Post by Paddy by Grace on May 21, 2009 22:58:50 GMT -7
By Stan Goodenough
July 25th, 2005
Apparently, visiting US Secretary of State Condoleezza
Rice demanded to
know from Israeli officials this weekend why the
Sharon government was
criticizing Mahmoud Abbas while his "Preventive
Security Forces" were
being shot at by Hamas.
Her implication: Can't you see the man is seriously
trying to assert
control in Gaza? It is in Israel's interest,
especially with the
looming
"disengagement," that this "moderate" and "elected"
Arab leader be
supported in his efforts.
Her admitted fear: Hamas looks increasingly like
taking over control of
the Strip. Where will that leave the US-led initiative
for a two-state
solution when, as Prime Minister Ariel Sharon warned
her after more
Jews
were murdered by Arab killers at the weekend, Israel's
response to
future terrorism from Gaza would escalate
dramatically?
There is no question that a number of Arabs have
killed one another as
Abbas has tried to impress the US with his
determination to exert
control over the "opposition forces".
There is also no question that it is vital to the Arab
strategy for
securing the establishment of a Palestinian state on
Jewish land that
the US continue to support the notion that Abbas is
the "moderate"
while
Hamas and co. are the "enemies of peace."
This illusion worked wonders for Abbas's revered
predecessor, Yasser
Arafat.
For years, as the disastrous Oslo Process inflicted
growing casualties
on the people of Israel, (and, as a consequence, on
the Palestinian
Arabs) Arafat worked at perfecting a division of labor
between the PA,
which he headed, and Hamas and other Islamic groups,
which he
controlled.
Israeli and US intelligence services have confirmed
Arafat's personal
oversight of this policy: He would negotiate with
Israel for as long as
he could receive concessions. When Israel stalled, he
would give a
green
light to the terror groups to attack, personally
paying them to carry
out their "operations", knowing that international
pressure would
subsequently mount on Israel not to "give in to the
terrorists", but to
return to negotiations with the PA.
It was an approach that saw Israel taking great "risks
for peace" that
only led to further funerals for Jewish victims of
Arab terrorism.
After September 2000, Arafat's own Tanzim and Fatah
Hawks were at the
forefront of this terrorism which, at the
acknowledgment of his own
officials, Arafat unleashed.
That wave of seemingly unending violence (which
continues unabated, as
witnessed this weekend) has seen over 25,000 Arab
attacks on Israel's
Jews which have left 1,050 people dead and over 5,500
wounded and
maimed.
Individually and collectively, Rice's demands, if met,
will further
weaken Israel's damaged security, which has been
eroded by the
political
actions of successive US administrations at least
since 1991.
Analysts believe that Washington views this
"disengagement" as its best
bet for ensuring the eventual implementation of
President George W.
Bush's
"personal commitment" to overseeing the creation of a
Palestinian state
during his second term.
The US also believes that a successful transfer of
Gaza out of Israel's
control would boost the American effort to sow the
seeds of a
democratic
culture in the Arab world.
What a waste of two presidential terms both these
goals look set to be.
For decades, the Arab side has remained unyielding in
its purpose to
destroy Israel by carrying out its two-stage strategy,
using diplomacy
and then terrorism to forge ahead.
As for its dreams for the Arab world, Washington's
realists and
pragmatists will first have to concede the truth:
Democracy and Islam
are oil and water; Islam has to be bound before
democracy can take
root.
There is no sign anywhere above the horizon of such an
awareness even
dawning in the United States. And while, from their
comfort zones and
portals of power, American officialdom doggedly
pursues these policies
that cannot work, Hamas and the PA continue to
collaborate, and
Israelis
and others in the Middle East continue to pay with
their lives.
July 25th, 2005
Apparently, visiting US Secretary of State Condoleezza
Rice demanded to
know from Israeli officials this weekend why the
Sharon government was
criticizing Mahmoud Abbas while his "Preventive
Security Forces" were
being shot at by Hamas.
Her implication: Can't you see the man is seriously
trying to assert
control in Gaza? It is in Israel's interest,
especially with the
looming
"disengagement," that this "moderate" and "elected"
Arab leader be
supported in his efforts.
Her admitted fear: Hamas looks increasingly like
taking over control of
the Strip. Where will that leave the US-led initiative
for a two-state
solution when, as Prime Minister Ariel Sharon warned
her after more
Jews
were murdered by Arab killers at the weekend, Israel's
response to
future terrorism from Gaza would escalate
dramatically?
There is no question that a number of Arabs have
killed one another as
Abbas has tried to impress the US with his
determination to exert
control over the "opposition forces".
There is also no question that it is vital to the Arab
strategy for
securing the establishment of a Palestinian state on
Jewish land that
the US continue to support the notion that Abbas is
the "moderate"
while
Hamas and co. are the "enemies of peace."
This illusion worked wonders for Abbas's revered
predecessor, Yasser
Arafat.
For years, as the disastrous Oslo Process inflicted
growing casualties
on the people of Israel, (and, as a consequence, on
the Palestinian
Arabs) Arafat worked at perfecting a division of labor
between the PA,
which he headed, and Hamas and other Islamic groups,
which he
controlled.
Israeli and US intelligence services have confirmed
Arafat's personal
oversight of this policy: He would negotiate with
Israel for as long as
he could receive concessions. When Israel stalled, he
would give a
green
light to the terror groups to attack, personally
paying them to carry
out their "operations", knowing that international
pressure would
subsequently mount on Israel not to "give in to the
terrorists", but to
return to negotiations with the PA.
It was an approach that saw Israel taking great "risks
for peace" that
only led to further funerals for Jewish victims of
Arab terrorism.
After September 2000, Arafat's own Tanzim and Fatah
Hawks were at the
forefront of this terrorism which, at the
acknowledgment of his own
officials, Arafat unleashed.
That wave of seemingly unending violence (which
continues unabated, as
witnessed this weekend) has seen over 25,000 Arab
attacks on Israel's
Jews which have left 1,050 people dead and over 5,500
wounded and
maimed.
Individually and collectively, Rice's demands, if met,
will further
weaken Israel's damaged security, which has been
eroded by the
political
actions of successive US administrations at least
since 1991.
Analysts believe that Washington views this
"disengagement" as its best
bet for ensuring the eventual implementation of
President George W.
Bush's
"personal commitment" to overseeing the creation of a
Palestinian state
during his second term.
The US also believes that a successful transfer of
Gaza out of Israel's
control would boost the American effort to sow the
seeds of a
democratic
culture in the Arab world.
What a waste of two presidential terms both these
goals look set to be.
For decades, the Arab side has remained unyielding in
its purpose to
destroy Israel by carrying out its two-stage strategy,
using diplomacy
and then terrorism to forge ahead.
As for its dreams for the Arab world, Washington's
realists and
pragmatists will first have to concede the truth:
Democracy and Islam
are oil and water; Islam has to be bound before
democracy can take
root.
There is no sign anywhere above the horizon of such an
awareness even
dawning in the United States. And while, from their
comfort zones and
portals of power, American officialdom doggedly
pursues these policies
that cannot work, Hamas and the PA continue to
collaborate, and
Israelis
and others in the Middle East continue to pay with
their lives.