Doc's Talk: PA: US is working on 3-month freeze extension to save talks

Wednesday, October 06, 2010

PA: US is working on 3-month freeze extension to save talks

KHALED ABU TOAMEH AND RUTH EGLASH

Abbas wins Egyptian, Jordanian backing for his refusal to return to negotiating table; Fatah and Hamas will restart reconciliation talks Oct. 20.

The Palestinian Authority said on Tuesday that it had won the backing of Egypt, Jordan and several other Arab countries for its refusal to return to the negotiating table unless Israel extended the moratorium on settlement construction.

The announcement was made following a meeting in Cairo between PA President Mahmoud Abbas and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. A senior PA official in Ramallah told The Jerusalem Post that the US administration was now talking about the possibility of extending the moratorium by an additional three months to avoid the collapse of the peace talks.

“This is not a bad proposal,” the official said. “But it remains to be seen if the Americans are able to exert pressure on [Prime Minister Binyamin] Netanyahu to stop the construction in the settlements.”

Abbas’s talks in Cairo come ahead of a meeting of Arab League foreign ministers in Libya on Friday to discuss the future of the peace talks in light of the resumption of construction in the settlements.

The meeting is being held at the request of the PA leadership, which has announced that it won’t return to the negotiating table with Israel unless the settlement freeze is extended.

“There is full agreement between the Palestinian Authority and Egypt with regard to the issue of settlement construction,” said Nabil Abu Rudaineh, a spokesman for Abbas, following the Cairo meeting. “There has to be a comprehensive freeze of settlement construction so as to give peace efforts a chance.”

Nabil Sha’ath, a member of the PA negotiating team, said that the Palestinians can’t resume talks with Israel under the motto of land for peace “while the land is being stolen and settlements are growing.” He added that Israel alone would be held responsible for the destruction of the peace process.

“No US-sponsored peace process would have credibility when the Americans can’t force Israel to fulfill one of the principal obligations – to stop settlement construction,” Sha’ath said.

“We in Egypt are invested with our utmost efforts in ensuring that the direct talks between Israel and the Palestinians will not collapse because of the settlements,” Mubarak said after the meeting with Abbas. He added that Egypt hoped “this opportunity to establish peace will not be missed as were many opportunities in the past.”

Meanwhile, Jordan’s King Abdullah II told Netanyahu by telephone on Tuesday to halt all building in the settlements.

“Any unilateral steps that threaten peace must be stopped, especially building in settlements,” Abdullah told Netanyahu, according to a statement released by his palace. “The region is at a critical point that requires significant effort to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on the basis of two states for two peoples, an opportunity that must not be missed for the benefit of future generations.”

Abdullah met in Amman earlier Tuesday with Minister of Welfare and Social Services Isaac Herzog and stressed the need to take advantage of the historic opportunity afforded by the current talks. According to Herzog, the king said that all efforts must be made to ensure that the direct talks continue, something that will necessitate courage and a great deal of responsibility on the part of the leaders.

“We completely understand the size of this challenge and how it could eventually change the face of the Middle East, and the obligation on all the sides to take immediate, courageous steps for peace,” Herzog told the king. “We must advance direct negotiations for the sake of peace and improve relations between the states and residents of the Middle East in general. This requires that the leaders make maximum efforts and take responsibility.”

This was Herzog’s second trip to Amman in a little over a month, having met Jordanian Prime Minister Samir Rifaay at the end of August.

A spokeswoman for Herzog said that the minister had a long history of relations with Jordan’s royal family, starting many years ago with his uncle Ya’acov Herzog and former foreign minister Abba Eban, who worked with King Abdullah’s father, King Hussein, during the 1960s and 1970s.

The crisis surrounding the peace talks coincides with reports about a possible reconciliation between Abbas’s Fatah faction and Hamas.

Representatives of the two rival parties are scheduled to hold a second round of talks on October 20 to discuss ways of ending their dispute and forming a unity government.

The first meeting was held in the Syrian capital of Damascus two weeks ago. It was the first meeting of its kind between Hamas and Fatah since the beginning of the year.

Spokesmen for the two sides said they were optimistic regarding the prospects of reaching a deal that would end their power struggle and the split between the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Izat Risheq, a senior Hamas official in Syria, said the upcoming meeting would focus on solving security-related issues, including the release of hundreds of Hamas detainees from PA jails in the West Bank.

But despite the optimism expressed by both sides, Hamas and Fatah leaders continued to attack each other through the media.

Ahmed Bahr, a top Hamas official in the Gaza Strip, called on Fatah to “take a brave decision and fire the unconstitutional government of Salam Fayyad.” Bahr also called for bringing Fayyad to trial for allegedly perpetrating “dangerous crimes” against the Palestinians and their cause.

In a move that has further intensified tensions between Hamas and Fatah, a PA military court in the West Bank sentenced two Hamas supporters to prison.

Ala Hisham Abu Diab was sentenced to 20 years in prison with hard labor while Abdel Fatah Hassan was given 12 years. The latter’s wife, Mirvat, was sentenced to one year in prison.

All three were indicted for their role in the death of three PA policemen during a violent confrontation with Hamas gunmen in Kalkilya in June 2009. The three were also found guilty of “conspiring against the Palestinian Authority and possessing unlicensed weapons.” In response, Hamas said that the verdicts contradicted the talk about a possible reconciliation with Fatah.

Hamas legislator Salah Bardaweel condemned the court ruling, saying that judges who “receive their salaries from the Zionists can’t be called Palestinian.” He said that the verdict was in the context of the PA’s ongoing security clampdown on Hamas supporters in the West Bank.

The families of the three defendants denied the charges and said their only “crime” was that they had provided shelter to Hamas gunmen who engaged in a firefight with PA security forces.

Gil Hoffman contributed to this report.

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