Category Archives: Fatah

Hamas rejects Abbas’ decree over holding Palestinian elections on Jan. 24

Hamas rejects Abbas’ decree over holding Palestinian elections on Jan. 24
By Saud Abu Ramadan and Emad Drimly, Xinhua, October 24, 2009

Gaza Strip ruling Islamic Hamas movement rejected on Friday the decree of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who called on the Palestinians to go for general elections on Jan. 24, 2010.

In a written statement sent to reporters, Hamas movement considered Abbas’ decree “a destructive strike” to all the efforts to achieve an inter-Palestinian reconciliation, adding “the decree is a rejected step.”

Meanwhile, Gaza-based Hamas leader Ismail Radwan told Xinhua in an interview that holding the Palestinian elections without a national agreement of accordance “is a response to the American instructions.” [continued…]

Our shame near complete

Our shame near complete
By Ramzy Baroud, Al-Ahram Weekly, October 15, 2009

… he post-Oslo culture has espoused a class of contractors. These are businessmen who are either high-ranking officials in the PA and the Fatah Party, or both, or closely affiliated with them. Much of the billions of dollars of international aid that poured into Palestine following the signing of Oslo found its way into private bank accounts. Wealth generated more wealth and “export and import” companies sprung up like poison ivy amidst the poor dwelling of refugees throughout the occupied territories. The class of businessmen, still posing as revolutionaries, encroached over every aspect of Palestinian society, used it, controlled it, and eventually suffocated it. It espoused untold corruption and, naturally, found an ally in Israel, whose reign in the occupied territories never ceased.

The PA became submissive not out of fear of Israeli wrath per se, but out of fear that such wrath would disrupt business — the flow of aid and thus contracts. And since corruption is not confined by geographical borders, PA officials abroad took Palestinian shame to international levels. Millions marched in the US, Europe, Asia, South America and the rest of the world, chanting for Gaza and its victims, while some PA ambassadors failed to even turn out to participate. When some of these diplomats made it to public forums, it was for the very purpose of brazenly attacking fellow Palestinians in Hamas, not to garner international solidarity with their own people.

Readily blaming “American pressure” to explain Abbas’s decision at the UNHRC no longer suffices. Even the call on the 74-year-old Palestinian leader to quit is equally hollow. Abbas represents a culture, and that culture is self-seeking, self-serving and utterly corrupt. If Abbas exits (and considering his age, he soon will), Mohamed Dahlan could be the next leader, or even Habbash, who called on Gaza to rebel against Hamas as Israel was blowing up Palestinian homes and schools left and right.

Palestinians that are now calling for change following the UN episode must consider the Oslo culture in its entirety, its “revolutionary” millionaires, its elites and contractors. A practical alternative to those corrupted must be quickly devised. The Israeli annexation wall is encroaching on Palestinian towns and villages in the West Bank, and a new war might be awaiting besieged Gaza. Time is running out, and our collective shame is nearly complete. [continued…]

U.S. to Egypt: Fatah-Hamas deal undermines Israel-PA talks

U.S. to Egypt: Fatah-Hamas deal undermines Israel-PA talks
By Barak Ravid and Avi Issacharoff, Haaretz, October 13, 2009

The United States sent a message to Egypt stating it does not support the proposed reconciliation agreement between Fatah and Hamas as it would undermine negotiations with Israel, Haaretz has learned.

George Mitchell, the U.S. envoy to the Middle East, met on Saturday night in Cairo with the chief of Egyptian intelligence, Gen. Omar Suleiman, and told him the United States would not support an agreement not aligned with the principles of the Quartet.

According to the agreement, which was supposed to have been signed by Thursday, Abbas was to issue a presidential decree no later than October 25, scheduling both parliamentary and presidential elections for June 28. Eighty percent of the delegates to the Palestinian parliament were to be elected by party basis, and 20 percent by constituency.

A special committee with delegates from all factions was supposed to have assumed control of the Gaza Strip, reporting to Abbas. The Strip was also to see a new security force, staffed with members of all Palestinian factions.

Sources told Haaretz that Mitchell made clear to the Egyptians on Saturday the United States expects any Palestinian government to follow the conditions of the Quartet, which include recognition of the State of Israel, acknowledging earlier agreements and renouncing terrorism.

Mitchell also said certain aspects of current agreement were poorly timed as they would undermine relaunching negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. [continued…]

Palestinian memo says hopes in Obama ‘evaporated’
By Amy Teibel, AP, October 13, 2009

An internal document circulated among members of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ political party says all hopes placed in the Obama administration “have evaporated” because of alleged White House backtracking on key issues to the Palestinians.

The Fatah Party memorandum, obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press, accuses the United States of backing off from its demands that Israel freeze settlement construction and failing to set a clear agenda for new Mideast peace talks.

It wasn’t immediately clear whether the Oct. 12 document reflected Abbas’ views or was intended to be leaked as Fatah’s attempt to pressure President Barack Obama to bear down harder on Israel.

The document said the Palestinians have lost hope in Obama and accused the American leader of caving in to pressure from pro-Israel lobbyists in Washington.

“All hopes placed in the new U.S. administration and President Obama have evaporated,” said the document issued by Fatah’s Office of Mobilization and Organization. The department is headed Fatah’s No. 2, Mohammed Ghneim. [continued…]

Turkey’s attitude toward Israel is changing
By Zvi Bar’el, Haaretz, October 13, 2009

Turkey did not hide its deep opposition to Israel’s policies in the territories in general and to Operation Lead Cast in particular. Erdogan’s outburst against President Shimon Peres last January at the Davos gathering did not stem from Islamist or pro-Iranian objectives.

Erdogan’s support for a UN deliberation of the Goldstone Report and his declaration that “those responsible for war crimes must be identified and held accountable,” is not based on any wish to please Iran or Syria. Turkey has a steady and clear policy on this issue and it is not a proxy for any country.

Public opinion exists in Turkey too and it is influential, and when the prime minister sees thousands of Turks protesting against Israel’s policy in Jerusalem, he cannot remain indifferent. At the same time, Turkey continues and will continue to have normal ties with Israel because such a relationship is part of Turkey’s strategy, but today it finds itself in a different international status, of the sort that allows it to also take swipes at Israel. [continued…]

The pieces are in place, but no one wants an intifada

The pieces are in place, but no one wants an intifada
By Tony Karon, The National, October 11, 2009

Nowhere is Israel’s defiance of Mr Obama’s demand for a settlement freeze more dangerous than in Jerusalem, and it is activists inside Israel (particularly Raed Salah of the Islamic Movement of the North) who are rallying opposition to what they see as Israeli efforts to take over the Muslim holy sites (although Israel insists it has no intention of doing so). And there are elements on the Israeli side who have an interest in sabotaging any new peace initiatives by provoking confrontation in Jerusalem. A single protest turning violent could start a firestorm across the Middle East.

With Gaza under siege, much of it still rubble because Israel’s blockade has prevented construction materials from entering the territory, the potential for a new outbreak is higher still.

Despite the similarities with 2000, however, it’s worth remembering the adage that you never step into the same river twice. There are also differences: the Palestinian population is battered, and could not easily sustain another round of confrontation. Its leadership is more fractured than ever, with no Arafat figure capable of uniting even the disparate factions of Fatah, while the motives of Hamas are complex: it has been gaining steadily on the diplomatic front during the calm in Gaza over the past 10 months, and from its indirect negotiations with Israel over ceasefires and prisoner exchanges. Gazans expect them to deliver real improvements to their lives, not another pummelling by Israel. [continued…]

Give peace a chance, says Mitchell. Fat chance, says Lieberman.

No chance of peace for years, says Israel’s Foreign Minister
By Amy Teibel, The Independent, October 9, 2009

There is no chance of an early solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and people must “learn to live with it”, the Israeli Foreign Minister warned yesterday.

“Anyone who says that within the next few years an agreement can be reached ending the conflict… simply doesn’t understand the situation and spreads delusions, ultimately leading to disappointments and an all-out confrontation here,” Avigdor Lieberman said in a radio interview.

He added: “I am going to say very clearly: there are conflicts that have not been completely solved and people have learnt to live with it, like Cyprus.”

Mr Lieberman, the head of the far-right Yisrael Beitenu party, suggested that a long-term, interim deal with the Palestinians could ensure prosperity, security and stability, but tougher questions should be left until later.

“We have to be realistic,” he said. “We will not be able to reach agreement on core and emotional subjects like Jerusalem and the right of return of Palestinian refugees.” [continued…]

Palestinians change course on UN report
AP, October 8, 2009

The Palestinian leadership has quickly backtracked in its approach to a U.N. report accusing Israel of possible war crimes in Gaza, in what its top diplomat acknowledged Thursday is erupting into a “clear crisis” for its people. [continued…]

UN Security Council to discuss Gaza report next week
VOA, October 8, 2009

A divided U.N. Security Council will meet next week at the request of Arab countries to discuss a U.N. report on war crimes committed by both Palestinian militants and Israel’s army during last December’s conflict in the Gaza Strip.

The Security Council’s monthly meeting on the Middle East was scheduled for October 20, but after a request from council member Libya that some western diplomat’s characterized as a bit of a “surprise”, the 15-member body agreed in closed consultations Wednesday to move up its session to October 14. [continued…]

After Goldstone, Hamas faces fateful choice
By Ali Abunimah, Electronic Intifada, October 8, 2009

Naming collaboration — even treason — for what it is has always been a painful taboo among Palestinians, as for all occupied peoples. It took the French decades after World War II to begin to speak openly about the extent of collaboration that took place with the Nazi-backed Vichy government. Abbas and his militias — who for a long time have been armed and trained by Israel, the United States and so-called “moderate” Arab states to wage war against the Palestinian resistance — have relied on this taboo to carry out their activities with increasing brazenness and brutality. But the taboo no longer affords protection, as calls for Abbas’ removal and even trial issued from Palestinian organizations all over the world.

Hamas too seems to have been taken by surprise at the strength of reaction. Hamas leaders were critical of Abbas’ withdrawal of the Goldstone resolution, but initially this was notably muted. Early on, Khaled Meshal, the movement’s overall leader, insisted that despite the Goldstone fiasco, Hamas would proceed with Egyptian-mediated reconciliation talks with Fatah and smaller factions scheduled for later in the month, stating that reaching a power-sharing deal remained a “national interest.”

As the tremors continued, however, Hamas leaders escalated their rhetoric — seemingly following, not leading, public opinion. Mahmoud Zahar, a prominent Hamas leader in the Gaza Strip, labeled Abbas a “traitor” and urged that he be stripped of his Palestinian nationality. Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, speaking before a hastily convened session of the Palestinian Legislative Council, said Abbas was personally responsible for the “crime” committed in Geneva, and a senior officer from the Hamas-controlled Gaza police force held a press conference to announce that Abbas and his associates would be subject to arrest if they set foot in Gaza. [continued…]

Netanyahu, the tunnels opener
By Hagit Ofran, Huffington Post, October 6, 2009

Last week, an incident that could have set the entire Middle East on fire was prevented. Netanyahu’s secret plan to visit a disputed tunnel in the East Jerusalem Palestinian neighborhood of Silwan, at the site known as Ir David (the City of David), was canceled, probably with some international intervention. Am I exaggerating the danger? No. Judging from past experience, provocations in Jerusalem never end well, and with the tensions in Jerusalem clearly rising in recent weeks, the potential for an explosion is very real. [continued…]

Israel considers recalling its ambassador to Sweden
By Roni Sofer, Ynet, October 8, 2009

Israel is considering recalling its ambassador to Stockholm in light of Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt’s remarks in support of a UN report claiming war crimes were committed by both sides during the Israel-Hamas Gaza conflict.

Bildt told reporters in Stockholm Thursday that South African jurist Richard Goldstone, who headed the investigation into the war, is a person with “high credibility” and “high integrity” and that his report carries weight.

Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon called to re-examine Israel’s relations with Sweden. [continued…]

Obama’s Middle East mess

Obama’s Middle East mess
Paul Woodward, War in Context, October 6, 2009

As Abbas falls, have no doubt that he got pushed by an inept administration that similarly gets weak-kneed whenever it feels pressure from either the Israel lobby or the Israeli government.

Yesterday, State Department spokesman, Ian Kelly, was asked: “What role specifically did the United States play in pressuring the Palestinian Authority to make that decision [to shelve the Goldstone report]?

Kelly, squirming like an eel, responded:

Well, I don’t know if I would accept your characterization of pressuring. I think that we recognized that we had serious concerns with the recommendations and some of the allegations. We felt very strongly that while these investigations should be investigated and addressed, that we thought on the one hand that Israel had the kind of institutions that could address these allegations. And of course, we urged Israel to address these very serious allegations.

But I think we had a broader concern that we didn’t want the report to distract us from our ultimate goal, which was to address the root causes of the tragic events of last January, and that’s the lack of a regional and lasting peace between the two parties – between the Israelis and the Palestinians. So we were concerned that we stay focused on that ultimate goal.

And we are not saying that the allegations in the report – we’re not saying that they should be ignored. We simply do not want the report itself to become any kind of impediment to this ultimate goal. We appreciate the seriousness with which the Palestinians approach this very, very difficult issue, and we respect this decision to defer discussion of the report to a later date for the reasons that I just stated – that we want to make sure that we stay focused on the ultimate goal here.

(Goldstone discussion begins at 6 minutes 55 seconds.)

What kind of tortured logic is this? On the one hand war crimes committed in Gaza are somehow extraneous to an understanding of the root causes of the conflict, yet the root cause of the conflict is conflict itself?

The administration needs to make up its mind: Either this conflict is all about violence, in which case Israeli violence can’t be ruled out of the equation. Or, the violence is merely symptomatic of underlying political injustices and a natural outcome of addressing those injustices will be a long sought peace. Take your pick.

Of course, the true sentiment that few American officials are crass enough to utter, yet apparently everyone believes, is that when Israelis kill hundreds of Palestinians they really don’t intend to kill any (“we shoot and we cry”), yet when Palestinians kill a dozen Israelis they merely fall short of accomplishing their genocidal intentions.

* * *

After taking stabs at solving the Middle East conflict, engaging Iran, bringing about global nuclear disarmament, healing the rift between Muslims and the West, shoring up the global financial system, tackling climate change and reforming America’s health care system, there are strong indications that Obama came into office intoxicated by his image as a world savior.

Even so, his cool created the impression that he might actually be impervious to the influence of adulation, but even though some of us thought he had risen above the massive projections that were being imposed on him, the evidence is that to some extent he got sucked into the myth that had been created around him.

To see Obama now as either a tragic figure or as the victim of circumstances essentially absolves him of responsibility for his own actions.

I don’t think it’s premature to be conducting an autopsy on Obama’s Middle East initiative and the first question to ask is this: Did he manage to cross the most minimal threshold for a defensible approach? That is, can he claim at least to have done no harm?

Unfortunately, the harm appears grossly evident and it hinges on his choice to raise expectations across the region and then allow those expectations to founder. Expectations dashed are much more destructive than expectations never formed. (George Bush never disappointed anyone because no one took his promises seriously. In office and life he mastered the art of setting a low bar.)

So, could Obama have entered the situation differently and put himself in a better position to at least live up to the Hippocratic oath (which, incidentally, all politicians should be forced to take)?

He could have acknowledged that he had on his plate more than any human president could address (“sorry folks, I’m not the Messiah”) and he could in his first days in office have said something like this:

“The Middle East conflict is a wound to which no easy remedy can be applied. I do not come into office claiming to have any greater powers than all of my predecessors who struggled with limited success to deal with this issue.

“I do know this, however: setting aside the many intractable political issues, there is right now a humanitarian crisis in Gaza. We haven’t had time to assess the scope of this crisis but having appointed George Mitchell as my Middle East peace envoy, I’ve asked him to put the crisis in Gaza at the top of his agenda. In the next few days he will be visiting the area to assess which needs must most urgently addressed.”

At that point, the Israel Lobby’s wheels would have started spinning frantically. But how do you conduct a campaign focused on preventing Mitchell going to Gaza and addressing a humanitarian crisis?

No doubt, phones in the White House and the State Department would have been ringing off the hook as Abe Foxman and other Jewish community leaders and Israeli officials objected, saying that such a move would not be “helpful”. But seriously, how do you conduct a public campaign whose direct aim is to prevent help reaching tens of thousands of people whose homes had been flattened?

What happened in reality? Obama and Mitchell made the choice of staying out of Gaza. Neither of them had a gun pointed at his head.

Obama had the opportunity to craft a policy that grew modestly and organically from the facts on the ground. A combination of fear, arrogance and perhaps lack of political imagination, led him to pass up that opportunity.

Hamas, not Abbas, is the Palestinians’ real leader

Hamas, not Abbas, is the Palestinians’ real leader
By Amira Hass, Haaretz, October 5, 2009

In a single phone call to his man in Geneva, Mahmoud Abbas has demonstrated his disregard for popular action, and his lack of faith in its accumulative power and the place of mass movements in processes of change.

For nine months, thousands of people – Palestinians, their supporters abroad and Israeli anti-occupation activists – toiled to ensure that the legacy of Israel’s military offensive against Gaza would not be consigned to the garbage bin of occupying nations obsessed with their feelings of superiority.

Thanks to the Goldstone report, even in Israel voices began to stammer about the need for an independent inquiry into the assault. But shortly after Abbas was visited by the American consul-general on Thursday, the leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization got on the phone to instruct his representative on the United Nations Human Rights Council to ask his colleagues to postpone the vote on the adoption of the report’s conclusions.

Heavy American pressure and the resumption of peace negotiations were the reasons for Abbas’ move, it was said. Palestinian spokespeople spun various versions over the weekend in an attempt to make the move kosher, explaining that it was not a cancelation but a six-month postponement that Abbas was seeking.

Will the American and European representatives in Geneva support the adoption of the report in six months’ time? Will Israel heed international law in the coming months, stop building in the settlements and announce immediate negotiations on their dismantlement and the establishment of a Palestinian state in the occupied territories? Is this what adoption of the report would have endangered? Of course not. [continued…]

Editor’s Comment — The White House, having initially promised American Jewish community leaders that the Goldstone report could be assured a quiet death (it would reach a “natural conclusion” in the UN Human Rights Council and move no further), then opted for a different choice: half-life might cause fewer political ruptures than sudden death. All that was required was the Mahmoud Abbas be obliging enough to do the administration’s dirty work and get the report shelved. Obama could then maintain his serenity and keep the peace process moving forward.

What kind of imbecile thought that was a plan that would work?

* * *

Yesterday, the jailed Tanzim leader and Fatah Central Committee member Marwan Barghouti said: “whoever thinks it’s possible to make peace with the current Israeli government is being delusional.”

He also suggested that the circumstances which led to the Al-Aqsa Intifada still prevail and called on Palestinians to conduct a “peaceful resistance” campaign.

That’s something Obama and Mitchell might pause to consider.

Hamas accuses Abbas of treason for ‘justifying’ Gaza war
By Avi Issacharoff, Haaretz, October 5, 2009

Hamas leaders on Monday warned that President Mahmoud Abbas’ decision to delay action on a United Nations report criticizing Israel’s offensive in the Gaza Strip was in essence a “justification” of the war and encouragement of occupation.

The report, by Justice Richard Goldstone, criticized both Israel and the Palestinians for the war in January 2008. Last week the Palestinian delegation to the UN Human Rights Council dropped its support for an immediate vote on the report.

Speaking to Gaza lawmakers, Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh accused Abbas of having “justified” the war by agreeing to defer a UN vote that would have condemned Israel’s failure to cooperate with the war crimes investigation led by South African judge Richard Goldstone. [continued…]

Palestinians, U.S. Jews spar over ‘Judaizing’ Jerusalem
By Natasha Mozgavaya, Haaretz, October 5, 2009

The Western-backed Palestinian Authority on Monday urged the world to “force [Israel] to put off its attempts to take over Jerusalem and Judaize it,” prompting Orthodox Jews in the United States to vow never to give up their historical right to the ancient city.

The Palestinian cabinet, issuing a strong statement after a meeting in the West Bank town of Ramallah, condemned what it called a plan by Jews to “perform religious rituals” in the Temple Mount compound which contains the al-Aqsa mosque, Islam’s third holiest site.

It also pledged “to confront Israel,” as Israeli security forces clashed with Arab protesters for a second day in the Jerusalem area. In response, the leading body of Orthodox Jews in America condemned the Palestinian Authority and the violence exhibited by Palestinian protesters. [continued…]

In Jerusalem, clashes over Temple Mount, Al Aqsa Mosque
By Ilene R. Prusher, Christian Science Monitor, October 4, 2009

Israeli police shut down access to key Muslim holy sites in Jerusalem’s Old City on Sunday, spurring Palestinian protesters to throw rocks and bottles in protest – marking the second consecutive Sunday of disturbances near the city’s overlapping points of prayer for Jews and Muslims.

Clashes broke out in reaction to Israel’s closure of the entrances to the Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa Mosque, Islam’s third-holiest site. About 150 Palestinians who gathered for a prayer service near the city’s Lion’s Gate on Sunday morning hurled rocks and bottles at Israeli police, who fired tear gas in attempt to disperse the crowd. Palestinian officials said nine people were treated for light injuries, primarily tear gas inhalation. Israel said two of its policeman were sent to hospitals after being injured by rocks and bottles.

An Israeli police spokesman said that the decision to close the site was made following calls in various Palestinian media on Saturday night to march on the Haram el-Sharif (The Noble Sanctuary), as it is called in Arabic – referred to by Israelis as the Temple Mount. Several Islamic groups claim that an Israeli archeological dig below the site is endangering Al Aqsa and that it will soon collapse, a claim Israel denies. [continued…]

A hostile takeover of Zionism

A hostile takeover of Zionism
By Patrick Martin, Globe and Mail, September 29, 2009

One Haredi leader who almost won Jerusalem’s mayoralty race last fall, boasts that, within 20 years, the ultra-Orthodox will control the municipal government of every city in the country. And why not? Of the Jewish Israeli children entering primary school for the first time this month, more than 25 per cent are Haredi, and that proportion will keep growing. There are between 600,000 and 700,000 Haredim in Israel, and they average 8.8 children a family.

A decade ago, there were almost no Haredim in the West Bank settlements. Today, the two largest settlements are entirely ultra-Orthodox, and the Haredim are about a third of the almost 300,000 settlers.

Now that they have tightened the rules on who can be a Jew and have forced the public bus company to provide gender-segregated buses in many communities, a discouraged secular community is starting to emigrate.

Nehemia Shtrasler, a business and political columnist for the Haaretz newspaper, wrote this summer that the country is risking destruction. “We will survive the conflict with the Palestinians and even the nuclear threats from Iran,” he wrote. “But the increasing rupture between the secular and ultra-Orthodox communities in Israel will be the end of us.” Mr. Shtrasler said: “It’s a struggle between two contradictory worldviews that cannot exist side by side.”

Will Israel adhere to its founding secular values or will it become a theocratic Jewish state? [continued…]

U.S. to Israel: Probe alleged Gaza war crimes to advance peace
Haaretz, September 29, 2009

The United States called on its close ally Israel on Tuesday to conduct credible investigations into allegations of war crimes committed by its forces in Gaza, saying it would help the Middle East peace process. [continued…]

Hamas agrees to reconcile with Fatah
By Nadia Abou el Magd, The National, September 29, 2009

Hamas has announced that it will accept an Egyptian proposal for ending its bitter power struggle with Fatah, renewing hopes for an end to political deadlock and intra-Palestinian violence and pave the way for presidential and parliamentary elections next year. [continued…]

Once-legendary Fatah figure makes a comeback

Once-legendary Fatah figure makes a comeback
By Richard Boudreaux, Los Angeles Times, September 1, 2009

H Mohammed Dahlan e ran the Gaza Strip like the Godfather, dispensing brutal punishment and benevolent largess. But that was before his summer of disgrace, two years ago, when Hamas militants drove out his armed followers and allowed looters to pick apart his seaside villa.

Mohammed Dahlan, the once-legendary chief of Fatah’s forces in the enclave, watched his own defeat helplessly from exile. Then he felt the sting of blame for “losing Gaza,” a debacle that split the Palestinians into hostile camps and crippled their drive for statehood.

Stripped of his authority in the late Yasser Arafat’s movement, he dropped from the limelight and plotted. But his target was not Hamas; it was the many detractors among his Fatah brethren who branded him a has-been.

After 18 months of quiet but tireless politicking, Dahlan is back in play. His recent election to Fatah’s Central Committee put him in an elite circle of advisors to Arafat’s 74-year-old successor, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, and positioned him as a contender to lead the movement someday. [continued…]

Big challenges ahead for Mahmoud Abbas

Big challenges ahead for Mahmoud Abbas
By Helena Cobban, IPS, August 14, 2009

Mahmoud Abbas, the 74-year-old leader of the Palestinian Fatah movement, registered a significant achievement in holding the movement’s Sixth General Conference, which has been wrapping up its business in Bethlehem in the Israeli-occupied West Bank this week.

But veteran Palestinian analysts say Abbas’s biggest internal political challenges still lie ahead. Many of these challenges, they note, stem directly from the compromises he made to be able to convene the conference at all – and to ensure that it presented the trappings of success in the form of a political platform and leadership elections.

One of the biggest compromises was linked to the decision to hold the conference inside the Israeli-occupied West Bank. That meant there were numerous long time Fatah activists from the demographically weighty Palestinian diaspora – and from Gaza – who were barred from attending by Israel. [continued…]

Growing threat to Hamas: Gazans who think it has sold out
By Erin Cunningham, Christian Science Monitor, August 17, 2009

Two years after its takeover of the Gaza strip, Hamas has faced down its greatest challenger: A militant, Al Qaeda-inspired organization that says Hamas is not Islamic enough.

Last Friday, Hamas forces and the Jund Ansar Allah (Soldier of God) movement fought a day-long gun and artillery battle that killed about 30 in the southern Gaza town of Rafah after the group’s spiritual leader, Sheikh Abdel Latif Moussa, declared an Islamic emirate in Gaza and denounced Hamas. Mr. Moussa was killed in the fighting, centered on the mosque where he and his followers had gathered.

It was the first time an Al Qaeda-inspired group had directly challenged Hamas’ rule in the Gaza Strip but it may not be the last. Fueled by the failure of Hamas to address the area’s growing poverty and isolation, and Hamas’ relative recent restraint in its confrontation with Israel, analysts say such organizations are growing in the territory. [continued…]

Jewish Fatah delegate nominated to Revolutionary Council

Jewish Fatah delegate nominated to Revolutionary Council
Ma’an, August 9, 2009

A Jewish member of Fatah was nominated for a spot on the movement’s Revolutionary Council on Saturday.

Vowing to step up lobbying efforts worldwide if elected, Dr Uri Davis told Ma’an one of Fatah’s weakest attributes has been its failure to establish ties with international parties, movements and human rights organizations.

In an interview, Davis played down the significance of his nomination to the Revolutionary Council, Fatah’s 120-member governing body. Each member of the movement has the right to run for office despite one’s religion, race or color, the Fatah delegate noted. [continued…]

Dahlan, Qureia vie to succeed Abbas as Fatah chief
By Avi Issacharoff, Haaretz, August 9, 2009

Elections for Fatah’s main governing bodies, the Central Committee and the Revolutionary Council, were expected to take place on Sunday, with two party strongmen, Mohammed Dahlan and Ahmed Qureia leading the nominee list for leadership posts.

On Saturday, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas was re-elected to chair the Central Committee at the party’s first convention in two decades, held in the West Bank city of Bethlehem since last Tuesday.

Sunday’s election was to name the 18 members of the Central Committee, who will be joined by four members to be named by the committee itself. In addition, elections for the 120-member Fatah Revolutionary Council were also scheduled for Sunday.

Qureia was the first Palestinian Prime Minister, and is currently heading the peace negotiations team for the Palestinian Authority. Dahlan, the former head of the Palestinian Authority Preventative Security Forces in Gaza, left the Strip in 2007 shortly before rival party Hamas violently seized control over Gaza.

The two have waged a tough political battle, as both are considered candidates to succeed Abbas. The two haven’t expressly announced any plans to succeed the Palestinian president, but they are considered to be the two strongest Fatah members after Abbas. Assuming that Marwan Barghouti, also considered a strong candidate to head the Palestinian Authority, remains in Israeli jail, one of the two will likely be named president once Abbas steps down for whatever reason.

On Saturday, Fatah adopted a position paper stating that the Palestinian national enterprise will not reach fruition until all of Jerusalem, including the outlying villages, come under Palestinian sovereignty.

Also Saturday, the Palestinian news agency Ma’an reported that for the first time, a Jewish candidate had been nominated for a post on the Revolutionary Council. According to Ma’an, Jerusalem-born Dr. Uri Davis explained that every Fatah member can run for a post on the party’s 120-member Revolutionary Council regardless of religion, race or color.

“Breaking the Silence” or silencing the critics?
By Louis Frankenthaler, Electronic Intifada, August 7, 2009

“Breaking the Silence” is a member of the Israeli human rights, peace and social justice community. The group’s only crime, so it seems, lies in its effort to offer an alternative ethical voice in a society that is arguably losing its way. Breaking the Silence provides a platform for soldiers to testify to acts of violence and other violations of Palestinian rights that they may have witnessed or taken part in during their service in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The group’s most recent report details soldier testimonies that raised serious concerns about Israeli military behavior during the war on Gaza, “Operation Cast Lead.” The publication is unique but it is only one example of many public statements, reports and legal advocacy in response to the prosecution of the war, which Israel consistently maintains was both moral and legal. Why then is the Israeli government waging a battle against this organization, trying to thwart its funding and, essentially, to shut it down?

The answer, perhaps, lies in the genealogy of the occupation. For 42 years Israel has argued its one acceptable and official truth: “Israel is not an occupier and it is not violating international law.” The problem is that this narrative has been accepted only by Israel, tolerated by the United States, and perpetuated by a broad spectrum of Israel’s “supporters,” largely in North America and Western Europe. In the aftermath of the war the Netanyahu government feels threatened by US President Barack Obama’s demands to halt one of Israel’s most visible violations of international law, settlement building. Part of the Israeli reaction is to try to manipulate discourse and impugn those who have exposed Israeli infractions over the years, choosing to begin with an organization that provides the public with direct insight into the behavior of soldiers. Ironically in its actions the government actually corroborates the group’s work and that of other organizations who report and represent the voices of the Palestinian abject Other, the torture victims, those evicted from their homes, denied access to their fields and those beaten by settlers with impunity. [continued…]

Freezing for failure
By Zvi Bar’el, Haaretz, August 9, 2009

It should be said from the onset: Do not freeze settlement construction, do not stop it in part or periodically, not for six months, not for a single day. As long as the U.S. administration does not present a comprehensive plan that explains its endgame – what the end will look like and what the shape and character of the Palestinian state will look like – the demand for a cessation of construction is pointless. It is a pathetic return to the doctrine of “confidence-building measures,” which led nowhere. The demand to freeze settlement construction is like the demand to remove roadblocks or cease razing homes; all these demands and similar ones mean only one thing: making the continuation of the occupation a little more pleasant.

The demand for a cessation of settlement construction will have no impact on the political process as long as they are not telling the Israeli and Palestinian public what will happen with the half-million Israelis who already live in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. How many of them will have to be evacuated? How much money will this cost and who will pay for it? Evacuating 7,000 Jews from the Gaza Strip cost more than NIS 10 billion.

Even if only 100,000 Jews are evacuated from the West Bank the move will cost, on the basis of this estimate, some NIS 150 billion – about 50 percent of the national budget for an entire year. It is true that it amounts to “only” about 8 percent of the cost of the American war in Iraq to date, and maybe for the sake of peace in the Middle East the U.S. administration would be willing to invest another 8 percent in the area, but someone in Washington must articulate this clearly. That would be much more convincing than halting the work of a crane.

American pressure yielded an impressive achievement when they twisted Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s arm and got him to say that he wants “two states for two peoples.” But what comes next? Are Netanyahu’s two states the same two as Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ and the same two as Washington’s? Where will the border be demarcated? After all, if it is agreed that the end of the process will leave the settlement blocs in Israel’s hands, and if indeed the Palestinians accept this in return for an exchange of territory, why is it necessary to cease construction in those blocs?

Logic dictates that construction should continue in the blocs and if possible at a faster pace, so that it will be possible to absorb those evacuated from other settlements. But when there is no plan or agreement on the border, not to mention that negotiations are not even taking place, the demand for ceasing construction appears to be some sort of independent aim – isolated from its political context and whose sole intention is to display America’s ability to impose “something” on Israel. Meanwhile, the removal of illegal outposts is not something Washington has proved it is able to impose on Israel, despite Israel’s promises to the Americans and despite all the brouhaha caused by Defense Minister Ehud Barak on the matter last month.

The attempt to understand the American move as an action from the periphery inward – a tactical move meant to lead to further moves, one slice at a time – is leading toward a dead end and might even be dangerous as well. Assuming Israel freezes construction and negotiations resume, and that (although there is no evidence to support it) some Arab states agree to grant Israel grace in the form of normalization, the desired result is that such confidence-building measures will encourage the government to convince the Israeli public to support the process and agree to a withdrawal. But it is not the public that needs to be encouraged; it is the right-wing government for whom the remnants of the Labor Party are serving as apologists. What is worse is that this government may agree to a gradual and temporary cessation of settlement construction, and at the same time will make every effort to prove that there is no worthwhile partner for this “sacrifice” on the other side. At the end of the settlement construction freeze, the government will be able to celebrate the failure of the negotiations and prove to the Americans that the pressure had been put on the wrong side. The chance of restarting the process from there will then be nil.

An honest government would not have to rely on the Arab safety belt in order to shake off the process. It would have taken advantage of the long period of calm in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the efficiency the Palestinian security forces have exhibited in the West Bank in combating terrorism, and the willingness of Abbas to negotiate seriously in order to tell the public that the quota of confidence-building measures has been fulfilled and the time has come for withdrawing and reaching an agreement. But this is not the sort of government that is running Israel. Washington knows this, as every Israeli citizen does. Hence the need for a comprehensive plan that will be managed with precision and determination. Freezing the settlements is not a plan and is not a prescription.

Lieberman summons envoy in U.S. over leaked rebuke of government
By Barak Ravid, Haaretz, August 9, 2009

The Foreign Ministry on Saturday summoned for consultation a senior Israeli diplomat who in a confidential memo criticized the government for harming ties with the U.S. last week.

A ministry statement said that Israel’s consul-general in Boston, Nadav Tamir, would arrive in Jerusalem next week to give a clarification to the ministry’s director-general.

The memo, which was addressed to the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem, stressed that the public spat with the U.S. over the issue of a settlements freeze has alienated a significant number of American Jewish supporters.

Tamir, a veteran well respected diplomat, wrote the memo under the heading “melancholy thoughts on Israel-U.S. relations.”

Tamir’s missive is considered unusual given the blunt, pointed nature of the criticism against the premier’s policies.

“The manner in which we are conducting relations with the American administration is causing strategic damage to Israel,” Tamir wrote. “The distance between us and the U.S. administration has clear consequences for Israeli deterrence.”

“There are American and Israeli political elements who oppose [U.S. President Barack] Obama on an ideological basis and who are ready to sacrifice the special relationship between the two countries for the sake of their own political agendas,” the consul general in Boston wrote.

“There has always been a discrepancy in the approaches of both states [on the issue of settlements], but there was always a level of coordination between the governments,” Tamir wrote. “Nowadays, there is a sense in the United States that Obama is forced to deal with the obduracy of the governments in Iran, North Korea, and Israel.”

“The administration is making an effort to lower the profile of the disagreements, and yet it is [Israel] that is the source which is highlighting the differences,” Tamir wrote.

Tamir accused Netanyahu of endangering American Jewish backing for Israel by publicly sparring with the Obama administration over construction of Jewish housing in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

A spokesperson for Netanyahu issued a statement to Channel 10 which accused Tamir of violating protocol by expressing “political views” against the premier.

Tamir refused a Haaretz request for comment. The Israeli consulate in Boston said the memorandum is an internal Foreign Ministry document that was not for the media’s consumption.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor told the Associated Press late Thursday, “We don’t comment on leaked reports.”

In a bid to jumpstart the moribund Middle East peace process, the Obama administration has repeated its demand that Israel cease construction in West Bank settlements. The policy is a sharp departure from the tone and substance of Israel-U.S. relations during the presidency of George W. Bush.

Fatah: We’ll sacrifice victims until Jerusalem is ours

Fatah: We’ll sacrifice victims until Jerusalem is ours
Haaretz, August 8, 2009

The status of Jerusalem as the future capital of a Palestinian state is a red line that no Palestinian leader is permitted to cross, President Mahmoud Abbas’ ruling Fatah faction declared in the West Bank on Saturday.

According to Israel Radio, the Fatah general conference, which convened in Bethlehem for a three-day gathering, adopted a position paper which also states that the Palestinian national enterprise will not reach fruition until all of Jerusalem, including the outlying villages, come under Palestinian sovereignty.

Fatah, which rules the West Bank but was ousted from power in Gaza by the Islamist Hamas movement, also ruled out any interim agreements with Israel.

“Fatah will continue to sacrifice victims until Jerusalem will be returned [to the Palestinians], clean of settlements and settlers,” the paper states.

According to Israel Radio, the paper does not make a distinction between the eastern and western halves of the capital, nor does it distinguish between the territories within the Israeli side of the Green Line and the areas captured by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War.

Abbas relected to lead Fatah
Mahmoud Abbas was re-elected on Saturday to lead Fatah by consensus at the party conference.

There was no vote taken because no other Fatah member challenged Abbas’ five-year rule of the party. Hundreds of delegates cheered and clapped as Fatah leader Tayib Abdul Rahim announced that Abbas was chosen to lead the party.

Technically Abbas can only lead the party for five years, until a new conference is announced, but this is the first time Fatah members have met in 20 years, so it isn’t clear how long his mandate will last.

Also Saturday, Ahmed Qureia, also known as Abu Alla, told reporters that delegates meeting in Bethlehem would elect a new Central Committee and a Revolutionary Council on Sunday or Monday.

Qureia said the convention would hold the elections for both the Gaza Strip and the West Bank at the same time, adding that “some Gaza members will contest the elections.”

He said the modalities of the election were still under discussion. Changes to Fatah’s platform were being discussed during Saturday’s sessions, he said.

Abbas Zaki, a Fatah representative from Lebanon said “100 candidates are running for membership of the Central Committee and 646 for the Revolutionary Council.

Voting by the some 2,500 delegates for the 18-member Central Committee, and 120-member Revolutionary Council had originally been expected to start on Saturday morning.

The convention is meeting for the first time in 20 years to elect a new leadership for the organization founded by Yasser Arafat.

However, Fatah rival Hamas, which has ruled the Gaza Strip since June 2007, banned scores of Fatah members there from traveling to the West Bank to attend the gathering.

On Friday, Central Committee member Nabil Shaath announced an agreement reached with the convention’s leadership that would allow Gaza delegates to vote by telephone.

Fatah said in a statement that Hamas security forces had placed several Gaza convention delegates under house arrest and prevented them from leaving their homes.

It said that on Friday and Saturday, Hamas security personnel detained several Fatah leaders for questioning before releasing them. Hamas Interior Ministry spokesman Ihab al-Ghussein denied there were any detentions.

U.S. to demand Israel, Palestinian deal with borders
The U.S. administration will demand that Israel and the Palestinians address the issue of borders as the first step in the Middle East peace plan, senior Palestinian officials said Thursday.

Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Wednesday that Washington will present its new plan for a comprehensive Middle East peace soon.

The Americans will also outline proposals for an Israeli peace with Syria and Lebanon, the Palestinian officials said Thursday.

The American plan will not specify step-by-step actions for an Israeli-Palestinian solution, but will address final status issues – borders, Jerusalem and refugees.

The Americans will set a timetable of about a year and a half for the negotiations and demand the sides first solve the border issue, under the belief that this will lead to solutions for other issues, such as the settlements and water. After that the sides will discuss the other fundamental issues – Jerusalem and the refugees.

The negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians probably will be conducted in the presence of American officials, the sources said. The American administration is likely to present its plan before or during the UN General Assembly set for September.

Forecasts of West Bank violence may well come true

Forecasts of West Bank violence may well come true
By Avi Issacharoff, Haaretz, August 5, 2009

Last weekend the State of Israel discovered the “other” West Bank. With suspicious timing, almost all the Israeli media devoted broad coverage to the improvement in the living conditions of the Palestinians in the West Bank, the increased freedom of movement permitted by Israel, the law and order that have returned to Palestinian cities and the momentum of construction and development – the new malls, the shows, the cafes.

We hate to admit it, but the Palestinian Authority, as opposed to Israel, is keeping to the requirements of the road map and is operating against the “terror infrastructure.” In the past, one of the easiest tasks for a journalist in the territories was interviewing armed men. Today they cannot be found in the West Bank cities. The government of Prime Minister Salam Fayyad disbanded Fatah’s Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, and the services subordinate to PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas are fighting an all-out war against the armed men of Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

It’s true that the West Bank has never been so quiet. But we must make no mistake; the situation remains fragile. In the opinion of many senior members of Fatah, in light of the dead end that characterizes the diplomatic contacts, the next explosion between Israel and the Palestinians is only a matter of time.

Although the PA has succeeded in improving the quality of life of West Bank residents, the Palestinians are still living under occupation. Although many of the checkpoints have been removed, there are enough surprise checkpoints and various obstacles that undermine freedom of movement; the Israel Defense Forces rarely operates in the Palestinian cities, but does so occasionally, and, above all, the PA and Fatah are forced to deal with their image as collaborators, without any diplomatic compensation from the Israeli side.

This time it probably won’t be an intifada-style popular uprising. The Palestinian public seems to be too tired for that. But from within Fatah there is a growing number of rebellious voices, calling to use weapons against the settlers and IDF soldiers.

Activists who were at the center of the last intifada and were pushed to the margins of the political arena are warning that turning the PA into the “Dayton Authority” (named after the U.S. security coordinator Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton, who is helping to rehabilitate the Palestinian security forces) will not help Fatah to improve its status in the street. In the final analysis, they claim, the diplomatic crisis vis-a-vis Israel will lead to a renewal of terror attacks in the West Bankand to the formation of armed cells who will operate clandestinely.

The forecast of Hussam Khader, a leader of the Tanzim Fatah faction and one of the prominent figures in the last intifada, is even more pessimistic. He says the diplomatic freeze will lead to the removal of
the Palestinian leadership in the West Bank, the strengthening of the Islamic extremists, and within about a year, a violent conflict. “The residents will throw shoes at the PA. A day will come and they will be regarded like Lahoud’s men [a reference to the commander of the South Lebanon Army],” Khader says. “It’s possible that we are marching toward a situation in which there will be two separate Palestinian entities, in the West Bank and in Gaza, but Israel must help to prove that the situation in the West Bank is better.”

Such claims are being heard with increasing frequency on the backdrop of the sixth Fatah convention in Bethlehem, at which the leadership of the organization will be elected for the first time in 20 years. The candidates know that one surefire way to win the support of conference delegates is to speak in praise of the armed struggle. If the Israeli government continues to entrench itself in its position that there is no Palestinian partner, and that this is not the time to discuss a peace agreement, it is quite possible the forecasts of a violent outbreak will, in fact, come true.

Free marriage counseling
By Tom Friedman, New York Times, August 2, 2009

Here’s what Israelis need to understand: President Obama is not some outlier when it comes to Israel. His call for a settlements freeze reflects attitudes that have been building in America for a long time. For the last 40 years, a succession of Israeli governments has misled, manipulated or persuaded naïve U.S. presidents that since Israel was negotiating to give up significant territory, there was no need to fight over “insignificant” settlements on some territory. Behind this charade, Israeli settlers bit off more and more of the West Bank, creating a huge moral, security and economic burden for Israel and its friends.

As Bradley Burston, a columnist for Israel’s Haaretz newspaper, put it last week: “The settlement movement has cost Israel some $100 billion. … The double standard which for decades has favored settlers with inexpensive housing, heavily subsidized social services, and blind-eye building permits has long been accompanied by a kid-gloves approach regarding settler violence against Palestinians and their property. … Settlers and settlement planners have covertly bent and distorted zoning procedures, military directives, and government decrees in order to boost settlement, block Palestinian construction, agriculture, and access to employment, and effectively neutralize measures intended to foster Israeli-Palestinian peace progress.”

For years, the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and the pro-Israel lobby, rather than urging Israel to halt this corrosive process, used their influence to mindlessly protect Israel from U.S. pressure on this issue and to dissuade American officials and diplomats from speaking out against settlements. Everyone in Washington knows this, and a lot of people — people who care about Israel — are sick of it. [continued…]

Israel targets human rights groups
By Jonathan Cook, The National, August 3, 2009

In a bid to staunch the flow of damaging evidence of war crimes committed during Israel’s winter assault on Gaza, the Israeli government has launched a campaign to clamp down on human rights groups, both in Israel and abroad.

It has begun by targeting one of the world’s leading rights organisations, the US-based Human Rights Watch (HRW), as well as a local group of dissident army veterans, Breaking the Silence, which last month published the testimonies of 26 combat soldiers who served in Gaza.

Additionally, according to the Israeli media, the government is planning a “much more aggressive stance” towards human rights groups working to help the Palestinians. [continued…]

Fatah conference aims to boost its radical credentials

Fatah conference aims to boost its radical credentials
By Tony Karon, Time, August 4, 2009

While much of the younger generation of Fatah — and many of its leaders who remain in exile — are contemptuous of the leadership of Mahmoud Abbas, to which they attribute their movement’s political demise, they don’t plan to try and unseat him just yet. Instead, they’ll seek to tie his hands. But there is a move afoot at the conference to take down Abbas’s national security adviser, the Bush Administration-favorite strongman Mohammed Dahlan. The conference will hear proposals for an investigation into the events that saw Hamas eject Fatah forces and take control of Gaza by force in 2007 — with many blaming Dahlan for having at least partly provoked the takeover. Demanding an inquiry and targeting one of his key allies is seen as another means of weakening Abbas’ authority. A second target will be Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, a political independent appointed by Abbas at Washington’s behest, although over strong opposition from both Hamas and Fatah. [continued…]

Fateh conference update #2
By Helena Cobban, Just World News, August 3, 2009

[A report in Al-Quds al-Arabi] says that reliable Fateh sources in Bethlehem say there are some Gaza-origined Fateh people now in Bethlehem/ the West Bank who are credentialed for the conference– and they spell out that this is a reference to Muhammad Dahlan and his supporters– but who are afraid that if the conference goes ahead they could be called to account for the disastrous failure Fateh suffered at the hands of Hamas in Gaza in June 2007… and that if this looks likely to happen, the Dahlan group would prefer to call the conference off on the pretext of the non-attendance of the delegates who are still resident in Gaza, rather than go ahead with it…

Yes, wheels within wheels within wheels there. I guess that’s what happens when you try to run a political “movement” that has no functioning mechanisms of internal accountability except the sloshing around of huge amounts of US-mobilized money. [continued…]

Hamas again accepts a Palestinian state on the 1967 lines
By Amjad Atallah, The Washington Note, August 3, 2009

Meshaal seems to be indicating that Hamas now endorses the US attempt to negotiate an end to the occupation.

In the past, Hamas’ position has been that that they would allow President Abbas, as leader of the PLO, to negotiate while they remained the pious opposition, undoubtedly back-biting his attempts to conclude an agreement and presenting the results as a sell-out. It was politics at its most cynical. But in Friday’s WSJ piece, Meshaal is quoted saying “Hamas and other Palestinian groups are ready to cooperate with any American, international or regional effort to find a just solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict, to end the Israeli occupation and to grant the Palestinian people their right of self-determination.”

If Meshaal is truly speaking on behalf of all of Hamas (and Hamas is much better at speaking with a unified voice than most Palestinian parties), then he is actually endorsing President Obama’s efforts to quickly negotiate an end to the conflict and is offering Hamas “cooperation” in that regard. [continued…]

Palestinian economy isn’t recovering thanks to Israel, but in spite of it
By Akiva Eldar, Haaretz, August 4, 2009

The Palestinian economy is not recovering thanks to Israel, but in spite of it.

Although the Shin Bet security services and the Israel Defense Forces agreed to ease pressure on the population, most of the internal checkpoints that Defense Minister Ehud Barak ordered removed at the request of U.S. President Barack Obama administration, had already been slated for removal by former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in response to pressure from former U.S. president George W. Bush.

In addition, according to the current report of the International Monetary Fund, Netanyahu was somewhat hasty in flaunting the success of his economic peace. The fund’s headquarters in the territories predicted that 2009 would end with 7 percent growth (not 10 percent), a statistic that will, for the first time in three years, represent a substantial improvement in the standard of living.

However, the IMF says that if Israel does not continue to remove the restrictions on internal trade, the gross domestic product per capita will decline later in the year. Incidentally, according to the report the unemployment rate still stands at an extremely high 20 percent (less than Gaza’s 34 percent). [continued…]

Hamas chief outlines terms for talks on Arab-Israeli peace

Hamas chief outlines terms for talks on Arab-Israeli peace
By Jay Solomon and Julien Barnes-Dacey, Wall Street Journal, July, 2009

The chief of Palestinian militant group Hamas said his organization is prepared to cooperate with the U.S. in promoting a peaceful resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict if the White House can secure an Israeli settlement freeze and a lifting of the economic and military blockade of the Gaza Strip.

Khaled Meshaal, 53 years old, said in a 90-minute interview at Hamas’s Syrian headquarters that his political party and military wing would commit to an immediate reciprocal cease-fire with Israel, as well as a prisoner swap that would return Hamas fighters for kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.

He also said his organization would accept and respect a Palestinian state based on 1967 borders as part of a broader peace agreement with Israel—provided Israeli negotiators accept the right of return for millions of Palestinian refugees and the establishment of a capital for the Palestinian state in East Jerusalem. [continued…]

Divided, demoralized Palestinian movement hopes to hit ‘restart’
By Dion Nissenbaum, McClatchy, July 30, 2009

Perhaps no Fatah figure has become as emblematic of the failures of Fatah as Dahlan, the polarizing politician who’s been alternately embraced and shunned by America.

Dahlan is viewed with skepticism by some American security leaders and reviled by Hamas for his heavy-handed crackdown on the Islamic group as the former head of security in Gaza.

Dahlan has kept a low profile since his Gaza City home was looted and burned during the 2007 Hamas takeover.

Now he’s preparing to run for the Fatah Central Committee.

“If Dahlan wins, then Fatah will have lost,” said Mohanned Abdel Hamid, a political analayst and occasional columnist for al Ayyam newspaper. “He is dangerous and self-serving.”

On a recent afternoon at the Elite coffee shop in Ramallah, a small group of middle-aged Fatah members who hope to take part in the convention criticized Dahlan and the old Fatah leaders.

“He is the main reason for the dispersed state of Fatah and he has not been held accountable for his actions,” said Allam Hattab, a Fatah member from Tulkarem who accused Dahlan of trying to buy votes. “I’m telling you, there will be a split after the conference.” [continued…]

Fatah’s leadership crisis deepens

Fatah’s leadership crisis deepens
By Helena Cobban, IPS, July 24, 2009

Fifty years ago, a small group of Palestinian teachers and engineers living in Kuwait founded a secretive movement aimed at liberating those portions of previously British-ruled Palestine that became the State of Israel in 1948.

The group they founded, Fatah, went on to dominate the entire Palestinian political scene. In 1969 it took over the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO), which had been founded by the Arab states – as a counter to Fatah – a few years earlier.

In 1993, it was Fatah/PLO head Yasser Arafat who signed the ‘Oslo Accord’ with Israel; and the following year Arafat became president of the Palestinian Authority (PA) established in occupied Ramallah.

But for several years, Fatah has been in crisis, and now that crisis is coming to a sharp head. Arafat’s successor, Mahmoud Abbas, is planning to convene a meeting of Fatah’s policymaking General Conference Aug. 4. By insisting on holding it in occupied Bethlehem – which will enable Israel’s security forces to completely control who attends and who does not – he has helped split the group’s historic leadership down the middle. [continued…]

NEWS & ANALYSIS: Trusting Hamas

All power to Hamas …
By Sami Moubayed, Asia Times, February 2, 2008

During the years 2000-2006, Hamas obtained all the war medals it needed by steering what has become called the al-Aqsa Intifada. There was no higher reward for the leaders of Hamas than an esteemed reputation in the Islamic world, the ability to inflict pain on Israel, discredit Yasser Arafat, and achieve martyrdom; the ultimate goal of jihadis worldwide. By 2006, it was clear that something was still missing for Hamas. It was the opportunity to rule; the chance to dictate policy and be recognized not only by Arabs and Muslims but by the international community as well.

That, of course, in addition to their conviction that they could run a state, combat corruption and find jobs for the Palestinians. They sincerely believed – and still do – that they can deliver if given the chance. This is actually why they were voted into office in 2006. Palestinians did not vote for them because they promised to annihilate the state of Israel. They actually did not use that during their parliamentary race but rather, campaigned on a social agenda, banking on the bankruptcy of Fatah and the numerous shortcomings that surfaced after the death of Arafat in November 2004. It was a pragmatic victory rather than an ideological one. The Palestinians voted for Hamas because they promised better schools, more security, less bureaucracy and no corruption. Voters included seculars and Christians.

Giving them the full burden of government would have sidelined them from the resistance – the way it did to Fatah after 1993. They would have been too busy cleaning up house in the civil service, inspecting schools, and building roads, to lead a proper resistance. They made several important gestures towards Israel and the Americans, however, crying “Uncle” without actually saying it, because they wanted recognition as statesmen rather than guerilla warriors. Decision-makers in Washington, however, refused to listen, seeing Hamas as no different from al-Qaeda, because of its Islamic program. Instead of taking advantage of the situation, Israel brought Hamas back to the fold of the resistance (what they know how to do best). [complete article]

Egypt: Hamas, Fatah should control Gaza border together
By Yoav Stern, Avi Issacharoff and Barak Ravid, Haaretz, February 3, 2008

Cairo wants Hamas and Fatah to jointly operate the border crossing between Gaza and Egypt, a spokesman for Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak said yesterday.

Meanwhile, the border was closed yesterday by mutual agreement of Egypt and Hamas, 12 days after the Islamic organization blew up the wall that sealed it.

Speaking after a meeting between Mubarak and European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana, presidential spokesman Suleiman Awad said that Egypt would not allow the border to reopen. “Egypt is a respectable country,” he said. “You can’t break open its borders and throw stones at its soldiers.”

What Egypt would prefer, he said, is for the Rafah crossing to reopen under the same arrangements that were in place before Hamas took over Gaza last June – namely, under Palestinian control alongside EU monitors. The monitors left after the Hamas takeover, causing the crossing to be shut. Now, said Awad, “the ball is in the Europeans’ court.” [complete article]

NEWS & OPINION: Winograd; Jerusalem; Palestinian talks

Olmert: His own shlemiel, or Bush’s?
By Tony Karon, Rootless Cosmopolitan, January 31, 2008

While Israel’s Winograd Commission has certainly pulled no punches in excoriating the Israeli military and political leadership for their botched war in Lebanon last summer, there appears to be a massive lacuna in its conclusions. (I’m not even going to get into the question of cluster bombs and other military actions by Israel in that conflict that contravene international law.) Israel clearly went to war in haste without a considered plan, without weighing alternatives, without establishing clear objectives and without an exit strategy. That much Winograd was prepared to say bluntly. But what he doesn’t explain is why things played out in this way.

And here, I think, he’s avoiding the elephant in the room: the very clear sense, throughout the Lebanon misadventure, that Israel was coordinating its actions with Washington to an extent that the Bush Administration’s own decisions had a decisive impact on how Israel waged its campaign. Once Israel had launche its initial air raids, the U.S. quickly moved to define the objectives of the war in terms far more expansive than Israel had ever intended, using its diplomatic veto to block a ceasefire that the Israeli leadership had, in fact, been counting on when they began. I had previously written about how in order to truly understand the brutal botchup of Lebanon, the commission would have to probe the U.S. role in Israel’s decision making — the war was one in which I believe Israeli leaders ceded an unprecedented level of control over Israeli decisions to the United States. [complete article]

Jewish group to build 200 new housing units in East Jerusalem
By Meron Rapoport, Haaretz, January 31, 2008

The Yemin Yehuda non-profit association has begun building 200 housing units in the Shimon Hatzaddik compound, in the heart of East Jerusalem’s Sheikh Jarra neighborhood. In the process, the organization intends to demolish the homes of dozens of Palestinian families who live there.

This neighborhood is in a strategic location: If Yemin Yehuda completes its plan, it will cut the Old City off from the Palestinian neighborhoods in northern Jerusalem.

MK Benny Elon (National Union-National Religious Party), who supports building the new neighborhood, says it is designed to create a Jewish continuum surrounding the Old City, where there currently is a massive Palestinian majority. [complete article]

Islamic Jihad urges Hamas, Fatah to start dialogue
Xinhua, January 31, 2008

Islamic Jihad movement on Thursday urged Hamas and Fatah movement benefit from both being in Cairo and start a reconciliation dialogue.

“We must get out from the internal infighting and its results,” said Naffez Azzam, an Islamic Jihad leader, during a demonstration in front of the sealed-off Rafah crossing point in southern Gaza Strip. [complete article]