Will President Obama Challenge Hamas and Other Palestinian Threats?

Mushir al-Masri, speaking as a Hamas representative from the Al-Aqsa Mosque, declared that should United States President Barack Obama visit the Temple Mount during his excursion in Israel, it will be equivalent to a declaration of war on the Arab and the Islamic world. He demanded that there should be a declared third intifada and requested Egyptian assistance in the “resistance” of such a desecration by the American President take place. Khalid al-Batash, a senior Islamic Jihad member, also called to prevent Obama from visiting the compound. And these were not the most definitive of warnings. Sheikh Akrameh Sabri, former Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and current head of the higher Islamic council was quoted by AFP warning, “Any visitor is welcome to Al-Aqsa, but they should follow the regulations of the Waqf and enter through the Lions’ Gate and not through Mughrabi Gate, to ensure Muslim sovereignty. The visit shouldn’t have a political theme to it because Al-Aqsa belongs to Muslims only and it is their place of worship and we refuse that any Israeli official accompanies the visitor.” Hatem Abdel Qader, head of the Jerusalem portfolio for the Fatah movement, said that Obama’s visit should be coordinated with the Palestinian Authority and with the Jordanians.

 

With such demands and even the somewhat overt threats makes one wonder if President Obama will simply avoid making any visit to the Temple Mount and what kind of result would such produce. It can be expected that should President Obama not visit the Temple Mount at all just to assure that he does not insult Islam or the easily riled Palestinians that such will be interpreted as a slight and a surrender to Israeli pressures which obviously had advised the President not to risk a visit. Whether or not the Israelis actually gave such advice will be of no consequence, the expressions of anger and reaction to insult is all that matters. Why else do the different Palestinian groups and even individual spokespeople make contradictory statements which when taken in full cover every possible action or lack of action as insulting and offensive to Islam and the Palestinian cause. These statements, demands and counters are made such that after President Obama has returned to the United States the Palestinians can choose which demands or warnings were transgressed and have the appropriate riots and violence targeting Israelis as the responsible and guilty party. The Friday riots after services on the Temple Mount were far more violent, viscous and animated this week and included not only the usual rock throwing and riots but also included Molotov cocktails and greater numbers and severity of attacks against security personnel stationed around the Temple Mount. This should be viewed as a warning of violence to come and a preliminary riot on which to build upon at a later date.

 

There has been an increase in violence with an emphasis on attacks in Judea and Samaria that has been escalating for the past weeks. There has been a definitive rise in rock and firebomb attacks on motorists and Israeli housing and crops. Some have already referred to these increased acts of violence as the beginning of yet another intifada. It is very likely that such is actually the case and that the plan is to use President Obama’s visit and some otherwise unimportant event as the trigger for the third (some say the count is as high as six) intifada. Additionally, there will be some within the leadership of the Palestinians will also blame Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu for having formed a coalition which they see as unhelpful and biased against the Palestinians. This will be the complaint no matter which parties are included within the coalition and even with Tzipi Livni, one of the most likely to offer unprecedented concessions in peace talks, being placed completely responsible for any peace talks or other dealings between Israel and the Palestinians. Prime Minister Netanyahu is likely making this decision relying of Mahmoud Abbas to refuse any offer no matter how generous that Tzipi Livni would offer. This is another reason for another intifada as starting such violence would likely scrub any possibility of restarting the peace process while such increased violence is occurring. The Palestinians also are likely counting on the rest of the world, especially the Europeans, to demand Israeli gifts and concessions in order to end the violence and entice the Palestinians back to the negotiating table and restarting the peace process. We have seen this act so many times over the years that one might be tempted to think that it would not still work. The truth is that as long as Israel is being forced to sacrifice the Europeans and much of the world will gladly demand such sacrificial acts despite knowing they will be fruitless and will not engender any advances in the peace talks. But first, will President Obama actually visit the Temple Mount and if so which gate will he use? Then comes the other point of inquiry, will he attend to the Temple Mount with security provided by Israel or by the Palestinians and depending on which, how safe should President Obama feel?

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

United States Department of State Proves Their Blindness Again

The State Department of the United States once again made the same tired old New Year’s resolution, or should I say wish list, by once more urging that the leaders of Israel and the Palestinians return to negotiations and find a resolution. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland stated, “As we turn the calendar to 2013… now is the time for leaders on both sides to display real leadership, to focus on the work that’s necessary to return to direct negotiations.” Her helpful suggestions were for, “both sides to clearly demonstrate that they are serious about achieving two states living side by side in peace and security,” adding that both sides, refrain from “counter-productive unilateral actions.” Ms. Nuland turned thoughtful and made this observation which had obviously escaped everybody else’s observations, “We have an environment that was quite fraught and quite difficult at the end of 2012, so the question is whether we can make a fresh start in 2013, and that’s going to require restraint on all sides. We want 2013 to be a better year, we really do.” How can anybody expect anything short of miracles to suddenly bloom and both sides to come together and hold a hoedown.

Well, let’s take a look at what needs to occur from both sides in order for negotiations to actually produce results. We will start with the Palestinian side. Numerous times, almost as many times as we’ve discussed this, Mahmoud Abbas has given a partial list which varies from time to time, depending on the atmospheric conditions, orientation of the stars, and his horoscope, of preconditions he requires the Israelis fulfill before he would be able to even consider joining into negotiations. His precondition lists usually start with almost understandable demands as if you can get anything from the other side before negotiations begin, you have gained the advantage and that is one less area of contention. Examples of such are the Israelis accepting the pre Six Day War which are also the 1949 Armistice lines as the starting point for negotiations for boundaries for the Palestinian State, a complete freeze of any and all Israeli building of any variety beyond the same boundaries, the surrender of the Old City areas of Jerusalem, the surrender of the entirety of the Temple Mount, and the surrender of the Western Wall and the Plaza where Jews regularly gather to pray as it is the closest Jews can come to praying at the holiest site of Judaism which is the Temple Mount.

There is a secondary level of preconditions which the Palestinian leadership regularly trot out just in case anybody might think that if only the Israelis make some offer of compromise which was the whole idea behind United States President Barack Obama’s forcing of a ten month building freeze on Prime Minister Netanyahu in order to entice Mahmoud Abbas to the negotiating table near the beginning of the President’s first term. It was during that time when Mahmoud Abbas first previewed some of his additional preconditions. Some of these include the release of the majority of Palestinians imprisoned in Israel serving life sentences, release of all Palestinian from Israeli prisons as part or at the end of negotiations, open route under Palestinian control and security between Gaza and Judea and Samaria cutting Israel in halves, no restrictions on military buildup of Palestinian security forces, ability to hold military training exercises with other nations within Palestine, removal of all roadblocks and checkpoints anywhere in the West Bank, recognition of all Islamic holy sites in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) which a subset of these sites bears a remarkable similarity to the Jewish and Christian holy sites, and the requirement that upon completion of negotiations every single Jew must be removed from within the lands denoted as the Palestinian state and be forbidden from reentering these lands in perpetuity thus placing the majority of Jewish holy sites out of the reach of the Jewish people both Israeli and non-Israeli.

Then there are the deal busters which Mahmoud Abbas has trotted out any time it appears that the Israelis might actually agree to meet any of his preconditions. These are the real beyond the pale demands which no Jewish or Israeli leader would ever agree to grant.  These include the Right of Return within Israel with full rights as citizens of over four and a half million Palestinian refugees as listed by UNRWA, the Palestinians are not to be held to consider any agreement as final and must be permitted their understandable right to continue protests until all of the Palestinian lands have been liberated which means they get to continue their terror war, and they then claim that these are not preconditions at all; they are simply items and obligations which Israel is required to fulfill in order to prove to the Palestinians and the world that they are seriously interested in peace.

There are some items that Israel has declared that must be included in the final agreement which are that Israel be recognized as the Jewish State, the agreement be an end to incitement, terror, rockets, and other forms of attacks, and recognition that all of Jerusalem belongs to Israel and Israel understands the existence of Christian and Islamic holy sites in addition to Jewish sites and that Israel will fulfill their obligation to allow free access for all religions to their holy religious places while Israel intends to be allowed access to Jewish holy sites within Palestine. Mahmoud Abbas has never stated that he would refuse allowing Jews to visit the Jewish holy sites in Judea and Samaria and has left that to others to state; Abbas has simply claimed that no Jewish holy sites exist anywhere in the entire area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea and figures that settles the need for Jewish access as there are no places to visit.

There is one thing I would love to hear from Ms. Nuland or any of the other United States State Department spokespeople, exactly what do they expect from the Israelis who are willing to come to the table and attempt to hammer out some agreement between the two sides which they both give and receive some amounts of what each side claims while Mahmoud Abbas simply wants to hold a signing ceremony after the Israelis have met his demand over every single negotiable point which exists and then some. My bet is that had the Jewish people accepted the alternate offer the British had proposed, taking Madagascar in which to build their Jewish state, Mahmoud Abbas along with Yasser Arafat would have sailed their and claimed it as Islamic lands of the ancient Madagascar Muslims and they were here to take back their ancient homeland. Would you bet against such a preposterous idea and feel safe?

Beyond the Cusp

Syria Reaching Another Crucial Point

Syria has lurched forward with most of the currents favoring the Rebel forces in their efforts to dethrone dictator President Bashir Assad. The struggle has been harshest on the Syrian people with tens of thousands killed, hundreds of thousands injured to various degrees and countless more fleeing into exile in neighboring countries. The latest crisis has been the increased suspicions that the Syrian forces still loyal to Assad are preparing the precursors for combination into Sarin Gas and other nerve agents known to be part of the Syrian arsenal. This has made some, myself included, even more nervous and suspecting that Assad will order a last ditch attempt to end the revolution against his rule with one coordinated and extensive lethal use of his chemical weapons. Statements from Assad spokespeople accusing the rebels of preparing to use chemical weapons due to their capture of a chemical plant outside Aleppo which held stores of Chlorine gas were made as a diversion and possible smoke screen to place blame elsewhere when Assad launches his chemical weapons. These spokespeople have also accused the United States and their allies of fomenting lies in order to construct a case allowing their intervention to assist in a rebel victory. Meanwhile, there has been a slow and steady parade of high Syrian officials who have deserted Assad, each bringing with them information and accusations of atrocities committed by the Assad forces.

The question which should be asked now and continue to be asked into the foreseeable future is who will be the benefactor and take control in Syria should Assad be brought down. Once the answer to this question has been narrowed to a short list of the likely successors, the Western powers should decide which they favor and work to weaken the others more so than they should visibly assist the preferred choice. The reason is because it is far more likely that actions taken to weaken some of the forces who will be vying for power can be done more covertly and anonymously than actions taken in support of one preferred entity. Recent revelation show a divided set of rebel forces with diverse leadership. Some of these forces are led by suspected and known terror groups while the main faction preferred by the Western allies has a divided leadership which has already fractured and had to be reassembled. The strongest forces in Syria opposing Assad remain the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaeda aligned groups. There is little to no possibility that the fall of Assad will produce anything resembling a liberal democracy even as much as the current leadership in Tunisia. Even Egypt will prove to have come closer to a functioning democracy that will the new Syria which is saying something since Egypt is more likely to become a theocracy led by whomever the Muslim Brotherhood prefers lead in their name than an honest democratic country with real choices to lead and elections whose results are known months before they are held. Tunisia at least has yet to fall completely under the control of Islamic euphemists though there have been many signs that these forces have sufficient numbers to begin to slowly build and bring about the eventual imposition of Sharia. Egypt, meanwhile, has raced so quickly towards the implementation of Sharia that should the new Egyptian Constitution be vote upon and ratified on December 15, 2012, then they will have taken steps that would actually place them ahead of Turkey where Prime Minister Erdogan has been working diligently and with great care over going on a decade to install an Islamist governance based on, if not actually under, Sharia.

Just a quick note about upcoming challenges and changes which will be spawned as the Arab Winter continues to spread its cold fingers over more of the Arab and Muslim worlds. The slow building pressures in Jordan are still gaining strength but are facing a relatively popular ruler in King Abdullah II. Eventually the King’s popularity will wane and the Palestinians, which make up 80% of the Jordanian population, will have been coopted by the same Palestinian terror groups that today menace Israel. Yemen is still in a state of siege between the forces in the south who are part of al-Qaeda and separatists in the north. Kuwait has also been experiencing distress and conflicts between the Sunni rulers and the Shiite majority population. A similar situation still exists in Bahrain despite the efforts by Saudi Arabia which put down the initial revolt almost two years ago in March 2011. All of the turmoil in the Arabian Peninsula has one main objective, the eventual gem and the really big prize, Saudi Arabia. As well as the oil fields, Saudi Arabia also possesses the grandest prize of all, Mecca and Medina, the two actual holy cities of Islam. The question mark is whether Lebanon will remain under Hezballah, and thus Iranian, control or will it fall to the Muslim Brotherhood should they prove victorious in the post-Assad scrum once Assad falls.

Beyond the Cusp