Doc's Talk: The Two Faces of Fatah

Saturday, March 29, 2008

The Two Faces of Fatah

C. Hart

Palestinian elements of Fatah, linked to terrorist leaders in Damascus, are trying to pave the way for a Hamas takeover of the West Bank. But, as reported on March 13, Israel Defense Forces (IDF) anti-terror units managed to eliminate top terrorist leaders in Bethlehem in order to deter such a takeover.

Mahmoud Shehada, the Commander of Islamic Jihad in Bethlehem and one of the terrorists killed by the IDF raid, was on Israel’s most wanted list for the past eight years. He had reportedly toured Bethlehem a day before his death hoping for greater cooperation between Islamic Jihad and Fatah.

Islamic Jihad continues to work alongside Hamas in Gaza launching rockets against Israel’s border towns and other terrorist attacks against Israeli citizens.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has not demonstrated strong enough leadership to control opposing Fatah factions in the West Bank, and it is only the IDF that has prevented Hamas from militarily taking over the area. With the help of certain Fatah terrorists who oppose Palestinian peace negotiations with Israel, Hamas continues to try and use its influence in the territories.

Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists receive training and direction from Iranian and Syrian operatives. The organizations have their headquarters in Damascus where they receive financing to direct terrorist attacks against Israel. Reports indicate that Iranian weaponry and Al Qaeda affiliates have infiltrated Gaza and the West Bank. Dr. Ely Karmon is a Senior Research Scholar at Israel’s Institute for Counter Terrorism in Herzliya. He claims that Farouk al-Kaddoumi, Secretary General of Fatah’s Central Committee, stays in Damascus and never visits the Palestinian territories or Gaza because he doesn’t accept Palestinian Authority agreements with Israel, including the Oslo Accords. In Karmon’s opinion, one faction of Fatah is represented by Kaddoumi in Damascus, while the other faction of Fatah is represented by Abbas in the West Bank. “Abbas is not uniting them as a force against Hamas,” he states.

The IDF continues to pursue Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and other Palestinian gunmen, while also seeking to eliminate Qassam rocket production in the West Bank and Gaza, hoping to weaken the power of the Hamas government. But, without a clear Israeli government strategy on how to deal with terrorism originating from these operatives, Israel cannot effectively stop terror attacks.

According to Karmon, “I think that what will happen in Gaza will be extremely important not only in deterring Hamas and other Palestinians, but also in deterring the Syrians and Iranians.”

Hamas has increased its West Bank operations in Kalkilya and Nablus, based on Israel’s recent intelligence assessments by the Mossad, Shin Bet (Israel’s Security Agency), the Israeli Police, as well as the Foreign Ministry and Military Intelligence units. Israel’s future actions against Hamas, which now reportedly has an army militia of 15,000 fighters in the Gaza Strip, could escalate into a violent reaction on other fronts.

That kind of potential unrest is a destabilizing factor that the Israeli government must consider at a time when Olmert is trying to figure out how to re-establish a deterrence policy in the south. A major Israeli incursion into Gaza, in which there could be a high Palestinian death toll, is risky, because it could stir Arabs in neighboring countries to carry out violent street protests. A scenario where all border crossings in and out of Gaza remain closed might cause another revolt by Palestinians in Gaza, similar to what happened earlier this month with the breach in the wall at the Gaza-Egyptian border. Hamas has already threatened to attack other border stations, like the Rafah crossing. Any major violent uprising among Palestinians in the south could lead to a threat from Hizbullah on Israel’s northern border, as the terrorist army is looking for a reason to engage in another conflict with Israel.

Yet, at the same time, the current War of Attrition against Israel by Hamas is unacceptable to a majority of Israelis who want it stopped. Israeli citizens want to feel safe and secure within defensible borders.

States Karmon, “We cannot let Hamas become a military power which will influence all other fronts… Syria is the key to the aggressiveness of Hizbullah and Hamas. If the Syrians were deterred by Israel and the international community things could be easier.”

While Israel still needs an effective deterrence policy against Hamas, officials in the Jewish state have privately assessed that Israel has already built up its deterrence against Syria. This happened in the reported Israeli Air Force bombing of a nuclear facility inside Syria on September 6, 2007. But, Israel has not done enough to stop Syria from using its terrorist proxies. Karmon thinks the Israeli government should have announced to the Syrian government before the summer war of 2006, that if it continued to support Hizballah and Hamas, as well as allow the flow of Iranian weapons into Lebanon, Syria would pay a heavy price for those actions. “We don’t hear this kind of message,” Karmon admits.

Despite international pressure, it’s expected that Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s government will not stop its surgical strikes against the Hamas military machine; and, Israeli elite forces will keep hunting down Palestinian gunmen operating in the West Bank and Gaza. Israel’s Defense Minister, Ehud Barak, while ordering the IDF to carry out these operations, can be expected to restrain forces from launching a full military incursion into Gaza. U.S. pressure on Israel to get back on the diplomatic track towards a final peace agreement with the Palestinians is forcing Israel’s hand into a temporary cease-fire. This will only result in Hamas building up its military arsenal, while training its men for another round of fighting with Israel in Gaza. It will also give Hamas time to establish a greater presence in the West Bank, gaining more control there through the divided forces of Fatah, some who have greater loyalty to Hamas than to Abbas.

Dan Dyker, current Director of the Institute for Contemporary Affairs (ICA) in Jerusalem, says, “Israel has made a strategic error in deterrence. We have agreed with the U.S. to engage the Palestinian Authority.” Dyker is referring to U.S. failed hopes that Abbas would be able to unite Fatah factions, stop violence in the West Bank, and show Palestinians that he has the ability to govern with authority.

Many Israelis have given up on Abbas, claiming he refuses or is incapable of effectively controlling Palestinian rebel forces. They are waiting, instead, to see if Olmert will show the kind of leadership necessary to establish a coherent and effective deterrence policy; a policy that thwarts terrorist attacks and stops the rocket launchings that have hit this nation hard in recent weeks.

Without an effective strategy, any temporary period of calm that Israelis may encounter now will be followed by another round of more terror and more pain. This will continue until an Israeli government is in place that will use the force necessary to stop the violence emanating from Gaza and the territories, effectively breaking the power of Israel’s enemies residing there.

[C. Hart writes for ThreatsWatch from Jerusalem, Israel.]

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk