FresnoZionism.org — ציונות פרסנו

The One Voice Movement has proposed a series of propositions, sort of a petition, for which it wishes to get a million Israeli and Palestinian votes. They believe that the great majority of both peoples are moderates who reject violent extremism and who want a two-state solution, and that their poll expresses the sense of this great peaceful majority.

The propositions represent a mildly left-wing position, but they contain key ambiguities which will be interpreted in totally different ways by both sides. Without clarification, the statements become meaningless. For example, what are ‘minority rights’? Who are ‘political prisoners’? What is a ‘fair and just’ settlement for refugees?

Another thing to keep in mind is that the sample of people who vote here is self-selected. Because the whole project seems to tilt leftwards, few right of center Israelis would choose to take part. So the results have to be taken with a large grain of salt.

My impression is that the ambiguous questions along with the self-selection of the sample make this project more of a public-relations effort intended to give the impression that a large majority of Israelis and Palestinians agree on the general parameters of a solution to the conflict, than an actual attempt to move toward a solution.

(more…)

So Hamas has taken over Gaza and the Palestinian Unity Government is essentially dead. Is this good or bad for Israel? Some commentators, like Ami Isseroff, think it’s awful:

What is happening in Gaza, the destruction of the Fatah by the Hamas, is an unmitigated disaster for United States and Western policy, and a grave threat to Israel…

A relatively small force of Hamas Islamist extremists are liquidating the possibility of a two state solution. Any possibility of peaceful coexistence is being swept into the dustbin.

I’m not so sure. Was Mahmoud Abbas and Fatah a partner to negotiate a two-state solution? Even Isseroff apparently isn’t sure:

No Israeli government could agree to Mr. Abbas’s terms of peace, which include return of Palestinian refugees and surrender of all of East Jerusalem, including Israeli national institutions there such as the Hebrew University on Mt Scopus, the historic Jewish quarter of the Old city and the Western (Wailing Wall).

As he points out, Israel was dragged kicking and screaming by the US to cooperate with the Hamas-controlled PA. But he adds,

…Israel did not oblige those who wanted it to grant more concessions in order to strengthen Mahmoud Abbas. It is unlikely that any such concessions would have really helped Palestinian moderates however. Every concession that Israel made was always seen as a victory for “armed resistance” and not for moderation. At the same time, every concession and every offer were always denigrated as too little, any number of prisoners offered as a confidence building gesture was considered to be a Zionist trick.

Let us remember also that the so-called ‘moderate’ Fatah has a ‘military wing’, the al-Aksa Martyrs brigades, who cooperated in this years’ only successful suicide bombing, in Eilat, and who have never stopped trying to kill Israelis regardless of Abbas’ words.

Let us remember that Fatah is the creature of Yasser Arafat, the spiritual and political heir of Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Nazi Mufti of Jerusalem. Abbas was Arafat’s right-hand man. What can we expect of such an organization, such a man?

What does Fatah do for Israel? Here are some things:

• By allowing itself to be labeled ‘moderate’, it provides an excuse for international donors, who wish to make points with their oil suppliers and domestic Muslims, to funnel money to the terrorist militias.

• By pretending to be a peace partner, it provides a lever by which the US and others can force Israel to make dangerous security concessions which can then be exploited by the terrorist militias.

• By appearing to be a counterforce against Hamas, it provides an excuse to pump even more weapons into the hands of the terrorist militias.

Hamas is no more hostile to the Jewish state than Fatah; it is just more honest about its intentions, more efficient, better motivated, more effectively led, and less corrupt. Because of this it is more dangerous, but it also adds a measure of clarity to the struggle, which in the long run might spell the difference between survival and destruction for Israel.

The hard fact that many people do not wish to face is that today there is no shortcut to peace for Israel. There is no partner such that, if only the right formulation could be found, if only Israel would be willing to give up a little more, peace would be at hand.

Today it’s necessary to prepare for a long, difficult struggle (as if it hasn’t been long enough and difficult enough until now) in which Israel’s enemies must be defeated and thereby come to understand that the only real solution is coexistence.

Israel made a historic mistake when she signed on to the Oslo process with the evil, duplicitous Arafat. As a result, the conflict was extended, not shortened, possibly by decades. But there’s no going back.

For the foreseeable future, the road to peace runs through conflict, not compromise.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Fatah, Hamas, Palestinians

Hamas men are displaying remarkable brutality as they cement their conquest of Gaza:

At least 25 Palestinians were killed and 80 were wounded as Hamas fighters overran two of Fatah’s most important security installations in the Gaza Strip on Thursday. Witnesses said the victors dragged vanquished gunmen from the building and shot them to death gangland-style in the street in front of their families…

A witness, who identified himself only as Amjad, said men were killed before their wives and children.

“They are executing them one by one,” Amjad said in a telephone interview, declining to give his full name for fear of reprisals. “They are carrying one of them on their shoulders, putting him on a sand dune, turning him around and shooting.” — Jerusalem Post

Hamas claims that they have found documents indicating that Fatah was working with the CIA. Of course the US has been up front about providing aid for Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah organization. The surprise is not that the CIA was involved, but that they continued to supply weapons to Fatah when the end of the story should have been obvious for months (thanks to Conflict Blotter for the photo, captured from Hamas TV).

Fatah officials here confirmed that Hamas had seized large amounts of weapons and military equipment belonging to Abbas’s security forces in the Gaza Strip. Some of the weapons were supplied to the PA in recent weeks by Egypt and Jordan as part of a US security plan to boost Fatah-controlled forces.

Hamas said it had seized thousands of M-16 and Kalashnikov rifles and pistols, communication equipment, armored vehicles, trucks, binoculars, military outfits, tents, sleeping bags, hand grenades, mortars and documents.
— Jerusalem Post

Fatah’s Mahmoud Abbas ordered his security forces to respond only defensively and not to attack Hamas directly, and he is reported to have spoken to Hamas leader and Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, who agreed to jointly call for a cease-fire. This strategy appears to have been a serious mistake — unless Abbas has made some kind of deal to save his own skin.

Lots of Fatah officials have not been as successful. Here’s a description of one Fatah man’s last phone call:

Hamas has stormed the home of Jamal Abu Jideyan, general secretary of Fatah in Northern Gaza and an Al Aqsa Brigades commander, and assassinated him. About 20 minutes ago we were listening to Sawt Al Hurriya, a Palestinian radio station, as Jideyan’s brother called into the station frantic. Hamas militants had surrounded the family’s home in the Jabbaliya refugee camp and had fired 16 RPG rounds at the home, with 35 family members inside, he said. “They’re firing at us, firing RPGs, firing mortars. We’re not Jews,” he screamed into the telephone live on air, gun fire bursting in the background.

Abu Jideyan himself was dragged outside and shot, his head almost removed from his body by bullets.

As it stands today, there are two Palestinian entities for Israel to deal with, one in Gaza that is pure Hamas, and one in the West Bank which is only Hamas-dominated.

For now.

Thank you, Mr. Dry Bones, and also Beth for finding this for me!

Technorati Tags: Gaza, Fatah, Hamas

Ami Ayalon and Sari Nusseibeh’s peace plan (as summarized by Bradley Burston, original here):

The borders of the new state would be based on 1967 lines, with a territorial exchange allowing for Israel to annex major settlement blocs and an equal amount of area to be granted Palestine from areas now within Israel proper. No settlers would remain within Palestine.

The Palestinian state would be demilitarized, under agreements in which the international community would guarantee its security.

Regarding the right of return, “Palestinians refugees will return only to the State of Palestine; Jews will return only to the State of Israel.” In addition, Israel, Palestine, and the international community would set up a fund to compensate Palestinian refugees for their suffering.

As for Jerusalem, the Palestinians would have sovereignty over Arab neighborhoods, and Israel over Jewish neighborhoods. Neither side would have sovereignty over holy sites. Israel would act as guardian of the Western wall, Palestine as guardian of the Noble Sanctuary mosque compound.

I don’t want to talk about the justice or fairness of the plan. Just a couple of guesses about how such a plan would be received by Israelis and Palestinians:

My first guess is that if they were convinced that security guarantees would be effective (a very big ‘if’), the majority of Israelis would accept such a plan.

My other guess is that no imaginable Palestinian leadership would accept it.

Historically, since the 1937 Peel Commission and through the 2000 Clinton/Barak proposal, Israelis have been prepared to accept partition, even when it would be objectively disadvantageous, on the grounds that it would bring peace. Israelis who think that the entire Land of Israel should be in Jewish hands for religious reasons are a minority.

Most Arabs have always opposed partition. It has always seemed to them — even before the founding of the state — that the entire land belonged to them, indeed, that any land held by Jews was in some sense stolen (even if it was purchased). Compensation has never been considered an acceptable substitute for possession.

There is a fundamental asymmetry in the thinking of Israelis and Palestinians. Israelis are mostly pragmatic and most of them are more interested in peace than land. Indeed, opposition to withdrawal from the territories is overwhelmingly based on security considerations.

Palestinians are not pragmatic, they are idealistic. They are prepared to undergo great hardship in order to obtain what they think is theirs, and they are uncompromising. Even this proposal, signed by the moderate Nusseibeh — and if there ever was a moderate Palestinian, it’s Nusseibeh — has to take Palestinian idealism into account.

I’m referring, of course, to the statement at the end of the first paragraph: No settlers will remain in Palestine. Although one presumes that both sides envisage that Arabs will continue to live in Israel, the idealistic Palestinians require that Palestine must be completely Judenrein.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Palestinians, Ayalon, Nusseibeh