In a ceremony broadcast live across the Middle East, the Israeli-Palestinian peace process was formally buried. The event, which formalized the unity pact between the Fatah Party and its Hamas rival, marked the formation of a new Palestinian Authority government in which both factions would share power. PA President Mahmoud Abbas will also assume the role of prime minister, ousting Salam Fayyad, the pro-peace and development technocrat who had earned the trust of the West for his efforts to build the Palestinian economy and enforce the rule of law. But Fayyad’s role in the PA is now over, as is, apparently, Abbas’s pretense that he, too, favored peace and development.
There will be those apologists for the Palestinians who will say unity was necessary for peace and even claim this means Hamas is abandoning violence. But they will be either lying or deceiving themselves. Hamas’s goal of Israel’s destruction is unchanged as is, it should be noted, that of their erstwhile Fatah enemies. By signing the pact and now making it a reality, Abbas has for all intents and purposes torn up the Oslo Peace Accords, signed with such hope on the White House Lawn in September 1993.
Oslo required the Palestinians to give up violence and dedicate themselves to peace and establishing a civil society in exchange for rule over the West Bank and Gaza and the implicit promise of independence. This PLO leader Yasir Arafat did not do. He nurtured terrorists among his own ranks even as he jealously guarded his power against rivals like Hamas. The choice for the Palestinians was clear. Their leaders could act to wipe out those who opposed peace and therefore seal a plan of coexistence with Israel or they could fail to do so and condemn both peoples to another generation or more of conflict. Arafat, who was offered an independent state in the West Bank, Gaza and a share of Jerusalem in 2000 and 2001, refused to accept it, and instead chose another round of conflict via the terrorist war of attrition known as the second intifada.
Abbas, his successor, turned down another such offer in 2008. Since then, he has refused to negotiate with Israel and has now preferred the embrace of the Islamists of Hamas to that of the West and Israel from whom he could have won independence and peace. While belief in the peace process has been the stuff of fantasy for many years, the consummation of the Fatah-Hamas marriage of convenience marks the formal burial of the idea that the Palestinians had any interest in peace with Israel.
The talk of Hamas changing from an Islamist terrorist group committed to Israel’s destruction and the murder of its Jewish population into a non-violent political group is as genuine as the similar rationalizations that were put forward in the 1990s for Arafat. Bringing Hamas into the PA government means an end to all pretense of hope for peace. There were, after all, never any real differences between the two on the ultimate objective of eliminating Israel. Fatah was no more capable of signing a peace deal that recognized the legitimacy of a Jewish state, no matter where its borders were drawn, than Hamas. The influence of the Islamists will now spread from Gaza to the West Bank, renewing the threat of terrorism from that region that Israel’s security fence had largely eliminated.
The Palestinians are counting on both the Europeans and the Obama administration to bend to their desires and keep Western aid flowing to the PA. They believe the West is so committed to its illusions about Palestinian moderation that they will flout their own laws that forbid the transfer of funds to terror groups and those governments they have infiltrated. They also hope the knee-jerk impulse to blame Israel for everything that happens in the Middle East will overwhelm common sense and create a new push for Israeli concessions to the Fatah-Hamas government.
No doubt there will be plenty of support for such a policy from so-called realists and other veteran peace processers who would compromise their own principles rather than admit they were wrong about the Palestinian desire for peace.
Obama has been the most pro-Palestinian of any American president. But his efforts to help them have been rewarded with the same contempt that more pro-Israel administrations have gotten from the PA. If Obama has a shred of common sense or dignity left, he will make it clear to the Palestinians that they have effectively cut themselves off from American aid and a path to independence. Anything else would constitute a U.S. repudiation of Oslo. If Abbas chooses peace with Hamas over peace with Israel then he must be made to understand he will pay a high price for this decision.
All this means is that Obama will demand no Jews be allowed to live anywhere in Israel,
Yes, I guess we shall all soon see whether or not President Obama has a shred of common sense or dignity. I am not very optimistic on that score. The Palestinian Authority should have been cut off from Western aid money many years ago. They should be made to face some negative consequences for their negative actions/rhetoric over the years.
While I agree with much of the post, the conclusion is problematic, because the Palestinians will simply respond to any aid cut-off with threats to dissolve the PA in order to force Israel to once again assume the burden of administering the territories–which would also allow them to gain a lot of brownie points in their campaign to delegitimize Israel as an occupying power. I don't think there are any easy solutions, but one approach that I would like to see is that the US (and the EU) would forcefully insist on solving the "refugee" issue by demanding that the Arab states integrate the Palestinian "refugees" that they have kept in camps for generations, and by working to dissolve UNRWA. The same of course should be demanded from the Palestinians themselves, who, in the territories they administer, have also kept the "refugee" camps.
Israel made a choice in 1967 to occupy and colonise the reminder of Palestine. Why should other countries shoulder the burden of administering the territories – especially now, that there are so many Israeli citizen living there? And of course why should US and EU help solve the refugee issue that was entirely of Israel's making?
Eva, I've news for you: the West Bank and Gaza were occupied by Israel in a defensive war. Since 2005, Gaza is entirely under Palestinian rule, and as a result of the Oslo agreements, some 40 percent of the West Bank with more than 90 percent of the Palestinian population, have also long been under PA control. The "refugee issue", as others have told you already, is a result of the 1948 Arab war of aggression against Israel – e.g. when Germany lost a war of aggression some 3 years before the Arabs did, it was fully expected to absorb the 12 million German refugees that resulted from this defeat. Moreover, Israel absorbed hundreds of thousands of Jewish refugees who were ethnically cleansed from their ancient communities all over the Middle East.
Eva – Shame on you – ignoring the Truth about ALL the Wars leading up to that "occupation" of ISRAELI Land, by Israel. nIt's so easy to let your Marxist masters just spoon-feed you their pablum. Bet you've never even looked at the MAP of the region, what was, and is, and what the Bible says will be. n nThat would mean you would be forced to wonder why the ancient tribes EXCEPT THE PHILISTINES are all lined up as the Lord said they would be – 3,000 YEARS AGO – when nothing made them fulfill that part of Bible Prophecy. God the Creator has now used Israel as a baby lamb in a cage to entice her enemies to come out seeking her, the way a Hunter entices His prey. The lamb in the cage has no way to defend herself, but the Hunter is not worried for her, because He will take care of her Prey, before they can seriously harm her.
No, that choice was made for Israel. n nEgypt kicked out UN Peacekeepers, massed troops along her borders and threatened her annihilation, along with promises of rivers of blood and orgies of rape. n nAfter the war, Israel offered to return the land in exchange for peace. n nThe Arabs refused. n nThey authored their own destiny- and once more thety failed miserably. n n
Eva, Israel is itselff not going to take responsibility for the PA and doesn't now, hopefully that is understood-that is the flip side, after all, of letting the PA run through its play options, join Hamas, fight with Hamas, go to the UN, without any serious threat of reoccupation. Israel is ceding the PA it's sand box. n nAnd no Eva, Israel is not "colonizing" areas of the PA demarcated by Oslo as being under sole PA administration and no, Eva, Israel didn't colonize the "rem[a]inder of Palestine" since "Palestine" itself is something of a construct to begin with and, anyways, Eva, the whole point of the article above is precisely that the US and EU WILL continue to assume the burden of administering the territories through aid. And no, Eva, the refugee problem is not Israel's doing but the Palestinian and Arab militias and army's in trying to throttle Israel in 1947 and 48. n nBut hey, there's one point you make worthy of consisderation: let the "refutgees" (well, great grand children of reguees) stew in Arab countries. n nGreat point!
It was the Bush Administration (mainly Condoleeza Rice and the State Dept) who insisted, over Israeli and PA objections, and in violation of the Oslo Accords, that Hamas be allowed to contest the last election. Maybe Obama can blame Bush
In any case, under the Oslo Accords, Israel negotiates with the PLO not the PA so Hamas joining the PA is irrelevant., they're not part of the PLO. n nBesides, no one can ignore reality like "peace process professionals". In his previous incarnatiuon as PA Prime Minister, Abbas signed the "Roadmap" and then announced the very next day he would not implement the first step, disarming militant groups. The Quartet just ignored that because they didn't want to look looke the idiots that they are. Lucasfilms or Disney could come up with a more realistic script for the "peace process" than the politicians and diplomats have,
Verse 10 of the Book of Obadiah makes a reference to the UNJUST VIOLENCE of the local rabble against the Return of the Jews as foretold by the Living God – that word in the very midst of that 21-verse Book – for "Violence" – actually defined as UNJUST and SLANDEROUS, THIEVING Violence for Unjust Gain – is the English Translation of the Ancient Word "Hamas". nThe Book of Obadiah describes what the Living God Himself WITHOUT AID OF HUMAN HAND OR BEAST shall Himself do to those who spit in the Apple of His Eye, and trip their brothers as they (the Jews) flee from their enemies who have chased them out of every land, and left them no where to go – tripped and assaulted and robbed them, themselves, for the sake of ill-gotten gain. n21 Verses of the Book of Obadiah, takes but a few minutes to read. It is in very plain language and the meaning is indisputable.
Well, so much for the "two state solution," and that "land-for-peace" sham too. Next on the menu, an ugly civil war between Hamas and Fatah and all the clans aligning with this side or the other…probably in a few months time, whenever the honeymoon wears off and everyone has had time to send his loot to Switzerland and wives and offsprings to Europe. Somehow, it will be all Israel's fault, of course.
In 2005 Abbas received the priceless concession of a full withdrawal from Gaza, only to watch Hamas spread all over the strip like a slime. In 2006, he lost an election to the terrorist group, and was thrown out of Gaza by them altogether in 2007. In 2008 he received an offer of statehood slightly more generous than the one Arafat thumbed his nose at in 2000/2001, and rejected it without making a single counter-offer, just like his predecessor. In 2009 he told the Washington Post that he was through making concessions and would sit back and watch Obama squeeze Israel for them instead. In 2010 he had effectively jettisoned negotiation for UN support for a state. In 2011 he has now reconciled with the violent terrorist group who evicted him from Gaza, and brought them into his government. His term of office expired more than two years ago. n n
Abbas’ intransigence toward even coming to the negotiating table, let alone making a final peace, are going to be more pronounced now than ever, and are unlikely to improve with Hamas riding at his side. His stewardship of the Palestinian Authority has been a sad, sorry failure. n nHe has never negotiated in good faith and has sought one alibi after another to refuse numerous peace offers. His recent NYT op-ed made perfectly clear that even statehood within the '67 borders will only serve as a platform for carrying on the conflict through other venues. He is still refusing direct negotiations, still rejecting a two-state solution, still demanding an endless “right of return” to Israel, still refusing to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, and still insisting that the Jewish people have no legitimate attachment to Jerusalem and, for that matter, to any of the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. These facts, sadly, can no longer be denied. n n