Why the Palestinians do not Have Their State

If one is to believe the mainstream news reports or much of the noises coming from numerous sources, the sole reason the Palestinians do not yet have a homeland of their own is Israel. The Israelis reportedly refuse to compromise one iota on any of the items vital and the basis of the Palestinian requirements for a functional state. Oddly, in a strange and peculiar manner, this is exactly the truth. When the Palestinian leaders, spokespersons, representatives, advocates, activists, and other supporters state that if only Israel would grant the few simple and vital core requirements which the Palestinians insist is necessary for their statehood then everything would be complete and the terror and violence would end. It is only because the Israelis refuse to grant the Palestinians simple and straight forward items to complete the formation of their state that one does not yet exist. The question which nobody ever seems to ask of those speaking for the Palestinians is exactly what it is they require for their state to come into fruition.

 

The truth is that the Palestinian list of demands all revolves around one central item, the end of any existence of a Jewish State. They would be perfectly happy if they were able to “liberate” the entire area they believe is their Palestine. They would replace all of Israel and their state would contain every piece of land from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. Some of their representatives actually accept that some form of the State of Israel would necessarily have to remain existent alongside any Palestinian State. They even accept this fact but insist that Israel be ruled by Muslims and the Jews would be allowed to remain under the protection provided for any Dhimmis. This is what they envision when they demand the “Right of Return” for over five million Palestinian refugees from all of the surrounding countries where the numerous Palestinian refugee camps are located. The vast majority of these refugees were not even born in 1948 when the camps were formed after the unsuccessful war was launched by numerous Arab and Muslim countries including but not limited to Egypt, Syria, Trans-Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq in order to annihilate any vestiges of the Jewish State. The stated claim of that war in the words of the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husayni in his declaration holy Fatwa, “I declare a holy war, my Moslem brothers! Murder the Jews! Murder them all!” In June of 1967 during the prelude to the Six Day War in which Israel defeated several Arab armies from Syria, Egypt, and Jordan; capturing all of the Sinai Peninsula and lands beyond the Golan Heights as well as all of Gaza, Judea, Samaria, East Jerusalem, and any other lands which Jordan referred to as the West Bank; President Nasser made numerous speeches often referring to the genocide of the Zionists, the Jews and the State of Israel. And Syria and Egypt allied once more in 1973 attacking Israel on the holy fast day of Yom Kippur presumably to undo the mistakes in history of 1948 and 1967 and despite initial gains, the Israelis held their lands and were approaching Cairo and Damascus when the United Nations, the United States and the rest of the world forged a ceasefire. During all of these attempts to erase Israel there had not yet been even the slightest mention of a State of Palestine. The only usage of the name Palestinian was by Yasser Arafat and the PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization) which had been formed with the sole intent of replacing the State of Israel with the Palestinian State. The PLO did not lay any claims to Gaza, Judea, Samaria, East Jerusalem, or any of the West Bank before the Six Day War. The PLO was content to allow Jordan to retain the West Bank lands and Egypt to retain Gaza.

 

The intent of the Palestinians has not changed since before the Six Day War, they still demand the end of Israel replacing it with a State of Palestine. Yasser Arafat called their plan the liberation of all of Palestine by stages. The aim was to gain as much of the lands between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea by negotiations and then continue the resistance through terrorism until they had freed the rest of Palestine and destroyed all of Israel. Hamas continues to hold true to the formula of replacing all of Israel with a Palestinian State and proudly exclaims this regularly. The Palestinian Authority, Fatah, and the PLO also all continue to hold to this policy though they will speak of accepting two states existing side by side in peace and security. The truth is they would accept such only if both States were governed by Muslims and either the Jews accepted Dhimmi status or were annihilated. Abbas has stated on numerous occasions that even if he should accept a Palestinian State with East Jerusalem as its capital, the Palestinians would retain the rights of occupied peoples and thus the war of attrition through terrorism would continue. Since agreeing to allow the formation of a Palestinian state even if it used the 1967 lines for borders returning every inch of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem would not end the terrorism or bring the conclusion of the conflict. What would Israel gain by making such a so-called peace? This is what is behind the Israeli insistence that the Palestinians admit and recognize that Israel will be a Jewish State. Unless the Palestinians agree to the existence of Israel as the Jewish State, the Israelis are fully aware that peace treaties would not end the terror or the claims of Palestinian lands being under occupation. Everything which is occurring presently including the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanction) demonstrations and protests against Israel worldwide, the claims of apartheid against Israel and everything else that has grown cancerous from the Palestinian war of genocide against the Jewish State, and that is what they are fighting, would not end with any singing of a treaty which did not include recognition of the right of the Jews to have their State of Israel. Until the Palestinians admit to the existence of a Jewish State there can be no peace. When the Palestinians will permit the Jews to have their State in peace, then there is the possibility for a Palestinian State. Had the Palestinians accepted the existence of a Jewish State at any time previously there would already be a Palestinian State. The real problem separating the two sides is not about land or borders, it is about existence, not only the existence of a Palestinian State but also a Jewish State. That is the sole solution and it is and has been available as soon as the Palestinians are willing to accept a real existence of two states for two people, two equal people both living in peace and mutual recognition. They do not necessarily need to start as friends but that too may someday become possible.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Abbas Casting Blame for Dire Economic Difficulties

Here we go once more into the financial doldrums and the Abbas dance of blame the rest of the Palestinian Authority leadership, blame Israel, blame Arab nations for not meeting their promised obligations and blame the world for not supporting the Palestinian cause with sufficient amounts of support, measured in dollars, Euros, precious metals or other forms of monetary equivalents. As has been the case since the fateful election where United States President Bush and his Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice forced the inclusion of Hamas in the imminent elections for the Palestinian Parliament, Abbas has claimed he has been forced to act as a man under siege against the fates of the world. As a quick refresher, Hamas won a clear majority in the Palestinian Parliament which caused Mahmoud Abbas to cancel the upcoming Palestinian Presidential election as he faced losing to the Hamas candidate. Soon after this Hamas executed a takeover of Gaza ejecting all the members of Fatah and splitting the Palestinian government into two separate and independent entities which continue to struggle for preeminence. Since then Mahmoud Abbas has become the equivalent of Palestinian President for life as he has consistently refused to allow new elections for his position. All of the past is now once again foaming to the top and displaying the grotesque underbelly of the Palestinian governance which he represents more than anyone else. So, what are the coming events and how exactly will Mahmoud Abbas once again remain President when all else around him changes.

The initiation of the problem was a familiar one, the Palestinian Authority was out of cash and unable to meet payroll of their enormously over-bloated government which employs over half of the residents under Palestinian rule. The payroll includes both employees in the West Bank and in Gaza. When the Palestinian employees threatened to strike if they did not receive their back pay, Mahmoud Abbas made a pitiable plea to the world to honor their pledges or renew new guarantees of monetary aid to the Palestinian cause and to also save Abbas and his government. Israel gave in to pressures from various fronts and released a large amount of the collected taxes they were withholding from the Palestinians as a response to the Palestinians going around Israel and petitioning the United Nations for statehood which was a break against the agreements in the Oslo Accords which specifically forbids any path outside of direct negotiations. The United States also responded with a half billion dollars which was sent by the Obama Administration circumventing Congress which had frozen all funding for the Palestinian Authority also in response to their petition for statehood at the United Nations. The President was able to authorize the aid bypassing Congress utilizing emergency measures which enabled bypassing Congress. This was still insufficient funds to alleviate the monetary predicament the Palestinian Authority finds themselves in once again. This is the predicament which Mahmoud Abbas is facing which he will once again find some way of casting all of the blame onto others and the first leaves have already started to fall from the government tree and more are sure to follow soon.

The first leaf that fell came as Nabil Qassis quit as Finance Minister responding to refutation to proposed austerity measures he had proposed to address financial situation. Nabil Qassis is a former president of the Bir Zeit University near Ramallah who joined the government in May 2012, who gave notice while President Abbas was out of the territories on March 2 that he was resigning. When members of the Parliament began to protest the financial situation and as a reaction to the resignation of Nabil Qassis, President Abbas responded upon his returning to Ramallah saying, “I am angrier than all of you at the government… but I don’t want to say more than that now. Just wait for three days.” It was further reported by an unnamed government official that, “Abbas informed (Salam) Fayyad that if Nabil Qassis did not return to the finance ministry… Abbas would dismiss his government and form a new one.” So, here we are on the verge of yet once again President Mahmoud Abbas placing all the blame upon everybody but himself and holding another round of elections while refusing to stand for election himself. The Palestinian authority seems to lurch from one catastrophe to the next with the solution always being either the Prime Minister or other high office holders resigning or being forced from office or the Parliament being disbanded and new elections held but one thing remains unchanged, President Mahmoud Abbas remains the sole survivor who never need face the people and receive their support to remain as President of the Palestinian Authority.

This is not the sole situation for which President Mahmoud Abbas appears to be more of a dictatorial President for Life than the rightfully elected leader the Palestinian people. The repeated attempts at managing a reunification of the two sectors of the Palestinian leadership bringing Hamas and Fatah together again in unified governance for the Palestinian Authority and its peoples which has been another example of Abbas intransigence. Every attempt at reunification has appeared to have reached an accord with all of the particulars smoothed out and the only remaining item being a general election for a new Parliament, the choosing of a new Prime Minister, and holding election for the office of President. That final little item, the election for President, has been the tripping point each and every time as Mahmoud Abbas refuses to stand for election. He is convinced that he would not have a prayers chance in…, well; he would have no chance of surviving the election and retaining the office of the President. This has caused the agreements to suddenly collapse and disintegrate as soon as the time comes for picking the date for the elections, especially and precisely the elections for the next President. Mahmoud Abbas is for too enamored with being the President of the Palestinian Authority and consistently refuses to risk being voted out of office. Perhaps his fears are completely founded. Perhaps his fears go beyond that of losing the office and are more about losing something far more dear and important to him; his life. It is his fear of death that I believe drives him to avoid having new elections for the office of President of the Palestinian Authority. The problem is that Mahmoud Abbas’s fear for his life will very likely forestall any progression for Palestinian governance until he finally accepts leaving the Presidency which will likely take the exact same path as his predecessor.

Beyond the Cusp

Republican Lack of Discipline Exposed by Hagel Confirmation

There is a theory throughout the free world that on certain votes party discipline is expected. Such examples abound in the Parliaments in Europe, Israel, Japan, Australia, Canada and any we may have omitted. It has often been on display within the United States Congress, but almost exclusively by the Democrat legislators and almost never, actually might be never, from the Republican side of the aisle. The nomination by President Obama of former Senator Chuck Hagel to be Secretary of Defense was problematic even before his dreadful performance at his confirmation hearings. As positions go in a President’s Cabinet, Secretary of State, CIA Chief, Chief of the FBI are the few of the positions which rival Secretary of Defense in their importance. This makes the ability to answer questions competently and without overly long hesitations very crucial. Mr. Hagel’s performance left loads to be desired. He not only stumbled on answering questions but also had to correct answers he had given after conferring with handlers sent to aid him in his responses. The United States does not need or desire a Secretary of Defense who is less prepared to answer vital questions than the average Senator would be. Even if this had been the only problem with the Hagel appointment it still would have been worthy of greater objection than was displayed.

But there were already other questions and difficulties posed by Senator Hagel’s previous statements concerning the United States staunchest Middle East ally Israel and his lack of resolve shown towards the Iranian nuclear program as well as his soft approach to such terrorist groups denoted as such by the State Department as Hamas and Hezballah. When one additionally inspects Senator Hagel’s voting record his appointment becomes all the more troublesome. Add in his flippant disregard for many such votes and his snide remark that there was no evidence that any of his votes ever did any damage to Israel which though technically true, it is not for want of trying on Hagel’s behalf and solely due to the fact that Hagel’s vote was among the minority and the vast majority of his fellow Senators supported the United State’s ally Israel. The final nail in the coffin for the Hagel appointment should have come when at least one Republican Senator decided to filibuster the nomination and requested his fellow Republicans support his efforts. Senator Inhofe of Oklahoma even wrote a letter asking as much and despite being given the support of a number of fellow Republican Senators; the party supported his efforts only through one cloture vote stalling the confirmation over one little weekend.

After supporting the Senator Inhofe intent to filibuster on a Friday vote, Senator Reid, the Majority Leader of the Senate, was assured by numerous Republicans that they would no longer support any further Republican efforts to filibuster and delay a confirmation vote. What makes the whole cloture vote fold by Republican Senators so disheartening is when the actual vote came to confirm the Hagel appointment as Secretary of Defense, the final vote was insufficient to have overcome the filibuster by a fair margin of 58-41, two votes short of cloture if the Senators had voted their up or down vote during the cloture vote. Despite the four Senators from the Republican side of the aisle who voted to approve the Hagel nomination, the cloture vote of 71-27 reveals that an additional thirteen Republican Senators voted to end the filibuster by their own party than eventually supported the nomination. The question which those whose Senators voted for cloture despite opposing the nomination must be asked is why, knowing that a vote for cloture guaranteed the nomination, did they ignore the sole path to resist this atrocious appointment and fold to the demands of President Obama, Senator Reid and the Democrats? Are they that afraid to stand strong for their beliefs and only vote their conscience when it will not make a difference and when their vote matters simply fold under even the slightest of pressures from the Democrats? What are they afraid of, missing out on some brie and red wine luncheons in the Capital Building or some other social affairs? If they are unable of standing when their votes matter, perhaps they should be replaced. If your Senator was among the four that voted for Hagel, well, at least they were consistent and voted their minds. But if your Senator is among the thirteen who voted for cloture thus guaranteeing a confirmation which they then voted against, you may wish to replace the worms you currently have as the next choice could not be worse. Maybe you can find a real Republican Senatorial candidate to run against the worm in the next primary and send a real conservative Constitutionalist Senator to Washington. Would that be too much to ask? My Senator, he was the one who first stated intent to filibuster and the other supported him and is known as Senator No. I am glad you asked.

Beyond the Cusp