U.S.-brokered Israeli-Palestinian peace talks are underway this week, and Egypt's Sharm el-Sheikh is the site of the latest round of talks which is being facilitated by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Opinion from both sides of the ideological divide can be found splattered all over the blagosphere. Below is a summary and analysis of a few select pieces:
PRO-PALESTINE
Palestinians have already recognized Israel (Jerusalem Post)
Arab-American writer and comedian Ray Hanania claims Palestine has already recognized Israel's right to exist (and Mr. Hanania would be excluding the opinion of Hamas in this instance), now it's Israel's turn to make concessions. Palestinians have never rejected Israel's right to exist, but have rejected "Israel's imposed right to grab any land it wants."
Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said Palestine hasn't recognized the "Jewishness" of the state of Israel, which seems to go beyond the original parameters, according to the author. And Netanyahu has claimed that the Israelis have recognized the rights of Palestinians. However, Hanania asks the Prime Minister:
What rights are those Mr. Netanyahu? If Israelis can't recognize that Palestinians have land rights, then what rights are they offering in exchange for a cessation of violence to reinforce security for Israel? What is Israel going to give the Palestinians in exchange for bringing this conflict to a final resolution? Ironically, the extremist movements of both the Israelis and Palestinians are being fed by Israel's rightwing rhetoric. Many Israelis do not recognize the West Bank as the West Bank at all and in fact refer to the area as "Judea and Samaria." It is an offensive term that is the equivalent to "Zionist state" used by many Palestinians who refer to the 1948 lands that were occupied by Israel.
U.S. biggest supporter of Israel apartheid and illegal occupation of Palestine (Russia Today)
[see video clip below]
A Russia Today reporter asked Omar Barghouti, an activist from the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, if it's likely the settlement freeze would be extended before the expiration date within the next two weeks, and Barghouti replied that we should not fall into the Israeli propaganda trap of discussing such micro issues. The entire colonial settlement is illegal according to international law - all the settlements have to be removed.
Barghouti referred to them as "negations" and not negotiations because they negate Palestinian rights, they negate human rights in general and they negate international law. He called Israel a militant occupier with an apartheid system. Barghouti also asserted that a large majority of Palestinians oppose these negotiations because there is nothing to gain for Palestine. When asked if there was any support for Abbas, Barghouti answered:
"Abbas should not have been there to start with, he has no mandate to be there, he cannot speak on our behalf. Palestinian leaders have no democratic mandate to concede any of our basic rights, which include: ending the occupation (2) ending apartheid and (3) the right of Palestinian refugees to return."
The interviewer then posed a leading question by asking if America, considering its pro-Israel policies, could truly be seen as a neutral arbiter. Barghouti responded:
"Absolutely not. Very few Palestinian Arabs or conscientious persons in the West view the U.S. as a neutral bystander. The U.S. is the main sponsor of Israeli occupation and apartheid, the main funder, the main protector at the UN, diplomatically, politically, financially it's the main supporter of Israel, the U.S. is entirely complicit - the U.S. administration is a partner in crime."
"If the U.S. wants to be a neutral referee, it has to stick by international law and impose on Israel respect for international law. This is the key issue that's missing in this whole formula, resistance to Israel's belligerence, occupation and apartheid."
PRO-ISRAEL
Palestinianism is not a legitimate national identity (Ynet News / Israel)
Conservative Israeli writer Moshe Dann puts together an impressive historical and anthropological analysis of whether or not the Palestinians are a true nationality. His arguments were strong, yet one feels an undeniable strain of racist sentiment throughout his entire treatise. Mr. Dann writes:
Focused on opposition to Zionists, rather than a positive self-definition, "Palestinian identity" then, as now, was negative. Palestinian leaders, like the mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husayni, an ardent supporter of the Nazis, and arch-terrorist Yasser Arafat - "fathers" of Palestinianism - rejected Zionism and promoted terrorism.
The writer provides an interesting argument that Palestinians were once Jews and claims that they lack the basic traits required to be considered an ethnicity:
Before 1948, those who were called (and called themselves) "Palestinians" were Jews, not Arabs, although both carried the same British passports. In fact, only after Jews in Palestine called themselves Israelis, in 1948, could Arabs adopt "Palestinian" as theirs exclusively.
"Palestinianism" lacks the basic requirements of legitimate national identity: a separate, unique linguistic, cultural, ethnic, or religious basis; it is nothing more than a political-military construct, currently led by Fatah and Hamas terrorist organizations. However, it became legitimized by the UN.
As Israel freezes settlements, when is Palestine going to freeze the hate? (FOX News)
Rabbi Abraham Cooper and Dr. Harold Brackman from the Simon Wiesenthal Center feel that Palestine president Mahmoud Abbas has a "funny way of winning over Israelis", referring to Abbas's interview with East Jerusalem newspaper Al-Quds, when the Palestine president repeatedly told the interviewer that he will not compromise on settlements, refugees, Jerusalem, or a return by Israel to its 1967 borders. But what Mr. Abbas then mentioned was even more worrisome in the authors' minds:
While these moves can perhaps be dismissed as posturing, the other key point Abbas made was a dagger aimed at every Israeli-left, center, or right-who wants to believe in the possibility of coexistence. When asked about Netanyahu's demand that the PA recognize Israel as a Jewish state, Abbas replied, "Israel can call itself whatever it wants. We don't have to recognize those definitions."
to recognize those definitions."
The writers chastise Abbas for invoking "the Yasser Arafat notorious mantra that it's one step along the road to removing the Jewish state" and point out that many elements within Palestine - not only the terrorist group Hamas - spread vitriolic hate about the Jewsish state. The authors write:
In sermons, broadcasts (including cartoons designed to brainwash toddlers), and school lessons the message is repeated ad nauseam that Israelis are interlopers with no historic ties to the Holy Land while Jews everywhere are "apes and pigs" destined for annihilation.
Cooper and Brackman conclude by providing recommendations:
While the inevitable chorus from the Muslim and Arab world, America and the European Union pressures Israel to freeze settlements, who is going to pressure Palestinian leaders to freeze the hate?
To take the talks off life support, Obama must do three things. First, visit Israel and publicly acknowledge the Jewish people's 3,000-year narrative in the Holy Land. Second, show the Palestinians that there are consequences for reneging on commitments. Third, the president should let friend and foe alike know that-no matter what-the Iranian regime that has given Hezbollah 60,000 rockets to threaten Israel will not be allowed to go nuclear.
Israel is a democracy (except for the ruling over another people part)
Palestine blasts Ahmadinejad for criticizing Middle East peace process
Dagestan suicide attack kills 5 at Russian army base
==
For more Geopolitics Examiner articles, click here.
For Afghanistan Headlines Examiner articles, click here.
Get the latest Geopolitics headlines delivered straight to your inbox. Just click the SUBSCRIBE button located above the article and provide your email.
Comments