Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Analysis: Why the president was right

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-11 08:28 PM
Original message
Analysis: Why the president was right
By John Quigley and Gabi Fahel

President Mahmoud Abbas' decision to request UN membership for Palestine at the Security Council is the right decision.

It is the right decision if you believe in two states. It is the right decision if you believe in one state. It is the wrong decision if you believe in the status quo.

The status quo is the continuing occupation of Palestine and its people, daily human rights violations, denial of access to Jerusalem and Palestinian holy sites, as well as settlement construction without end. The status quo also means no tangible remedy for Palestinian refugees.

Abbas has clearly exhausted every bilateral avenue to responsibly move the peace process forward and he has now prudently reached the conclusion that international consensus is not enough. He has concluded that it is now time for active international engagement beyond the confines of the bilateral negotiations box.

remainder: http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=428860
Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
azurnoir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
1. Good article and spot on IMO
Abbas can keep this up and this part spells things out quite well

And Israel's allies could also be taken to task to reassess whether any good-will created during the Arab Spring should be used to extinguish Israel's diplomatic flare ups every few months at numerous international organizations.

So is Abbas on the right side of history for seeking Palestine's international engagement? Absolutely.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shira Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
2. Yeah, right. Abbas has avoided negotiations for years. Give up RoR, recognize a Jewish state!
Edited on Fri Oct-14-11 02:39 PM by shira
Of course, when you have useful idiots - posers for peace - doing all the ass wiping propaganda for you, why not say you're desperate and the UN is the only choice?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. The settler leader who led Israelis to disaster

Hanan Porat understood that if he could fill Judea and Samaria with dozens of settlements and hundreds of thousands of settlers, no government would be able to evacuate the territories and arrive at a peace agreement.

By Nehemia Shtrasler

There were so many accolades and so much praise that I found myself getting confused. Was this the same Hanan Porat that I also knew? True, he was an idealist, and charismatic, and modest, and he always said what he felt in his heart. True, also, that he was the great leader of Gush Emunim. But we must not forget, and this is the tragic part of the story, that his biggest success - covering the West Bank with a carpet of Israeli settlements - was also the greatest disaster that befell the people of Israel.

My father used to say that Hanan Porat was a very dangerous man. He looked so nice, so handsome, and he always smiled a smile of pure olive oil, so that you would become confused and charmed by him and wouldn't notice that he was leading you, pied piper-style to a disaster.

His admirers pointed out this week what a gigantic contribution he had made to the settlement enterprise on the West Bank. But Porat did not make do with Judea and Samaria. He was a maximalist. He wanted everything. When Menachem Begin signed the peace treaty with Egypt, he attacked him with fury and joined MK Geula Cohen, who bolted the Likud to form the rightwing Tehiya Party. Because even in return for peace with Egypt he believed it was forbidden to return even one grain of sand in Sinai. Imagine our situation in the 32 years that have since passed without (even a cold ) peace with Cairo. How many soldiers would have been killed, how many wars would have broken out, how many tens of billions of shekels would have been wasted?

That was also Porat's approach with regard to evacuating Gush Katif. From his point of view, even the Gaza Strip, with its 1.5 million Arabs, was ours and we should not give up even one clod of its earth, despite the fact that it was not part of the Land of Israel.


http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/the-settler-leader-who-led-israelis-to-disaster-1.388656




Civil Administration plans to expel tens of thousands of Bedouins from Area C

10 Oct. '11


The Civil Administration (CA) is planning to expel the Bedouin communities living in Area C in the West Bank, transferring some 27,000 persons from their homes. In the first phase, planned as early as January 2012, some 20 communities, comprising 2,300 persons, will be forcibly transferred to a site near the Abu Dis refuse dump, east of Jerusalem. These communities currently live in the area of the Ma'ale Adummim settlement and nearby settlements; half of them live in 1E, the area designated by Israel for future expansion of Ma’ale Adummim. In the second phase, the CA plans to expel communities from the Jordan Valley. One option being considered is building a new permanent town for these communities next to a-Nabi Musa, west of Jericho. According to the CA's schedule, the plan will be implemented in three to six years.

The CA announced its plan to "relocate" the Bedouin communities to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). The main reason given was the claim that the Bedouins do not have rights to the land on which they currently live and that all their construction has been done without permits. The CA did not consult with representatives of the communities before adopting the plan, and ignored the anticipated harm to these communities’ way of life. Most of the communities informed the UN agencies that they would object to the plan.

About 80 percent of the Bedouins living in what Israel terms the "Adummim bloc", who are expected to be expelled in coming months, are 1948 refugees who once lived in the Negev, in southern Israel. Two-thirds are under age 18. All of them have lived for decades in unrecognized villages. Demolition orders have already been issued against most of the structures in the communities – tin structures and tents and a school in the Khan al-Ahmar community. In two communities – Wadi Abu Hindi (350 residents) and al-Muntar (300 residents) – demolition orders have been issued against all the structures in the community.

None of the communities are hooked up to the electricity grid and only half are connected to the water system. They do not receive vital services in the areas of health, education and others. They live a traditional life based on sheep and goat farming, but their access to grazing land and to markets is limited. According to OCHA’s figures, most of the residents in these communities suffer from food insecurity.

http://www.btselem.org/settlements/20111010_forced_eviction_of_bedouins
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shira Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. The settlers would have been a thing of the past had the PA accepted credible peace offers...
...in 2000 and 2008.

Any more shit you wish to throw up against the wall?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Anyone interested to read the information decides for themselves.
Considering world opinion of Israeli policy, I think most have figured it out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shira Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 09:10 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. World opinion. Really? Hezbollah via Lebanon currently sits atop the UNSC while....
...bastions of human rights like Syria and Libya were until very recently on the UNHRC.

Why should any country - not just Israel - take that kind of world opinion seriously?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
King_David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. World opinion of The Jewish State
Is as a rule negative .

Nothing can change that ever. It is not a dynamic or rational value.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
azurnoir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. International help pours in as Israel battles forest fire
From Bulgaria to Jordan and Greece, even Turkey, send firefighters, equipment, helicopters and other help as a fire rages in Carmel Forest. The toll rises to 41 as officials hope to control the blaze by weekend.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/dec/04/world/la-fg-israel-fire-20101204

It would seem that if World opinion of Israel was so entirely negative it simply would have been allowed to burn

"Rumor" has it that even the PA offered assistance
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
King_David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Ok the lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
azurnoir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. so international assistance to Israel during the Carmel fire is a laughing matter to you? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
King_David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Ha ha ha. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
azurnoir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. that's really kind of unfortunate as even Netanyahu did not feel that way
Following is a translation of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Hebrew remarks at the ceremony held today (Tuesday), 7.12.10, at President Shimon Peres' Residence in Jerusalem, in salute to both the Israel and foreign volunteers who assisted in extinguishing the Carmel wildfire.

"The Psalmist says (83:15): 'As the fire that burns the forest, and as the flame that sets the mountains ablaze.'

"This is a strong and poetic expression that gives one pause," said Netanyahu. "This past week, to our sorrow, we saw it in all its strength, not in a poem and not in this verse, but in reality, on Mt. Carmel, where the prophet Elijah brought down fire from Heaven.

There are times when modern and technological man feels how small he is against the forces of nature but it is precisely these times in which certain, select people transcend the ordinary and show the greatness of humanity.

Such brave people from all over the world came to help Israel in this hour of need and joined our brave firefighters and police. Among them were pilots from a dozen countries who repeatedly circled, landed and took off, through fire and water, swifter than eagles and stronger than lions – over the fire."

<snip>

Over 300 members of the various delegations participated in the event including fire fighters, pilots, emergency response experts, and Ambassadors from more than 10 countries. There were delegations representing Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Egypt, France, Germany, Greece, Holland, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, Britain, United States, Russia, Jordan, Turkey, and the Palestinian Authority. The participants crowded into the expanded Hall in the President's Residence specifically so all of the delegates could be included in the event.

http://www.israelnewsagency.com/netanyahuperesisraelthankscarmelfireforeignvolunteersgreeceusjordanazerbaijanbulgariacroatiacyprussegyptfrancegermanyhollanditalyspainswitzerlandbritainusrussiajordanturkeypa48071210.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
King_David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. WTF it has to do with anything on this thread ?


Hence the ha ha ha.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
azurnoir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. well you brought up world opinion of Israel being negative
Edited on Sat Oct-15-11 07:42 PM by azurnoir
I gave an example that could say otherwise
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. Prolonging the longest occupation has nothing to do with it, according to some.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shira Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. You're against ending the occupation, so what are you talking about?
Edited on Sat Oct-15-11 03:28 PM by shira
Israel could've ended it in 2000 and 2008 had the PA merely agreed to a reasonable peace offer. The price Israel had to pay wasn't high enough, so no deal. As far as you're concerned, the PA made the right choice allowing the occupation to remain in place another decade.

Even though Arafat was quoted later regretting that he turned it down.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/jun/22/israel

Olmert offered more in 2008, but you support Abbas turning that one down too.

Only someone in favor of extending the occupation would support the PA's decision to reject both peace deals without making a reasonable counter-offer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
King_David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. That has very little to do with opinion of
The Jewish State, Jews or Israel .
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Yea, why would it, according to some, it is a non-issue, for the most part.
The occupation that inflicts injustice for so long, as we speak the settlements continue, but that would not carry much weight in the minds of fair minded people. Must be something else, according to some.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shira Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. If you're against the occupation then you should be for the 2000 and 2008 peace offers from Israel.
You're not.

You think the PA was correct in rejecting both offers and allowing the occupation to continue.

Apparently, you need the occupation to exist so you can keep bashing Israel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. They were rejected because the Palestinians enjoy the occupation
and or wanted to give people a reason to keep bashing Israel??

You're funny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shira Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 05:20 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Well actually, the PA/Hamas love using the occupation to bash Israel, but it's not b/c they enjoy it
Edited on Sat Oct-15-11 05:25 PM by shira
....that they refused the peace deals.

Try again.

They refused because................

Come on, you can do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. You made the assertion, back it up..I don't fill in the blanks for your
stupid formations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shira Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-16-11 06:05 AM
Response to Reply #24
25. You know why they rejected both 2000 and 2008. They're not interested in their own homeland...
...free of occupation and settlements.

They want more than that, as rejecting deals from Peel and the 1947 Partition Plan all the way up to the present day proves.

Care to guess what MORE they want? Or will you pretend you don't know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-16-11 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. They're interested in a viable state, yes.
Instead of playing guessing games with yourself, I suggest you read more often on the subject.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shira Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-16-11 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. Oh? Only a viable state? The 1937 Peel and 1947 Partition Plans provided for a viable Palestinian
Edited on Sun Oct-16-11 09:17 AM by shira
....state.

Look at the maps.

If anything, Israel would not have been viable as a state back then under each plan.

The Arabs rejected those plans, just as they rejected 2000 and 2008 proposals.

Why?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Donald Ian Rankin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 08:37 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. "Give in first, negotiate afterwards".
The Palestinians have very few bargaining chips. The Israelis are going to give them the bare minimum they can possibly get away with, with the support of the US. To give away anything the Israelis want without getting as much for it in return as they can would be foolish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shira Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Sure, if they want a state. They're seemingly not as oppressed and desperate as advertised...
Edited on Sat Oct-15-11 01:25 PM by shira
If they were, they'd have agreed to their own state, free of occupation and settlements, long ago.

They should be doing everything they can to demonstrate their peaceful intentions. Looks like you'd have them fight it out a few more decades...

=========

Now be honest - tell me why the Palestinians rejected something like the 1937 Peel Commission:
http://www.ijs.org.au/Peel-Commission-Partition-Plan-1937/default.aspx

Answer that one please.

And then tell me what's different today.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Dec 22nd 2024, 03:14 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC