More reports that Abbas plans to dissolve the PA

As I was the first one to report in English last week, afterwards confirmed by Ma'ariv, there is more evidence that Mahmoud Abbas plans to dissolve the Palestinian Authority.

From Asharq al-Awsat:

Despite a number of denials by members of Fatah Movement regarding Israeli press reports that Palestinian President Mahmud Abbas intends on dissolving the Palestinian Authority [PA], sources have stated to Asharq Al-Awsat that President Abbas intends on reverting the situation in the Palestinian territories to what it had been before the creation of the PA in 1994, which means handing over the management affairs of the West Bank to the administration of the Israeli occupation, which means, in other words, dissolving the PA.
Asharq Al-Awsat has learned from a high-ranking Palestinian source that Abbas has recently sent two messages that include this idea to the government of Benjamin Netanyahu in Tel Aviv and the US Administration. This has been confirmed by a source of the Fatah Central Committee, but the difference between the two sources is that the first speaks about written correspondence while the second talks about verbal exchanges.

However, the two sources agreed on the identities of the conveyers of the these two messages since the message to Israel was conveyed by Hussein al-Sheikh, member of Fatah Central Committee and the official in charge of civil affairs in the PA who is responsible for coordination with the Israeli Civil Administration. As for the message to the United States, it was conveyed by Saeb Erekat, the PLO chief negotiator and member of Fatah Central Committee.

According to the high-ranking source, this is an important, serious, sudden step, which President Abbas spoke about, and it will be revealed within a month (which means soon after the Security Council votes on the UN membership request for the state of Palestine, the discussion on which is scheduled to start on 11 November). Abbas spoke about this step in an interview with an Egyptian satellite channels a few days ago, and repeated it in his speech at the Revolutionary Council of Fatah Movement, which began its meetings in Ramallah last Wednesday night and concluded yesterday with a joint-final statement.

During his visit to New York to submit the application of Palestine to the United Nations last September, Abbas told Asharq Al-Awsat that actually a National Authority [PA] does not exist and he is not going to accept to carry out the tasks of a head of municipality.

The contents of these messages are the same, according to the two sources who differed on some words, since the Fatah source said that the two messages do not at all include the phrase of dissolving the PA "because we are against dissolving the PA, which we consider a national achievement, but they speak about the collapse of the PA, and the occupation [authority] assuming its role." The Fatah source added that "Hussein al-Sheikh informed the Israelis to prepare themselves to receive these administrations and what they handed over to us (which means after Oslo Accords) because we do not work for them"

The source added: "Hussein al-Sheikh told the Israelis that we are going to return the 3,000 rifles that you allowed for us (in reference to halting the security coordination)." The official said that "this talk in this way means that the PA does not exist, and therefore, let the occupation authority return to shoulder its responsibilities in the Palestinian territories."

Some Arabic-language analysts predict that a new intifada will inevitably break out if the PA is dissolved, which is probably true. Also remember that the single biggest employer in the West Bank is the PA, with some 170,000 jobs. Take that away and all of the economic and lifestyle gains that Palestinian Arabs have enjoyed since Oslo will disappear, and unemployment will skyrocket.

Will the Palestinian Arabs in Area A, who now enjoy essentially all the benefits of a state, be happy with this?

Can you imagine Kurdish leaders  in Iraqi Kurdistan dissolving their autonomous region in order to gamble their people's lives to gain a UN seat?

What this all comes down to is more proof, as if  more were needed, that the welfare of the Palestinian Arab people has never been a priority for any of their so-called "leaders." They are willing to throw all of their gains away for their own twisted senses of "honor" and "justice." They are anxious to use their own people's lives as pawns on the off chance that by doing so they can hurt Israel. The very concept of compromise with the Jewish state is so unthinkable that they prefer to choose an all-or-nothing scenario that is guaranteed to end up disastrous. And the ones who will be hurt the most are their own people.

It is a truly sick mentality, but one that the West refuses to notice.

Yet it is exactly now that Western leaders must stand up and publicly shame Abbas for even considering the idea. Now is the time for ordinary Palestinian Arabs to undergo their own "spring" where they tell their unelected leaders to stop playing stupid political games with their lives.

(h/t CHA)

Read More

Abbas, look in the mirror (poster)

From Ha'aretz:

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said on Friday in an interview with Channel 2 that the Arab world erred in rejecting the United Nations' 1947 plan to partition Palestine into a Palestinian and a Jewish state.

The Palestinian and Arab refusal to accept a UN plan to partition the then-British-controlled mandate of Palestine sparked widespread fighting, then Arab military intervention after Israel declared independence the following year. The Arabs lost the war.

"It was our mistake. It was an Arab mistake as a whole," Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas told Channel 2.

Yet Abbas is just as rejectionist as the Palestinian Arab leaders were in 1947, as he has rejected offers of peace that would end the conflict - and today keeps adding pre-conditions before even talking to Israel.

So while hindsight is 20/20, Abbas cannot learn the obvious lessons:

It's amazing that Arab leaders keep claiming that time is on their side, and only realize that their intransigence has set their cause further behind decades after the fact.  

And one only has to read the many articles in the 1950s and 1960s where Arab leaders say that Israel is not viable, that it cannot succeed economically, that all they need to do is wait - to see that nothing has changed.

Read More

EoZ poster sighting at Columbia U

From The Forward:

Pro-Palestinian student activists are planning a national conference this month that they hope will bring new coordination and potency to the anti-Israel movement on campus.

The group Students for Justice in Palestine is already one of the most active pro-Palestinian groups at North American universities, but its diffuse chapters share no formal organizational ties. That could change this month, as student members try to unite into a more cohesive national group.

“SJP’s have decided to form their own national body to make sure students are at the forefront of deciding what the student movement is pursuing and how it pursues it, rather than off-campus organizations,” said Yaman Salahi, a student at Yale Law School and member of the ad hoc national committee that has organized the event.

From The Silent Majority:

The Anti-Israel Conference, unopposed, was held ON campus at Columbia University.

Of course, the conference isn’t the first time these students were fed such a heavy dose of racism.

But, we were pleased to see a counter-protest outside the campus gate.

Some protesters came independently, alerted by e-mails or social media. Others were members of groups such as Americans for a Safe Israel, Human Rights Coalition Against Radical Islam, Amcha-Coalition for Jewish Concerns, National Council on Jewish Affairs, and Liberals for Israel. Among the many signs they held up to passers-by were "Occupy Columbia With Truth and Justice, not Lies and Anti-Israel Incitement".

Among the photos in the article we can see a counter-protester holding up one of my posters:

And they didn't even crop out my name:

The Cynical Arab has a much harsher piece about the counter-protesters, and specifically quotes mine (he also has photos of it.)

The original poster can be found here. (h/t CHA)

(h/t Ian)

Read More

Assad warns against Western intervention in Syria

From the Sunday Telegraph:

In his first interview with a Western journalist since Syria's seven-month uprising began, President Assad told The Sunday Telegraph that intervention against his regime could cause "another Afghanistan".

Western countries "are going to ratchet up the pressure, definitely," he said. "But Syria is different in every respect from Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen. The history is different. The politics is different.

"Syria is the hub now in this region. It is the fault line, and if you play with the ground you will cause an earthquake … Do you want to see another Afghanistan, or tens of Afghanistans?

"Any problem in Syria will burn the whole region. If the plan is to divide Syria, that is to divide the whole region."

Assad chose his interviewer, Andrew Gilligan, skillfully, as the actual interview is filled with praise for the ruthless mass murderer - and it resembles the infamous Vogue puff piece inthe Assads in a number of ways:

When you go to see an Arab ruler, you expect vast, over-the-top palaces, battalions of guards, ring after ring of security checks and massive, deadening protocol. You expect to wait hours in return for a few stilted minutes in a gilded reception room, surrounded by officials, flunkies and state TV cameras. You expect a monologue, not a conversation. Bashar al-Assad, the president of Syria, was quite different.

We sat, just the three of us, on leather sofas in Assad’s small study. The president was wearing jeans. It was Friday, the main protest day in Syria: the first Friday since the death of Colonel Gaddafi had sunk in. But the man at the centre of it all, the man they wanted to destroy, looked pretty relaxed.

On Thursday night, the beginning of the Muslim weekend, Damascus’s Old City was heaving with people having a good time. Men and women were mixing freely. Alcohol was widely available. A pair of Christian Orthodox priests, in their long cassocks, walked through the crowded alleys, and small Christian shrines were tucked away in the corners. The regime is successfully pushing the message that all this is at risk. “I don’t like Assad, but I am worried that what follows could be worse,” said one of the partygoers. On Wednesday, Damascus witnessed a large pro-Assad demonstration: Western journalists who observed it say that the participants did not appear to have been coerced.

Assad himself could not be further from a ranting, Gaddafi-like Arab dictator. His English is perfect — he lived for two years in London, where he met his wife. In conversation he was open, even at times frank. “Many mistakes,” he admitted, had been made by the security forces – though no one, it seems, has been brought to book for them. He could both make, and take, a joke. A former president of the Syrian Computer Society, he sometimes explained things in computer terms.

Comparing Syria’s leadership with that of a Western country, he said, was like comparing a Mac with a PC. “Both computers do the same job, but they don’t understand each other,” he said. “You need to translate. If you want to analyse me as the East, you cannot analyse me through the Western operating system, or culture. You have to translate according to my operating system, or culture.” That’s the inner nerd in you speaking, I said, and he laughed out loud. I can’t imagine too many other Arab leaders you could get away with calling a nerd.

Assad lives in a relatively small house in a normal – albeit guarded – street. He believes that his modest lifestyle is another component of his appeal. “There is a legitimacy according to elections and there is popular legitimacy,” he said. “If you do not have popular legitimacy, whether you are elected or not you will be removed – look at all the coups we had.

“The first component of popular legitimacy is your personal life. It is very important how you live. I live a normal life. I drive my own car, we have neighbours, I take my kids to school. That’s why I am popular. It is very important to live this way – that is the Syrian style.”

That might not amount to much against the pile of corpses in Homs, Hama, and elsewhere, but from conversations with residents in Damascus at least, it does in fact seem to make Assad somewhat better esteemed by his own people than many other Arab rulers.

Wow, sounds like a really hard-hitting interview!

It doesn't even appear that Gilligan asked Assad to deny whether he threatened to shoot hundreds of missiles at Tel Aviv if Western forces intervene in Syria's bloodbath. I mean, he was so polite in his modest study, why ask something that might dampen the mood on the same day that 40 people were murdered by his soldiers?

Was this interview arranged by another PR firm hired by Assad to burnish his image? Or is Gilligan just that much of a fan of Arab despots?

See also Nir Rosen - in Al Jazeera - describe how the Alawite minority in Syria holds all the political and military power.

(h/t Yoel)

Read More

"The West is hijacking the Arab spring - to the benefit of Islamists"

When writers like Barry Rubin warn about the dangers of Islamism in the context of the "Arab Spring," the mainstream media tends to marginalize it and the Left dismisses it as right-wing paranoia and anti-Arab racism.

Which makes this article by Raghida Dergham so vitally important. Not only because she is an Arab woman, but also because it was published in both the pan-Arab Dar al Hayat newspaper and in Al Arabiya:

While the West speaks of the necessity of accepting the results of the democratic process, in terms of Islamists coming to power in the Arab region, there are increased suspicions regarding the goals pursued by the West in its new policy of rapprochement with the Islamist movement, in what is a striking effort at undermining modern, secular and liberal movements. The three North African countries in which revolutions of change have taken place, are witnessing a transitional process that is noteworthy, not just in domestic and local terms, but also in terms of the roles played by foreign forces, both regional and international.

The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is trying to hijack the youth’s revolution with the help of the West. This is while bearing in mind that Egypt is considered to be the “command center” for the Muslim Brotherhood’s network in different Arab countries. The followers of the Ennahda in Tunisia are wrapping their message with moderation as they prepare to hijack the democracy that Tunisia’s youth dream of, while being met by applause and encouragement from the West in the name of the “fairness” of the electoral process. Libya, where the North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) is in a “marriage of convenience” with Islamist rebels, has become a hub of extremism and lawlessness, with a plethora of military aid being collected by an assortment of armed Islamists who aim to exclude others from power. In Yemen, where a struggle for power rages on, a war is taking place between extremism and a harsher and more violent brand of extremism, with so-called “moderate Islam” in the middle as a means of salvation, even as the latter’s ideology remains neither modern nor liberal, and is rather lacking when it comes to the fundamentals of democracy and equality. In Syria, where the battle for freedom is at its most difficult phase, the youths of the revolution fear what could very much be under discussion behind the scenes between the West and the Islamist movements, in terms of collaboration and of strengthening the Islamists’ hold on power, in a clear bid to hijack the revolution of a youth that aspires to freedom in its every sense, not to yet another brand of tyranny and authoritarianism.

Yet despite increasing talk and concern over the unnatural relationship between the West and Islamist movements in the Arab region, there is growing insistence among the region’s enlightened and modern youths that they will not allow this relationship to direct their lives and dictate their course. It would thus be more logical for the West to listen carefully to what is happening at the youths’ scene, as well as on the traditional secularist and modernist scenes, and to realize the danger of what it is doing for these elements and the road to change brought about by the Arab Spring.

The obsession of some Westerners with the so-called “Turkish model” of “moderate Islam,” able to rule with discipline and democracy, seems naïve, essentially because of its assumption that such a model can automatically be applied on the Arab scene, without carefully considering the different background and conditions that exist in Turkey and the Arab countries. There is also some naivety in assuming than the “Iranian model” of religious autocratic rule that oppresses people, forbids pluralism and turns power into tyranny, can be excluded as a possibility.

The New York Times would never dream of publishing such seeming heresy - yet the secular Arab press is anxious to.

The entire article is a must-read.

(h/t JW)

Read More

A small victory

Last week I discovered that a Ma'an story claiming that an 11-year old boy was released after five months in an Israeli prison, which was copied and retweeted on anti-Israel sites, was not true.

The real story was that a 17 year old stone-thrower was imprisoned for 4 months before being released.

After I brought it to their attention, Ma'an corrected the story. (In Arabic, they corrected the age but still refer to him multiple times as a "child.")

The unanswered question is whether a Ma'an reporter was physically there during his release. The article claims that "Israeli forces tried to forbid people who were waiting for the child near the checkpoint from welcoming him and tried to remove Palestinian flags that were on cars near the checkpoint." But if the reporter, who presumably knows the difference between an 11 year old child and a 17-year old, was not there, then how was this information obtained? The article doesn't say "witnesses said" or anything like that.

Nevertheless, it is a very small victory in the war against the huge amount of misinformation out there.

Read More

Saudi prince ups reward for kidnapping Israeli soldier to $1 million

From YNet:

Saudi Prince Khaled bin Talal bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud declared Saturday he would give $900,000 to whoever abducts an Israeli soldier in order to be exchanged for Palestinian prisoners.

In an interview with Saudi TV, bin Talal stressed that his offer was in response to a similar offer made by a Saudi cleric who earlier this week said he would give $100,000 to anyone who would kidnap an Israeli soldier.

"Al-Qarni offered $100,000 to whoever abducts (an Israeli soldier) and I say to him – I sympathize with you and am offering $900,000 to put the figure at $1 million," he said.

Prince Khaled is the third son of Prince Talal bin Abdul Aziz, the Saudi King's brother.

Peninsula Online adds:

Prince Khaled, originally quoted by the Palestinian network Al Wattan TV, said, “Al Qarni offered $100,000 for whoever kidnaps a soldier, then (unnamed Israeli groups) offered $1m to kill Al Qarni, and now I’m saying to Al Qarni that I’m supporting you by offering another $900,000, which will make it a million for whoever kidnaps a soldier,”

He doesn't name the group that supposedly offered a million dollars to kill al Qarni. My guess is that it never happened, or some teen on Facebook wrote it where it got picked up and exaggerated in Arabic media.

Either way, this means that Saudi Arabia is officially supporting the violation of the Geneva Conventions against taking hostages

Shouldn't someone be asking Saudi officials about this?

Read More

The hypocrisy of the Israeli Left, perfectly captured

I noted an absurd Ha'aretz op-ed by Alon Idan the other day where he said, among other things:

The Shalit deal is, in fact, a public display of Israel's racist price index. The ceremony occurs every few years, and the index is designed to update the market values of the region's various races. As of October 2011, in the Israeli market, the price of one Jew equals 1,027 Arabs. And the price increases every day.

But a few months ago, during Shalit's fifth anniversary in captivity, here is what Idan wrote:

Shalit will not be freed because, contrary to conventional wisdom, the push for his release is not nonpartisan; it is part of a struggle that falls along classic political lines.

Suffice it to look at reality itself - Gilad Shalit is still in captivity.... The seeming gap between the public's desire to "pay any price" for Shalit's freedom and the government's opposition to doing so is deceptive. The fact that the situation has not changed means there isn't really a gap, that pressure isn't really being exerted from below - and if it is, it's not strong enough to break the ruling paradigm.

The absence of such pressure is no accident. It faithfully reflects the fact that the issue fall along classic political lines: the left is in favor of releasing Shalit, the right is against it, and the center says it's in favor but acts against it.

Besides how obviously wrong he was about how the right were indeed the ones that freed Shalit, Idan is identifying the desire to free Shalit "at any price" with the Left that he is a part of.

But when Israel does release Shalit for 1027 prisoners, he deems that to prove Israel's racism!

So by the calculus of his later article, the Israeli Left must be racist, since in his words they would have been willing to release many, many more prisoners to get Shalit back!

As usual, the anti-Zionist Left will twist whatever facts they can to make a political point, consistency be damned.

(h/t Guillermo)

Read More

Ashkelon father killed in rocket barrage; PIJ video of new multiple launcher

Some 24 rockets (update: 35) were launched towards civilian areas in Israel this evening, killing Moshe Ami from Ashkelon. He was a father of four.

Islamic Jihad, via their Palestine Today website, is bragging that they are using a new kind of multiple rocket launcher. Here's the video they posted:


Will the UN continue to call these "home made rockets"?

Read More

Weekend open thread

Don't forget to put in your nominations for the 2011 Hasby Awards.

I was a little surprised not to see anyone nominate Bibi's speech at the UN - or, even more so, his speech to Obama.

So think about any other interesting hasbara events that may have happened this year, and nominate them!

Have a good weekend!

Read More

Latest Latma

Read More

Meanwhile, in Syria...

From Al Arabiya today:

As many as 37 people have been killed when security forces opened fire at demonstrators on Friday, Al Arabiya reported citing Syrian activists as protesters called for nationwide rallies to demand the imposition of a no-fly zone over Syria to protect civilians.

From CNN Thursday:

Three children were among 25 people reported killed Thursday in Syria, an opposition group reported, in the apparent latest round of violence to rattle the turbulent Middle Eastern nation.

From AP Monday:

Syrian security forces killed at least six people in the restive central city of Homs on Monday, while government troops clashed with gunmen believed to be defectors from the military in several parts of the country, killing five including a Syrian soldier, activists said.

I wonder when the Occupy Wall Street people will add this to their ever-growing, amorphous list of issues.

Read More

Does this mean Israel values Arabs twice as much as Jews?

From Al Masry Al Youm:

Alleged Israeli spy Ilan Grapel, who was released Thursday in a prisoner exchange deal between Egypt and Israel, thanked Egyptian authorities for treating him well during his four months of detention.

Grapel was returned to Israel on Thursday night in exchange for 25 Egyptians held in Israeli prisons. He crossed into Israel from the Egyptian border town of Taba.

Ouda Tarabin, an Israeli Bedouin who has been detained in Egypt for nearly a decade accused of spying for Israel, will be released sometime in the next few days in another swap deal, a representative of his family in Israel told the Voice of Israel radio station Thursday evening.

Yitzhak Molcho, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's chief negotiator for the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, and Knesset (Israeli parliament) member Yoel Hasson informed the Tarabin family's representative that Ouda will be released in exchange for 60 Egyptians currently detained in Israel on charges related to Israeli national security.

By the brilliant logic of Deborah Orr and Alon Idan, subconscious racists who believe that only Israelis decide the terms of prisoner deals and that Arabs have no ability to influence the parameters, they have to admit that this is proof that Israel values the lives of its Arab citizens over twice as much as her Jewish citizens.

Read More

Hamas apologist thrilled with Islamist victory in Tunisia

From Ma'an:

Tunisia's main Islamist party Ennahda was officially declared winner of the national vote on Thursday, the first election of the Arab Spring.

Prominent Palestinian journalist Khalid Amayreh lauded the democratic vote, and said Ennahda's victory demonstrated the "resilience and tenacity of Islam" in the nation where the moderate Islamist group was banned before its January revolution.

Amayreh, writing for Hamas-affiliated news site Palestinian Information Center, said Tunisia can be "a model to be followed and emulated throughout the Arab world."

Ma'an fails to mention that Amayreh is a virulent anti-semite, liar and nutcase .

Nevertheless, it is useful to read exactly what Amayreh wrote that Ma'an ignored, and read between the lines of what he desires to see in Tunisia:

We Muslims are not against true democracy, a significant, accumulative human experience which can't be dismissed lightly. None the less, we are convinced a million per cent that Islam is inherently superior to democracy.

...With all due respect to the committed believers in western democracy, we Muslims don't believe in this way of thinking because peoples and nations ought to be answerable to values that are higher and more sublime than simple majorities.

Muslims in particular ought to seek Islamic democracy where human rights and civil liberties are guaranteed while general moral values of society are preserved and encouraged. Thus moral vices shouldn't be accorded the same freedoms as moral virtues.

Meaning, Islamic law is far more important than the "simple majority" will of the people.

Amayreh pointedly ignores the fact that while the Ennahda party won a plurality, it did not win the majority - nor can it put together a majority coalition with only Islamist groups. It will need to partner with some hated secularists. So his concept of "true democracy" seems to indicate that when Islamists win less than half the vote, they can impose their will on the "simple majority." I doubt that he would be as happy with coalition politics if somehow the secular parties of Tunisia could put together a larger coalition than the Islamists.

Amayreh's - and Hamas' - concept of "Islamic democracy" is one where democracy is only useful as long as it pushes an Islamic agenda. If not, then it is illegitimate.

Which means that "Islamic democracy" has nothing to do with democracy.

Read More

Ma'ariv reports of Abbas plan to dissolve PA

I reported Wednesday that there were rumors that Mahmoud Abbas might announce that he would dissolve the Palestinian Authority if he doesn't get his state, in the Palestinian Arab version of a temper tantrum.

Ma'ariv is quoting a senior Palestinian Arab official as saying that the PA has created detailed plans in case it decides to do just that.

According to the article, Abbas requested a contingency plan be drawn up on how to transfer various responsibilities from the PA to Israel, starting with health, education and tourism and ending with security.

There is an interesting subtext here. Many Israelis have said publicly that "occupation" is a disaster for Israel and that it would ultimately result in the destruction of the state. Abbas is not threatening Israel with war or terror; he is threatening it with the fear that Israeli liberals have instilled in some parts of Israeli society.

If an Israeli government would simply say that it is willing to accept the responsibilities of controlling the territories, then this entire plan would blow up.

Israel's leaders could go beyond that, mentioning that it would be nice for Israelis to be able to go shopping in Nablus and Ramallah again - as they did before the first intifada. It would help the economy of Arab communities in the territories. More Arabs could be employed in Jewish communities.

Whether or not this is true, calling Abbas' bluff publicly would be the fastest way to kill it. There is no way that Palestinian Arabs would accept their leader saying that he will do something Israel likes.

Read More