries who were cooperating with the Germans. Also not “resisting occupation”?
Settlers in the occupied territories are not simple citizens minding their own business. They are part of a military occupation framework. Many of them are actually armed militants. I do not see any reason why they should be considered “civilians” any more than Gazan policemen or Hamas officials.
So it’s okay for Hamas to kill Israeli civilians because the IDF kills Palestinian civilians?
Absolutely not.
It is of course especially tragic for the Palestinians because the Israelis have far bigger and more lethal weapons, including fighter planes and Apache helicopters from which to kill Palestinians in greater numbers.
No, neither is “okay”. But then again, neither is more or less reprehensible or criminal than the other.
I condone neither, and actually think that in both cases the responsible parties should be brought to justice.
I could be wrong, but I’m fairly certain that you think that in one of these cases – the one which happens far more often by the way – the responsible party should walk away scot free or at best receive a slap on the wrist, while in the other case they should be imprisoned and/or killed? Am I right?
Seems to me you’re in a vicious circle. Can we agree that it’s not acceptable for either the IDF or Palestinian militants to murder civilians? Further, the number of Israeli civilians killed by Hamas militants is infinitesimal compared to the number of Palestinian civilians killed by the IDF.
@ Koshiro
Don’t tell me what my opinions are, you don’t know me. No, I don’t think IDF soldiers should get away “scot free” when they kill Palestinians civilians. I think they should go to jail.