Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
by Jan Markell
Gaza: Nobody Saw it Coming?
June 19, 2007 01:49 PM EST
The ghost of Yasser Arafat lives on as his successor, Mahmoud Abbas, is simply Arafat in a $1,000 suit. The stripes on a leopard don't change easily. In the Islamic world, they hardly ever do. But to Abbas' credit back in January 2006, while under extreme U.S. pressure to have "free Palestinian elections," Abbas earnestly sought to delay them sensing Hamas would come to power as they did. So the brutal reign of Hamas began, duly elected. The White House and State Department insisted on the elections, sure that the "curative powers of democracy" would solve many issues. Rice later stated, "Nobody saw it coming," meaning the win by Hamas.
The Israelis pulled one of the most foolish geo-political acts of the 21st century by pulling all Israelis out of Gaza two years ago. History should have taught them that whenever they pull out of any area, even Lebanon in 2000, it will then get infested with barbarians...
...As Christian commentator Jack Kinsella states, "The entire scenario is the result of the global adoption of the simplistic and moronic notion that there is a difference between a 'moderate' terrorist and an 'extremist' terrorist."
The U.S. is backing Abbas with aid and military assistance. Israel's government will do everything possible to preserve that regime as well. Clearly, Israel's worst enemies are her own leaders who, as secular humanists, believe in the basic goodness of man if treated fairly.
Over the years billions of dollars of aid have been donated to the Palestinian Authority and much of it has been your tax dollars and mine. In 2006, the Palestinians collected more Western aid per capita than any other people on earth. Most of it was stolen by the leadership and put away in private banks in Europe. Arafat set that tone and Abbas has followed suit.
How will things change? Fatah still is a criminal gang, and it inevitably acts like one. They are not religious fanatics such as Hamas but both outfits are brutal terrorist organizations. Abbas earned his doctorate on the fact that the Holocaust was a myth.
Joel Rosenberg says, "It's too early to say for certain, but even at this early stage two things are clear: 1) Iran's efforts to surround Israel and prepare to 'wipe Israel off the map' have just been significantly advanced and thus the prospect for a full-blown war in the Middle East this summer or fall now seems more likely; and 2) U.S. politicians had better think twice about a precipitous withdrawal of American military forces in Iraq before the Iraqis are ready unless they want a repeat of the nightmare in Gaza."...
Where did Fatah/PLO drop that from their charter? I missed that. I agree about Hamas, the simple funding by Iran makes them more dangerous to the "Big Satan". Then again, I don't forget until 9/11, Hizbollah had been our biggest threat regarding terrorism, also Iranian funded.from Israel's perspective, there is really very little difference between Fatah and Hamas.... both really want the destruction of Israel, although Fatah has officially dropped that goal from their charter. One is an arab nationalist organization, the other is an islamic extremist organization.
From our perspective, there is a large difference. To America, the difference between, say, the Iraqi Ba'ath party and Al Qaeda is that the latter wants to fly planes into our buildings punishing us for our support of Israel and the corrupt gulf states monarchies, and the former could care less.
In his letter of September 9, 1993 to Prime Minister Rabin, Fatah leader and PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat stated:
"In view of the promise of a new era and the signing of the Declaration of Principles and based on Palestinian acceptance of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, the PLO affirms that those articles of the Palestinian Covenant which deny Israel's right to exist, and the provisions of the Covenant which are inconsistent with the commitments of this letter are now inoperative and no longer valid. Consequently, the PLO undertakes to submit to the Palestinian National Council for formal approval the necessary changes in regard to the Palestinian Covenant."
Though changes in the charter were ratified by PLO governing bodies, the original charter is still displayed by the Palestine legation to the UN and other Palestinian bodies. The commitment to nullify the offending provisions of the charter was restated by Arafat in a letter to US officials in 1998.
http://www.mideastweb.org/plocha.htm
from Israel's perspective, there is really very little difference between Fatah and Hamas.... both really want the destruction of Israel, although Fatah has officially dropped that goal from their charter. One is an arab nationalist organization, the other is an islamic extremist organization.
From our perspective, there is a large difference. To America, the difference between, say, the Iraqi Ba'ath party and Al Qaeda is that the latter wants to fly planes into our buildings punishing us for our support of Israel and the corrupt gulf states monarchies, and the former could care less.
good pointsThere's a big difference to Israel, too. Ultimately, Abbas knows that he has to deliver certain things to the palestinians or they're going to become even more radicalized. (He also might want to do something about the terrorist mickey mouse, but that's for another thread). He also now has a reason to take a different road since that's the selling point for getting world support (and financial aid).
Fatah versus Hamas also has huge implications for the other Arab countries which, ultimately, is even more important than what the U.S. or Israel may or may not want. Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia... all rely on the fact that their countries AREN'T fundie in order for the ruling folk to maintain power. Their purse strings speak lounder than those of Hamas.
Last Chance for Abbas
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, June 22, 2007; A19
Gaza is now run not by a conventional political party but by a movement that is revolutionary, Islamist and terrorist. Worse, Hamas is a client of Iran. Gaza now constitutes the farthest reach of the archipelago of Iranian proxies: Hamas in Palestine, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Mahdi Army (among others) in Iraq and the Alawite regime of Syria.
...
But let's remember who Abbas is. He appears well intentioned, but he is afflicted with near-disastrous weaknesses. He controls little. His troops in Gaza simply collapsed against the greatly outnumbered forces of Hamas. His authority in the West Bank is far from universal. He does not even control the various factions within Fatah.
But the greater liability is his character. He is weak and indecisive. When he was Yasser Arafat's deputy, Abbas was known to respond to being slapped down by his boss by simply disappearing for weeks in a sulk. During the battle for Gaza, he did not order his Fatah forces to return fire against the Hamas insurrection until the fight was essentially over. Remember, too, that after Arafat's death Abbas ran the Palestinian Authority without a Hamas presence for more than a year. Can you name a single thing he achieved in that time?
Moreover, his Fatah party is ideologically spent and widely discredited. Historian Michael Oren points out that the Palestinian Authority has received more per capita aid than did Europe under the Marshall Plan. This astonishing largess has disappeared into lavish villas for party bosses and guns for the multiple militias Arafat established.
The West is rushing to bolster Abbas. Israel will release hundreds of millions in tax revenue. The United States and the European Union will be pouring in aid. All praise Abbas as a cross between Anwar Sadat and Simón Bolívar. Fine. We have no choice but to support him. But before we give him the moon, we should insist upon reasonable benchmarks of both moderation and good governance -- exactly what we failed to do during the Oslo process. Abbas needs to demonstrate his ability to run a clean administration and to engage Israel in day-to-day negotiations to alleviate the conditions of life on the ground.
Abbas is not Hamas. But despite the geographical advantages, he does not represent the second coming, either. We can prop him up only so much. In the end, the only one who can make a success of the West Bank is Abbas himself. This is his chance. His last chance.
the only thing I take real issue with in that piece is the Syria part. I realize that Assad is an alawite, and that they are shiites...but he - and his father before him - were and are pretty secular ba'athists. I think they may "make nice" with Iran, but I doubt that Assad or his handlers would allow Syria to be a client state of Iran. IMHO
before I started my tour in the middle east, I thought I was pretty knowledgeable about the area and the various players...and I assumed that, during my time there, I would become even moreso. After two years, what I really learned was the depth of my lack of real understanding about the place. I know a lot more than most folks about the area, yet I know next to nothing of the depth of things you really need to know to make wise decisions about it.
Just what I've read about Lebanon over the past several years:when I got to Beirut, my US colleague was a green beret LTC with three tours in Nam.... he sent me out each day to cover a grid of streets in the city and report back on what I had found. the first day, I told him about the coffee shops I had found and the great men's clothing store and a great place to buy cassettes...and he nearly ripped my head off....after further guidance (for this squid with NO shore time)I went back out and was looking for faction graffitti and posters and noting who was eating at what cafe and who was carrying what sort of armament.... and when I went back to the same neighborhood a month later, all of those things were different....the situation was so fluid it was almost gaseous.
June 23, 2007
A Warning from Gaza
By Michael J. Totten
Efraim Halevy writes about Hamas in the New Republic.
The handwriting was on the wall; everybody knew that there would be a showdown between Hamas and Fatah in the Gaza Strip; everybody knew that Hamas was the overriding force in that territory. In the Middle East where the "Mu'ahmara," the conspiracy, has been the leitmotif behind every catastrophe, the man in the street knew that the Americans and Israelis had been conspiring with Fatah, that Hamas had been conspiring with the Syrians and Iranians, and that the Saudis were toiling to get things on track and to move the entire region in the direction of moderation. But now, a week after the events that culminated in the takeover of the Strip by Hamas, people are just now overcoming their surprise.
Lets see: the Americans are siding with a weak government compromised and undermined by militarily superior terrorists, the Syrians and Iranians are backing the terrorists, and the Saudis are trying to broker some kind of moderate compromise. Sound familiar? It should.
Here is Michael Young in Beiruts Daily Star:
In recent days, some have suggested that Hizbullah intends to do in Lebanon, or part of Lebanon, what Hamas did in Gaza. The reality may be worse, if more subtle. A statement on Sunday by Hizbullah's Nabil Qaouk could be read as notification that the party might defend what he termed "Lebanon's unity" by force - shorthand for a military coup. Qaouk's warning that foreign observers should not deploy on the Lebanese-Syrian border, his describing such a project as "Israeli," his presumption that he had the right to impose a new "red line" on the state, all suggest a new mood in Hizbullah, one that is dangerous.
Hizbullah's attitude is only convincingly explained in the framework of Iran and Syria implementing a project to reclaim Lebanon, but more importantly perhaps to eliminate international, particularly Western, involvement in the Levant. After having won in Gaza, Tehran and Damascus are now pushing forward in South Lebanon. Their joint objective, regardless of their different priorities on other matters, appears to be to remove the Siniora government, undermine United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, and create a situation where the international community would have to accept a Syrian return to Lebanon, which would, by extension, scuttle the Hariri tribunal.
....
...
Im skeptical, to say the least, of the Wests sudden swooning for Yasser Arafats Fatah. This corrupt band of gangsters and killers destroyed Palestine before it was born, and they havent improved an iota since Arafat died. They are just about the most unconvincing allies and saviors imaginable.
But who knows, maybe theyll turn it around. Not likely, but its barely possible. If the Hamas takeover of Gaza really does spook Arab governments, as it should, there is a chance albeit a small one that Fatah, the Saudis, the Egyptians, and the rest of the so-called moderates will finally figure out that Islamists threaten everyone in the Middle East, not just the Israelis, and that the Israelis, in fact, dont threaten anyone but the Islamists and, tragically, the civilians who are unlucky enough to live in their neighborhoods.
Apparently none of the Arab governments, except the one in Syria, ever expected or even wanted Hamas to dominate Palestine or even defeat Israel. (Hamas could not do the latter without first doing the former.)
Arab regimes have been playing appeasement games of their own to keep the radicals busy fuming at somebody else.
You could even argue that the Syrian regime has been appeasing Islamists, that support from Damascus is really just a life-insurance policy so the Islamists dont gun for the Baath Party as they did before Hafez Assad flattened large parts of the Sunni city of Hama. Bashar Assads regime is overwhelmingly Alawite. They belong to an extremely deviant and heretical branch of Twelver Shiism that is no longer really even Islamic. The Alawites probably figure that have no choice but to ride the Islamist tiger so they wont be eaten. Assad also, quite cleverly I must say, whips up Islamists to deter the U.S. and Israel from terminating his regime. No one wants to see the Hamasification of Syria after the departure of the Assads.
...
I have no dispute with any of that... the entire region is a byzantine mess that we can only stumble around blindly in.
Scary? no doubt
