Thursday
Jan222009
The Latest from Gaza/Palestine (22 January)
Thursday, January 22, 2009 at 19:55
Latest Post: The Gaza Conflict Reaches Home - Demonstrations at the University of Birmingham
11:40 p.m. And is that an Obama pre-emptive strike in the US approach to Iran? He declares that all external support for "terrorist organizations in the Middle East" must be halted.
11:35 p.m. But George Mitchell, I fear, may already be boxed in by his President. After declaring to applause that "the US will not torture", Obama firmly declared that Hamas must not re-arm and recognise Israel's right to exist.
The question is whether the US Government will discreetly talk to Hamas in advance of such a statement, hoping to move the organisation towards recognition of Tel Aviv, or set recognition as a pre-condition for any discussions. If the latter, the Mitchell mission is a non-starter.
11:30 p.m. George Mitchell's opening statement was professional and suitably non-committal. He said there was no conflict that could not be resolved and promised a sustained effort by the Obama Administration towards Middle Eastern peace.
A reader notes, "The word Palestinians was used twice, the word Ireland I lost count. Good to know they're sending a clear message."
10:45 p.m. Confirmation that George Mitchell will be Barack Obama's envoy to the Middle East. The former Senator and experienced negotiator, who helped broker the 1998 Northern Ireland agreement and served as Bill Clinton's envoy in 2000 to Israel and Palestine, is of Lebanese descent. Officials and Administration contacts are keen to play up Mitchell as an honest broker: ""He's neither pro-Israeli nor pro-Palestinian. He's, in a sense, neutral."
10 p.m. Ha'aretz reports that Hamas is pledging to distribute a total of $37 million to the Gazan population from Sunday. It's a shrewd political as well as economic move, if it can be pulled off, as the Palestinian Authority has been prevented by Israel from distributing $60 million in Gaza since the war began on 27 December.
5:30 p.m. We've just posted on the significance of an extended comment by Moussa Abu Marzook, the deputy political director of Hamas, in The Guardian of London.
1:55 p.m. Speaking to Al Jazeera's Ayman Moyheldin, European Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner not only rebuffs Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal's approach for talks but presses "inter-Palestinian reconcilation": "There is a President elected by all the Palestinians: that is Mahmoud Abbas." European Commissioner will not talk to Hamas until it "renounces violence and recognises Israel".
(Note: Technically, Abbas' term as President ended on 9 January.)
1:50 p.m. Important development: Egypt is hosting meeting with Palestinian factions under the umbrella of the Palestine Liberation Organisation, which includes Fatah and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. Hamas is still "forming its delegation" to go to Cairo. Topics will include reconstruction.
This is not quite a "reconciliation" meeting, but it at least gets Hamas in the same location as the groups in the PLO.
1:30 p.m. Al Jazeera reporting at least 100,000 Gazans homeless.
12:30 p.m. The United Nations has released photographs of the Israeli assault on its compound, including what appear to be white phosphorous "wedges" falling upon the buildings.
11:30 a.m. Stephen Erlanger's analysis in today's New York Times of the Israel/Palestine situation opens with a howler:
This, of course, is not a choice. The support of Abbas and the Palestinian Authority is part of the strategy to isolate Hamas. Erlanger apparently doesn't fathom that the political coding of "Palestinian unity government", as long as no one will speak with Hamas, means the support of one Palestinian faction over another.
11:10 a.m. Meanwhile, in the Symbolic but Largely Irrelevant Department: UN Security Council unanimously adopts statement, drafted by Britain and France, welcoming "ceasefires", expressing "grave concern" over humanitarian situation, and calling on member states to step up efforts to stop arms trafficking and ensure the reopening of all crossings in the territory.
It's largely irrelevant because the statement puts no pressure on Israel to relinquish its grip on Gazan economy and infrastructure, let alone reopen the crossings. Conversely, the reference to an end to arms trafficking will be seen as support of the US-Europe-Israel initiative to police the sea-lanes and tunnels of Gaza.
11:00 a.m. Juan Cole has an excellent review of the situation in Gaza, asking --- among other questions --- where Israel's military attempt to break Hamas has actually strengthened the organisation.
Morning update (10:30 a.m. Israel/Gaza time): The Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization issued a statement from Ramallah on Wednesday that "any resumption of peace talks with Israel would require the Jewish state to commit to withdraw from land occupied in 1967 and freeze all settlement activity".
This can be read as an attempt by the Palestinian Authority of Mahmoud Abbas to regain some initiative after the Gaza conflict, with the PA trying to shape an agenda ahead of President Obama's appointment of George Mitchell as Middle Eastern envoy later today. It will be intriguing to see if the US and Israel accept the PA's placing of these issues on the table; if they don't, then the PA is in a very difficult, almost subservient, position.
Of course, this does nothing to approach the Gaza situation but is in effect an attempt to work around it.
11:40 p.m. And is that an Obama pre-emptive strike in the US approach to Iran? He declares that all external support for "terrorist organizations in the Middle East" must be halted.
11:35 p.m. But George Mitchell, I fear, may already be boxed in by his President. After declaring to applause that "the US will not torture", Obama firmly declared that Hamas must not re-arm and recognise Israel's right to exist.
The question is whether the US Government will discreetly talk to Hamas in advance of such a statement, hoping to move the organisation towards recognition of Tel Aviv, or set recognition as a pre-condition for any discussions. If the latter, the Mitchell mission is a non-starter.
11:30 p.m. George Mitchell's opening statement was professional and suitably non-committal. He said there was no conflict that could not be resolved and promised a sustained effort by the Obama Administration towards Middle Eastern peace.
A reader notes, "The word Palestinians was used twice, the word Ireland I lost count. Good to know they're sending a clear message."
10:45 p.m. Confirmation that George Mitchell will be Barack Obama's envoy to the Middle East. The former Senator and experienced negotiator, who helped broker the 1998 Northern Ireland agreement and served as Bill Clinton's envoy in 2000 to Israel and Palestine, is of Lebanese descent. Officials and Administration contacts are keen to play up Mitchell as an honest broker: ""He's neither pro-Israeli nor pro-Palestinian. He's, in a sense, neutral."
10 p.m. Ha'aretz reports that Hamas is pledging to distribute a total of $37 million to the Gazan population from Sunday. It's a shrewd political as well as economic move, if it can be pulled off, as the Palestinian Authority has been prevented by Israel from distributing $60 million in Gaza since the war began on 27 December.
5:30 p.m. We've just posted on the significance of an extended comment by Moussa Abu Marzook, the deputy political director of Hamas, in The Guardian of London.
1:55 p.m. Speaking to Al Jazeera's Ayman Moyheldin, European Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner not only rebuffs Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal's approach for talks but presses "inter-Palestinian reconcilation": "There is a President elected by all the Palestinians: that is Mahmoud Abbas." European Commissioner will not talk to Hamas until it "renounces violence and recognises Israel".
(Note: Technically, Abbas' term as President ended on 9 January.)
1:50 p.m. Important development: Egypt is hosting meeting with Palestinian factions under the umbrella of the Palestine Liberation Organisation, which includes Fatah and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. Hamas is still "forming its delegation" to go to Cairo. Topics will include reconstruction.
This is not quite a "reconciliation" meeting, but it at least gets Hamas in the same location as the groups in the PLO.
1:30 p.m. Al Jazeera reporting at least 100,000 Gazans homeless.
12:30 p.m. The United Nations has released photographs of the Israeli assault on its compound, including what appear to be white phosphorous "wedges" falling upon the buildings.
11:30 a.m. Stephen Erlanger's analysis in today's New York Times of the Israel/Palestine situation opens with a howler:
The new Obama administration faces an immediate policy choice: support a Palestinian unity government, as Egypt and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, want, or continue to isolate Hamas and concentrate on building up the West Bank as a political alternative to radical Islam.
This, of course, is not a choice. The support of Abbas and the Palestinian Authority is part of the strategy to isolate Hamas. Erlanger apparently doesn't fathom that the political coding of "Palestinian unity government", as long as no one will speak with Hamas, means the support of one Palestinian faction over another.
11:10 a.m. Meanwhile, in the Symbolic but Largely Irrelevant Department: UN Security Council unanimously adopts statement, drafted by Britain and France, welcoming "ceasefires", expressing "grave concern" over humanitarian situation, and calling on member states to step up efforts to stop arms trafficking and ensure the reopening of all crossings in the territory.
It's largely irrelevant because the statement puts no pressure on Israel to relinquish its grip on Gazan economy and infrastructure, let alone reopen the crossings. Conversely, the reference to an end to arms trafficking will be seen as support of the US-Europe-Israel initiative to police the sea-lanes and tunnels of Gaza.
11:00 a.m. Juan Cole has an excellent review of the situation in Gaza, asking --- among other questions --- where Israel's military attempt to break Hamas has actually strengthened the organisation.
Morning update (10:30 a.m. Israel/Gaza time): The Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization issued a statement from Ramallah on Wednesday that "any resumption of peace talks with Israel would require the Jewish state to commit to withdraw from land occupied in 1967 and freeze all settlement activity".
This can be read as an attempt by the Palestinian Authority of Mahmoud Abbas to regain some initiative after the Gaza conflict, with the PA trying to shape an agenda ahead of President Obama's appointment of George Mitchell as Middle Eastern envoy later today. It will be intriguing to see if the US and Israel accept the PA's placing of these issues on the table; if they don't, then the PA is in a very difficult, almost subservient, position.
Of course, this does nothing to approach the Gaza situation but is in effect an attempt to work around it.
tagged Al Jazeera, Ayman Moyheldin, Barack Obama, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, Egypt, European Commission, Gaza, George Mitchell, Hamas, Israel, Khaled Meshaal, Mahmoud Abbas, Moussa Abu Marzook, New York Times, Palestine, Palestine Liberation Organization, Palestinian Authority, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Stephen Erlanger, United Nations Security Council, white phosphorous, white phosphorus in Middle East & Iran
Al Jazeera, Ayman Moyheldin, Barack Obama, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, Egypt, European Commission, Gaza, George Mitchell, Hamas, Israel, Khaled Meshaal, Mahmoud Abbas, Moussa Abu Marzook, New York Times, Palestine, Palestine Liberation Organization, Palestinian Authority, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Stephen Erlanger, United Nations Security Council, white phosphorous, white phosphorus in Middle East & Iran
Reader Comments (6)
Hi Scott, here is a question for you:
Who could unite the Palestinians and lead them towards a settlement?
Related to Mae's question, has anyone read Gaddafi's piece on a one-state solution in the NYT?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/22/opinion/22qaddafi.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
Actually it is time now for a new elections in palestine, as the period of the FORMER palestinian authority is already finished...
But imagine your self.. homless...hungry....cold....surrounded by injuries , grief and blockade , then somebody is telling you "why aren't you get along with your competitor?!!!
i think this was the aim from this barbaric israeli invasion to Gaza , to make sure that no resolution or elections can take place there ..
this is how tzipi levni can come and say with full innocence " WITH WHOM CAN WE NEGOTIATE !!!
Thanks for the article, Mike.
Unfortunately, Israelis wouldn't accept an Isratine because it would not be a Jewish state. I once posted my crackpot-sounding plan/solution on here. The US and Israel would never agree to it, of course. Nobody has come up with a better solution. And that's the other problem: the Palestinians continue to reject any proposal from outside parties, but never submit any of their own.
The whole point of having a Jewish homeland was to prevent another holocaust. I can understand this. My great grandfather and great uncle survived Dachau. I visited the place in 1990. But the Jews survived for 4,000 years without a state. The Jews were never driven to extinction. There is no guarantee that a piece of land can save a people from extinction, as we have seen in history. Large, powerful, thriving nations came and went -- Hittites, Babylonians, Phoenicians. They all held territory, and I believe the Hittites had their own empire! These great ancient nations are now EXTINCT. But the Jews, living under the Roman sword managed to survive. They survived under the Roman sword and they outlived Nazi Germany. They also survived the Islamic dhimmitude. They perished in huge numbers, but the nation has continued to endure. If God's chosen people can survive without a state for 4,000 years, then they should be able to endure without a state for another 4,000.
I think at this point that it may be a mistake to deal with a single Palestinian "leader", such as an Arafat, who can unite Palestinians (much as it would be difficult to identify a single Israeli leader). Instead I think, as Hanan Nashrawi said on Al Jazeera a few days ago, that an "inclusive" approach --- bringing in all Palestinian factions --- is needed. There may be divisions between the Palestinian factions on a number of matters but I think there also is consensus amongst them on certain issues (i.e., an end to Israeli right of military return for "security" in the West Bank and Gaza). Key here may be quietly ascertaining if Hamas will accept settlement based on pre-'67 borders.
Actually the ((((isratine)))) is a modern version of old palestine where jew, christians and muslims lived together on one land; TILL THE ZIONIST DECIDED TO TAKE IT ALL ONLY FOR THEMSELVES :
And yes Dave I agree with you israel will never accept this solution as the amin idea of zionism is to build a country for jew only (even the arab israeli have no place there and would never get the same rights as jewish people)
I don't understand if israel is made to secure all jewish people shall the other jews all around the world be expelled to israel , then we would never see any jew outside israel boarders !!!
jewdism is a religioun just like christianity and islam and any other religioun the palce of any religioun is the human heart not any land.
and if the jewish have suffered trouble during their history , then this is also very normal.
The coptics in egypt have suffered a horrible genocide under the roman impror too ( they still remember the names of the maryters tell today)
the muslims suffered in Andalus in spain a genocid that caused a 800 years civilization to be vanished in 10 years (people, houses, mosques everything)
BUT STILL NO ONE HAS CAME UP WITH THE IDEA TO EVACUATE A LAND FROM ITS ORIGINAL OWNERS AND GIVE IT ONLY FOR CHRISTIANS OR COPTIC ; OR MUSLIMS...
CAUSE THAT IS CALLED SIMPLY (((((((((((RACISTIC MANOUVERS))))))))