Diana Buttu: Palestinian Refugee Rights & Negotiations

[P F Tinmore]

Interesting critique of the peace process.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAKOtINJHWw]Diana Buttu: Palestinian Refugee Rights & Negotiations - YouTube[/ame]

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Diana Buttu's presentation is already three years old. It is not about current talks.

Interesting critique of the peace process.

(COMMENT)

While Ms Buttu claims not to be HAMAS or FATAH, clearly she criticized FATAH and the leadership (not that I care, but the importance of her side will become clear).

She believes that the outcomes of previous negotiations did not fail from the Israeli, but put the Palestinians at a disadvantage. She believed that the previous negotiations compromised the Palestinian "Right of Return" (ROR), and has allowed Israel to confine the Palestinians to an ever diminishing area of control.

Ms Buttu says openly that She is critical of the PLO and the focus of statehood and does not believe in the process of negotiation. This is an Article 13 Premise (initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement).

She uses the term "Palestinian Homeland" without ever defining what that is, and that the Palestinian People need to focus on the ROR.

This is HAMAS 101, nothing new and nothing really applicable, unless you are not interested in a negotiated peace settlement, and interested only in the continued struggle.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Diana Buttu's presentation is already three years old. It is not about current talks.

OK, so what is different now?

Interesting critique of the peace process.

(COMMENT)

(1)While Ms Buttu claims not to be HAMAS or FATAH, clearly she criticized FATAH and the leadership (not that I care, but the importance of her side will become clear).

(2)She believes that the outcomes of previous negotiations did not fail from the Israeli, but put the Palestinians at a disadvantage. (3)She believed that the previous negotiations compromised the Palestinian "Right of Return" (ROR), and has allowed Israel to confine the Palestinians to an ever diminishing area of control.

(1) Fatah screwed the negotiations, not Hamas.

(2) They did.

(3) They did.

Ms Buttu says openly that She is critical of the PLO and the focus of statehood and does not believe in the process of negotiation. This is an Article 13 Premise (initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement).

She uses the term "Palestinian Homeland" without ever defining what that is, and that the Palestinian People need to focus on the ROR.

This is HAMAS 101, nothing new and nothing really applicable, unless you are not interested in a negotiated peace settlement, and interested only in the continued struggle.

She does criticize the PLO as she should. It has nothing to do with Hamas.

Why would you be confused about the Palestinian homeland?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Bloodrock44]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Diana Buttu's presentation is already three years old. It is not about current talks.

OK, so what is different now?

(COMMENT)

(1)While Ms Buttu claims not to be HAMAS or FATAH, clearly she criticized FATAH and the leadership (not that I care, but the importance of her side will become clear).

(2)She believes that the outcomes of previous negotiations did not fail from the Israeli, but put the Palestinians at a disadvantage. (3)She believed that the previous negotiations compromised the Palestinian "Right of Return" (ROR), and has allowed Israel to confine the Palestinians to an ever diminishing area of control.

(1) Fatah screwed the negotiations, not Hamas.

(2) They did.

(3) They did.

Ms Buttu says openly that She is critical of the PLO and the focus of statehood and does not believe in the process of negotiation. This is an Article 13 Premise (initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement).

She uses the term "Palestinian Homeland" without ever defining what that is, and that the Palestinian People need to focus on the ROR.

This is HAMAS 101, nothing new and nothing really applicable, unless you are not interested in a negotiated peace settlement, and interested only in the continued struggle.

She does criticize the PLO as she should. It has nothing to do with Hamas.

Why would you be confused about the Palestinian homeland?

Most Respectfully,
R

We are not confused about the Palestinian homeland. It's called Jordan.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Diana Buttu's presentation is already three years old. It is not about current talks.

OK, so what is different now?



(1) Fatah screwed the negotiations, not Hamas.

(2) They did.

(3) They did.



She does criticize the PLO as she should. It has nothing to do with Hamas.

Why would you be confused about the Palestinian homeland?

Most Respectfully,
R

We are not confused about the Palestinian homeland. It's called Jordan.

Jordan has refugees who can't return?

Got a link?

 

[docmauser1]

Jordan has refugees who can't return?

Of course! The "palistanians", suntanning in Lebanon after the Black September, for example. heh

 

[Kondor3]

What?

The Israelis are slowly but surely nudging the remaining Palestinians out of Rump Palestine?

Hold the presses!!!

Now there's something new on the world stage!

Not.

Thank you, Captain Obvious.

The rest is minutiae by comparison.

 

[georgephillip]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Diana Buttu's presentation is already three years old. It is not about current talks.

OK, so what is different now?



(1) Fatah screwed the negotiations, not Hamas.

(2) They did.

(3) They did.



She does criticize the PLO as she should. It has nothing to do with Hamas.

Why would you be confused about the Palestinian homeland?

Most Respectfully,
R

We are not confused about the Palestinian homeland. It's called Jordan.

"The Arab tribes that settled Jund Filastin after the Muslim conquest were the Lakhm, Kindah, Qais, Amilah, Judham and the Kinanah;[1] at the time of the Arab conquest, the region had been inhabited mainly by Aramaic-speaking Monophysite Christian peasants. The population of the region did not become predominantly Muslim and Arab in identity until several centuries after the conquest.

"At its greatest extent, Jund Filastin extended from Rafah in the south to Lajjun in the north, and from the Mediterranean coast well to the east of the southern part of the Jordan River. The mountains of Edom, and the town of Zoar at the southeastern end of the Dead Sea were included in the district..."

Jews will always have Brooklyn.

Jund Filastin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[docmauser1]

"The Arab tribes that settled Jund Filastin after the Muslim conquest were the Lakhm, Kindah, Qais, Amilah, Judham and the Kinanah;[1] at the time of the Arab conquest, the region had been inhabited mainly by Aramaic-speaking Monophysite Christian peasants. The population of the region did not become predominantly Muslim and Arab in identity until several centuries after the conquest. "At its greatest extent, Jund Filastin extended from Rafah in the south to Lajjun in the north, and from the Mediterranean coast well to the east of the southern part of the Jordan River. The mountains of Edom, and the town of Zoar at the southeastern end of the Dead Sea were included in the district..." Jews will always have Brooklyn.

Ah, arab expansionism.

 

[georgephillip]

"The Arab tribes that settled Jund Filastin after the Muslim conquest were the Lakhm, Kindah, Qais, Amilah, Judham and the Kinanah;[1] at the time of the Arab conquest, the region had been inhabited mainly by Aramaic-speaking Monophysite Christian peasants. The population of the region did not become predominantly Muslim and Arab in identity until several centuries after the conquest. "At its greatest extent, Jund Filastin extended from Rafah in the south to Lajjun in the north, and from the Mediterranean coast well to the east of the southern part of the Jordan River. The mountains of Edom, and the town of Zoar at the southeastern end of the Dead Sea were included in the district..." Jews will always have Brooklyn.

Ah, arab expansionism.

As opposed to creeping (Zionist) annexation proudly sponsored by:

U.S. Vetoes of UN Security Council Resolutions Critical to Israel | Jewish Virtual Library

 

[docmauser1]

"The Arab tribes that settled Jund Filastin after the Muslim conquest were the Lakhm, Kindah, Qais, Amilah, Judham and the Kinanah;[1] at the time of the Arab conquest, the region had been inhabited mainly by Aramaic-speaking Monophysite Christian peasants. The population of the region did not become predominantly Muslim and Arab in identity until several centuries after the conquest. "At its greatest extent, Jund Filastin extended from Rafah in the south to Lajjun in the north, and from the Mediterranean coast well to the east of the southern part of the Jordan River. The mountains of Edom, and the town of Zoar at the southeastern end of the Dead Sea were included in the district..." Jews will always have Brooklyn.

Ah, arab expansionism.

As opposed to creeping (Zionist) annexation proudly sponsored by:U.S. Vetoes of UN Security Council Resolutions Critical to Israel | Jewish Virtual Library

Palistanians have to have something to cry annexation, of course, don't they?

 

[RoccoR]

georgephillip, docmauser1, et al,

I may be confused here.

"The Arab tribes that settled Jund Filastin after the Muslim conquest were the Lakhm, Kindah, Qais, Amilah, Judham and the Kinanah;[1] at the time of the Arab conquest, the region had been inhabited mainly by Aramaic-speaking Monophysite Christian peasants. The population of the region did not become predominantly Muslim and Arab in identity until several centuries after the conquest. "At its greatest extent, Jund Filastin extended from Rafah in the south to Lajjun in the north, and from the Mediterranean coast well to the east of the southern part of the Jordan River. The mountains of Edom, and the town of Zoar at the southeastern end of the Dead Sea were included in the district..." Jews will always have Brooklyn.

Ah, arab expansionism.

As opposed to creeping (Zionist) annexation proudly sponsored by:

U.S. Vetoes of UN Security Council Resolutions Critical to Israel | Jewish Virtual Library

(COMMENT)

I thought the last veto on these issues was in 2011, and it was placed on veto for diplomatic cause?

Condemning the continuation of settlement activities by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and of all other measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Territory, in violation of international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions,

1. Reaffirms that the Israeli settlements established in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, are illegal and constitute a major obstacle to the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;

SOURCE: S/2011/24 18 February 2011

The proposed resolution, supra, included a statement to "violation" and a statement to the "obstacle for peace." But the veto was based on:

a. Article V - TRANSITIONAL PERIOD AND PERMANENT STATUS NEGOTIATIONS

(A/48/486 S/26560 11 October 1993) Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements
3. It is understood that these negotiations shall cover remaining issues, including: Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, relations and cooperation with other neighbours, and other issues of common interest.​

b. Nothing in the accords prevents the establishment of settlements.

Section B - Specific Understandings and Agreements, Article IV, Paragraph 1, Agreed Minutes to the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements
(A/48/486 S/26560 11 October 1993) and (A/51/889 S/1997/357 5 May 1997)
1. Jurisdiction of the Council will cover West Bank and Gaza Strip territory, except for issues that will be negotiated in the permanent status negotiations: Jerusalem, settlements, military locations and Israelis.

ARTICLE XII (Oslo II)

Arrangements for Security and Public Order

1. In order to guarantee public order and internal security for the Palestinians of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, the Council shall establish a strong police force as set out in Article XIV below. Israel shall continue to carry the responsibility for defense against external threats, including the responsibility for protecting the Egyptian and Jordanian borders, and for defense against external threats from the sea and from the air, as well as the responsibility for overall security of Israelis and Settlements, for the purpose of safeguarding their internal security and public order, and will have all the powers to take the steps necessary to meet this responsibility.

2. Agreed security arrangements and coordination mechanisms are specified in Annex I.

3. A Joint Coordination and Cooperation Committee for Mutual Security Purposes (hereinafter "the JSC"), as well as Joint Regional Security Committees (hereinafter "RSCs") and Joint District Coordination Offices (hereinafter "DCOs"), are hereby established as provided for in Annex I.

4. The security arrangements provided for in this Agreement and in Annex I may be reviewed at the request of either Party and may be amended by mutual agreement of the Parties. Specific review arrangements are included in Annex I.

5. For the purpose of this Agreement, "the Settlements" means, in the West Bank - the settlements in Area C; and in the Gaza Strip - the Gush Katif and Erez settlement areas, as well as the other settlements in the Gaza Strip, as shown on attached map No. 2.​

CHAPTER 3 - LEGAL AFFAIRS - ARTICLE XVII - Jurisdiction (A/51/889 S/1997/357 5 May 1997)

a. The territorial jurisdiction of the Council shall encompass Gaza Strip territory, except for the Settlements and the Military Installation Area shown on map No. 2, and West Bank territory, except for Area C which, except for the issues that will be negotiated in the permanent status negotiations, will be gradually transferred to Palestinian jurisdiction in three phases, each to take place after an interval of six months, to be completed 18 months after the inauguration of the Council. At this time, the jurisdiction of the Council will cover West Bank and Gaza Strip territory, except for the issues that will be negotiated in the permanent status negotiations.

Territorial jurisdiction includes land, subsoil and territorial waters, in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement.

b. The functional jurisdiction of the Council extends to all powers and responsibilities transferred to the Council, as specified in this Agreement or in any future agreements that may be reached between the Parties during the interim period.

c. The territorial and functional jurisdiction of the Council will apply to all persons, except for Israelis, unless otherwise provided in this Agreement.

d. Notwithstanding subparagraph a. above, the Council shall have functional jurisdiction in Area C, as detailed in Article IV of Annex III.

3. The Council has, within its authority, legislative, executive and judicial powers and responsibilities, as provided for in this Agreement.

4. a. Israel, through its military government, has the authority over areas that are not under the territorial jurisdiction of the Council, powers and responsibilities not transferred to the Council and Israelis.

b. To this end, the Israeli military government shall retain the necessary legislative, judicial and executive powers and responsibilities, in accordance with international law. This provision shall not derogate from Israel's applicable legislation over Israelis in personam.
​

Nothing in the Accords actually prohibits the development of settlements. It is a matter to be negotiated and placed in the permanent status negotiations. Until then, the interim agreement set the conditions for authority and jurisdiction.

Similarly, the International Court of Justice, Summary Judgment in Advisory Opinion #5, does say that "The Court concludes that the Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (including East Jerusalem) have been established in breach of international law." (Paras. 115-122)(Page 10) However, the Court was not a hearing and adversarial. Both sides were not presented, and the Court did not consider the Oslo Accords.

Third point is, none of the settlements are annexed territories. That is still in the permanent status negotiations pending final settlement and peace; by interim agreement between the Israelis and Palestinians (force of law).

THUS: VETO for technical cause.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

Rocco,

Did elected representatives of the Palestinians negotiate or sign Oslo?

Was it ever placed before the people for approval?

What did Oslo accomplish?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you've asked a question! I'm sure it will bore more people. I think (I'm not sure) that it is fairly common knowledge. So, I'll thumbnail it.

Rocco,

Did elected representatives of the Palestinians negotiate or sign Oslo?

Was it ever placed before the people for approval?

What did Oslo accomplish?

(OBSERVATION)

Part of this is an adaptation of the Chicken or the Egg question (which came first). The Palestinian National Authority (PNA) came into being in 1964. It became the de facto interim government of the Palestinian People, absent any other established leadership or diplomatic voice. The PNA predates HAMAS by a decade (or more). The PNA Declared Independence in 1988 on behalf of, and as the voice of, the Palestinians.

Imbedded in the Oslo Accords, is:

The Government of the State of Israel and the PLO team (in the Jordanian-Palestinian delegation to the Middle East Peace Conference) (the "Palestinian Delegation"), representing the Palestinian people, agree that it is time to put an end to decades of confrontation and conflict, recognize their mutual legitimate and political rights, and strive to live in peaceful coexistence and mutual dignity and security and achieve a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement and historic reconciliation through the agreed political process. Accordingly, the two sides agree to the following principles:

SOURCE: A/48/486 S/26560 11 October 1993

The Interim Government was established to govern the West Bank and Gaza Strip; to give the Palestinians a mechanism by which to express their preferences. It is a consequence of the arrangement known as the Agreement on the Gaza Strip and the Jericho Area: Palestinian Authority, International Presence, Paris Protocol [(More Commonly Known as (MCKA): The Gaza–Jericho Agreement)(A/49/180 S/1994/727 20 June 1994)].

At the time of the Oslo Accords, the 1988 Interim Government was not established as a Democracy or Republic.

Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and

Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory:

The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem.

Seventh Arab Summit Conference resolves the following:

1. To affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to return to their homeland;

2. To affirm the right of the Palestinian people to establish an independent national authority under the command of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated. This authority, once it is established, shall enjoy the support of the Arab states in all fields and at all levels;

3. To support the Palestine Liberation Organization in the exercise of its responsibility at the national and international levels within the framework of Arab commitment;​

SOURCE: Resolution on Palestine Rabat, Morocco 28 october 1974

SOURCE: A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988

(COMMENT)

• Did elected representatives of the Palestinians negotiate or sign Oslo?
  • NO ---> Recognized Representatives by the Arab Conference

• Was it ever placed before the people for approval?
  • NO ---> Arab Rules

• What did Oslo accomplish?
  • This is up to the Palestinian to decide. But it is a comprehensive interim agreement.

I'm not sure that the Palestinian People recognized the windows of opportunity that the Oslo Accords opened.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you've asked a question! I'm sure it will bore more people. I think (I'm not sure) that it is fairly common knowledge. So, I'll thumbnail it.

Rocco,

Did elected representatives of the Palestinians negotiate or sign Oslo?

Was it ever placed before the people for approval?

What did Oslo accomplish?

(OBSERVATION)

Part of this is an adaptation of the Chicken or the Egg question (which came first). The Palestinian National Authority (PNA) came into being in 1964. It became the de facto interim government of the Palestinian People, absent any other established leadership or diplomatic voice. The PNA predates HAMAS by a decade (or more). The PNA Declared Independence in 1988 on behalf of, and as the voice of, the Palestinians.

Imbedded in the Oslo Accords, is:

The Government of the State of Israel and the PLO team (in the Jordanian-Palestinian delegation to the Middle East Peace Conference) (the "Palestinian Delegation"), representing the Palestinian people, agree that it is time to put an end to decades of confrontation and conflict, recognize their mutual legitimate and political rights, and strive to live in peaceful coexistence and mutual dignity and security and achieve a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement and historic reconciliation through the agreed political process. Accordingly, the two sides agree to the following principles:

SOURCE: A/48/486 S/26560 11 October 1993

The Interim Government was established to govern the West Bank and Gaza Strip; to give the Palestinians a mechanism by which to express their preferences. It is a consequence of the arrangement known as the Agreement on the Gaza Strip and the Jericho Area: Palestinian Authority, International Presence, Paris Protocol [(More Commonly Known as (MCKA): The Gaza–Jericho Agreement)(A/49/180 S/1994/727 20 June 1994)].

At the time of the Oslo Accords, the 1988 Interim Government was not established as a Democracy or Republic.

Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and

Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory:

The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem.

Seventh Arab Summit Conference resolves the following:

1. To affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to return to their homeland;

2. To affirm the right of the Palestinian people to establish an independent national authority under the command of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated. This authority, once it is established, shall enjoy the support of the Arab states in all fields and at all levels;

3. To support the Palestine Liberation Organization in the exercise of its responsibility at the national and international levels within the framework of Arab commitment;​

SOURCE: Resolution on Palestine Rabat, Morocco 28 october 1974

SOURCE: A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988

(COMMENT)

• Did elected representatives of the Palestinians negotiate or sign Oslo?
  • NO ---> Recognized Representatives by the Arab Conference

• Was it ever placed before the people for approval?
  • NO ---> Arab Rules

• What did Oslo accomplish?
  • This is up to the Palestinian to decide. But it is a comprehensive interim agreement.

I'm not sure that the Palestinian People recognized the windows of opportunity that the Oslo Accords opened.

Most Respectfully,
R

Didn't it expire after 5 years a complete flop?

The Palestinians set up a new representative government with the 2003 amended Basic Law.

Shouldn't the present government be representing the people? The appointed interim government has expired and has been replaced.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore; et al,

There is a dispute, as I understand it. It rests in the poor construction of the Basic Law.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you've asked a question! I'm sure it will bore more people. I think (I'm not sure) that it is fairly common knowledge. So, I'll thumbnail it.

Rocco,

Did elected representatives of the Palestinians negotiate or sign Oslo?

Was it ever placed before the people for approval?

What did Oslo accomplish?

(OBSERVATION)

Part of this is an adaptation of the Chicken or the Egg question (which came first). The Palestinian National Authority (PNA) came into being in 1964. It became the de facto interim government of the Palestinian People, absent any other established leadership or diplomatic voice. The PNA predates HAMAS by a decade (or more). The PNA Declared Independence in 1988 on behalf of, and as the voice of, the Palestinians.

Imbedded in the Oslo Accords, is:



The Interim Government was established to govern the West Bank and Gaza Strip; to give the Palestinians a mechanism by which to express their preferences. It is a consequence of the arrangement known as the Agreement on the Gaza Strip and the Jericho Area: Palestinian Authority, International Presence, Paris Protocol [(More Commonly Known as (MCKA): The Gaza–Jericho Agreement)(A/49/180 S/1994/727 20 June 1994)].

At the time of the Oslo Accords, the 1988 Interim Government was not established as a Democracy or Republic.

Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and

Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory:

The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem.


SOURCE: A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988

(COMMENT)

• Did elected representatives of the Palestinians negotiate or sign Oslo?
  • NO ---> Recognized Representatives by the Arab Conference

• Was it ever placed before the people for approval?
  • NO ---> Arab Rules

• What did Oslo accomplish?
  • This is up to the Palestinian to decide. But it is a comprehensive interim agreement.

I'm not sure that the Palestinian People recognized the windows of opportunity that the Oslo Accords opened.

Most Respectfully,
R

Didn't it expire after 5 years a complete flop?

The Palestinians set up a new representative government with the 2003 amended Basic Law.

Shouldn't the present government be representing the people? The appointed interim government has expired and has been replaced.

(COMMENT)

First, at the time of the Oslo Accords, there was no Basic Law (BL) in effect. The Accords are still in play.

Second, there is no real time limitation to the Accords. They are valid until withdrawn.

Third, there is no limitation on the term of office for either the HAMAS Government or the PNA Presidency. Article 36: The term of the presidency of the National Authority shall be the interim phase, after which the President shall be elected in accordance with the law.

Four: Under Article 4, BL, the State of Palestine is an Islamic Government under Shari'a Law. Nor is there a Foreign Affairs clause, per sa. So, I cannot answer the need for ratification.

The BL doesn't seem to address the termination of the interim period; but it may be interim period could extended until the the new Constitution of the State of Palestine is established (Article 115).

Five: The President of the National Authority shall be directly elected by the people.​

So, I can't answer the question. The Hamas Government was initially installed under election, but the Government of Gazan Prime Minister (PM) Haniyye was affirmed in September 2012, without an election. The President shall have the right to dismiss the Prime Minister or to accept his resignation and to request him to convene the Council of Ministers (Article 45). Thus, it appears that the PM is subordinate to the President.

Also, we do not know the impact of the Arab Summit Framework, and the general recognition it grants to the PNA President and the of the Gazan PM.

This is a case that demonstrates that the Palestinians may yet be a people unable to stand on their own (LoN Covenant Article 22 concept).

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore; et al,

There is a dispute, as I understand it. It rests in the poor construction of the Basic Law.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you've asked a question! I'm sure it will bore more people. I think (I'm not sure) that it is fairly common knowledge. So, I'll thumbnail it.


(OBSERVATION)

Part of this is an adaptation of the Chicken or the Egg question (which came first). The Palestinian National Authority (PNA) came into being in 1964. It became the de facto interim government of the Palestinian People, absent any other established leadership or diplomatic voice. The PNA predates HAMAS by a decade (or more). The PNA Declared Independence in 1988 on behalf of, and as the voice of, the Palestinians.

Imbedded in the Oslo Accords, is:



The Interim Government was established to govern the West Bank and Gaza Strip; to give the Palestinians a mechanism by which to express their preferences. It is a consequence of the arrangement known as the Agreement on the Gaza Strip and the Jericho Area: Palestinian Authority, International Presence, Paris Protocol [(More Commonly Known as (MCKA): The Gaza–Jericho Agreement)(A/49/180 S/1994/727 20 June 1994)].

At the time of the Oslo Accords, the 1988 Interim Government was not established as a Democracy or Republic.


(COMMENT)

• Did elected representatives of the Palestinians negotiate or sign Oslo?
  • NO ---> Recognized Representatives by the Arab Conference

• Was it ever placed before the people for approval?
  • NO ---> Arab Rules

• What did Oslo accomplish?
  • This is up to the Palestinian to decide. But it is a comprehensive interim agreement.

I'm not sure that the Palestinian People recognized the windows of opportunity that the Oslo Accords opened.

Most Respectfully,
R

Didn't it expire after 5 years a complete flop?

The Palestinians set up a new representative government with the 2003 amended Basic Law.

Shouldn't the present government be representing the people? The appointed interim government has expired and has been replaced.

(COMMENT)

First, at the time of the Oslo Accords, there was no Basic Law (BL) in effect. The Accords are still in play.

Second, there is no real time limitation to the Accords. They are valid until withdrawn.​

The aim of the Israeli Palestinian negotiations within the current Middle East peace process is, among other things, to establish a Palestinian Interim Self-Government Authority, the elected Council, (the "Council") for the Palestinian people in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, for a transitional period not exceeding five years, leading to a permanent settlement based on Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.

The Avalon Project : Israel-Palestine Liberation Organization Agreement : 1993

Third, there is no limitation on the term of office for either the HAMAS Government or the PNA Presidency. Article 36: The term of the presidency of the National Authority shall be the interim phase, after which the President shall be elected in accordance with the law.​

A 2005 amendment changed that.

Article 36

The term of the presidency of the National Authority shall be four years. The President shall have the right to nominate himself for a second term of presidency, provided that he shall not occupy the position of the presidency more than two consecutive terms.

Four: Under Article 4, BL, the State of Palestine is an Islamic Government under Shari'a Law. Nor is there a Foreign Affairs clause, per sa. So, I cannot answer the need for ratification.

The BL doesn't seem to address the termination of the interim period; but it may be interim period could extended until the the new Constitution of the State of Palestine is established (Article 115).

Five: The President of the National Authority shall be directly elected by the people.​

So, I can't answer the question. The Hamas Government was initially installed under election, but the Government of Gazan Prime Minister (PM) Haniyye was affirmed in September 2012, without an election. The President shall have the right to dismiss the Prime Minister or to accept his resignation and to request him to convene the Council of Ministers (Article 45). Thus, it appears that the PM is subordinate to the President.

The president has the authority to change the PM and his ministers, however, there is a procedure that must be followed.

The president appoints a new PM. The PM selects his ministers. They are placed in front of the PLC for a vote of confidence. After receiving the vote of confidence, they are sworn in and then, and only then, the previous PM and ministers step down.

Article 79

4. Neither the Prime Minister nor any of the Ministers shall assume their duties until they have obtained the confidence of the Legislative Council.

This is why the government in the West Bank is illegal.

Also, we do not know the impact of the Arab Summit Framework, and the general recognition it grants to the PNA President and the of the Gazan PM.

This is a case that demonstrates that the Palestinians may yet be a people unable to stand on their own (LoN Covenant Article 22 concept).

Most Respectfully,
R