Doc's Talk: Asharq Al-Awsat Talks to Fatah's Mohammed Dahlan

Friday, December 10, 2010

Asharq Al-Awsat Talks to Fatah's Mohammed Dahlan

Salah Jumaa
Asharq Alawsat

CAIRO, Asharq Al-Awsat – Fatah Commissioner of Information, Mohammed Dahlan confirmed to Asharq Al-Awsat that "members of the Fatah Central Committee are united behind President Mahmoud Abbas." He also revealed that "informers" had poisoned his relationship with Abbas, although this has not reached the level of a "dispute."

Dahlan called for peaceful and creative steps to be taken in order to strengthen the perseverance of the Palestinian people, whilst he also predicted the outbreak of a third Intifada should the peace process remain stalled. Yesterday, Mohammed Dahlan met with Egyptian Intelligence chief Omar Suleiman in Cairo. Dahlan told Asharq Al-Awsat "I do not deny that there has been a misunderstanding with President Abu Mazen [Mahmoud Abbas]". He added "my respect for the President does not prevent me from expressing my opinion about the Palestinian Cause openly and transparently, during leadership meetings, and meetings of the Central Committee of the Fatah government”.

He went on to clarify his position, saying "however I have been surprised by this crisis and these leaks which have no purpose but to create confusion in the Palestinian situation”.

Dahlan added "there is always a group of individuals who are a burden on the shoulders of the Palestinian people and leadership. They spread slander, and I refuse to comment about what they attempted to spread here and there."

Dahlan also told Asharq Al-Awsat "I do not deny that misinterpretation and misunderstanding can occur within the Palestinian leadership, but I did not expect that this would reach the stage of disagreement. I do not consider there to be a dispute between myself and President Abbas, at least from my side, for what brings us together is common interests….his responsibility as President and my responsibility as a member of the Central Committee, the elected framework whose authority I do not exceed, and I will not allow others to offer their advice on how I operate."

As for reports about the security around Dahlan's home being down-graded and the closure of the "Palestine Tomorrow" television channel, which is a subsidiary of the parent "Al-Mustaqbal" company, Dahlan said that "I do not want to dwell on these issues, not because I am unable to explain them but because I am not in a race with anybody for power, and if there is any harm in these decision, this is against those who took them."

Regarding his relationship with the channel, Dahlan revealed that "it belonged to a private company owned by a group of investors who wanted to establish a channel to serve the Palestinian Cause." He added "I was able to convince these investors, some of them Palestinians, some of them Arabs [to invest in the channel]." Dahlan also revealed that the closure of this channel will be discussed by the Central Committee of Fatah at a future time. He said: "the priority here is to stop settlement activity, not to stop a channel that supports the Palestinian people”.

Responding to a question about whether his request to meet with Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Ghiet and Egyptian Intelligence Chief Omar Suleiman had been denied, Dahlan told Asharq Al-Awsat "this is a joke. I have both official and personal links with Minister Suleiman, and I am used to meeting Minister Suleiman and Foreign Minster Aboul Gheit whenever there is an important issue [to discuss]. Minister Suleiman did not refuse any request from any Palestinian official [to meet]; he will meet businessmen, important figures, and others. The relationship between the Palestinian leadership and Egypt is not governed by official protocols alone”.

Dahlan revealed that during his meeting with the Egyptian Intelligence Chief, Omar Suleiman – who is a Minister without portfolio – the two discussed three major concerns, including the unity of the Palestinian leadership, returning the peace process to its normal state with international guarantees being given and a return to serious negotiation [with Israel], and finally Palestinian national unity and reconciliation with the Hamas movement.

Dahlan also told Asharq Al-Awsat that Suleiman is closely observing the inter-Palestinian reconciliation, adding that "I think Fatah has done what it needs to when it agreed to the Egyptian Document, and Mr. Azzam al-Ahmed led the Fatah delegation for reconciliation to Damascus, where he met with the Hamas leadership where they [Hamas] recorded their concerns that they wanted to be taken into account."

Dahlan asked "why did Hamas not sign the Egyptian Document after their concerns were examined?" He called on Hamas to seize the opportunity and address the challenges being faced by the Palestinian people.

As for his position on the negotiations, Dahlan told Asharq Al-Awsat that "this corresponds with the position of the President and the [Fatah] Central Committee." He said that "Netanyahu’s rejections, and his failure to recognize a reference for the peace process, means that his term in office will not see any step forward in the peace process. He does not want peace so much as he wants to (restructure the occupation), and he wants us to agree to this plan. Therefore, I am against the negotiations on this basis, and this is the stated position of President Mahmoud Abbas, and we support it. I do not see an end on the horizon for the peace process, as long as the Netanyahu government is in power. Therefore we must have a plan in place to confront this."

In this regard, Dahlan told Asharq Al-Awsat that his proposal is to confront the Israeli arrogance through united Palestinian action, with different forces and factions uniting for national action. He also said "the practical response to Netanyahu's policies would be for Hamas to sign the Egyptian Document, and at the same time we should study the possibility of putting pressure on Israel, along with the Arab Monitoring Committee, Egypt, and the Arab States [putting pressure on Israel]."

Regarding the threats that the Palestinian Authority may dissolve itself, Dahlan told Asharq Al-Awsat that this was an emotional stance, not a political one, by those who "have realized that the Palestinian Authority does not exercise any of the rights stipulated by the Oslo Accords." He pointed out that Israel has not only stopped the peace process, but undermined all Palestinian achievements.

Dahlan said "we have many pressure cards, such as saying (subject to security coordination in the political process): if you stop this peace process, then security cooperation will stop as well. Security is a form of leverage in the hands of the Palestinian Authority, and it must be used correctly. This does not mean calling for another Intifada, on the contrary we will gain more from preserving the internal Palestinian situation, and stability in the West Ban. However at the same time we have the potential to apply pressure [on Israel]. I believe that the current situation is not normal, and one that all Palestinian reject."

Dahlan clarified his position to Asharq Al-Awsat, reiterating that "once again, I am not calling for, nor do I want to advocate, the use of violence, because this would mean paying a steep price, and we do not need this."

Dahlan stated there are civil ways [to apply pressure on Israel], including popular resistance for example, "which no one could blame us for. On the contrary, half of Israel will participate with us, and the international community will sympathize with us."

Regarding the US position towards the negotiations, Dahlan added "I do not doubt the intentions of the US President, but all of those working on the peace process have reached a dead-end for incomprehensive and inexcusable reasons. The US administration has moved from the option of solving the crisis to the option of managing the crisis, and today it has reached an impasse."

Comment: Listen to their own words. As long as the international community does not hold their feet to the fire of responsibility, they will continue to whine and act as immature people. Their strategy is to focus the narrative upon Israel, blame all the difficulties on us while abdicating their own responsibility to prepare their people for nation building. Theinconvenient truth is they do not want this resolved now-they have such internal struggles their policy statements are driven by they internal divisions. This is no way to form a nation.

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