1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh - Aggression Under False Pretenses

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by insane man, Jul 10, 2006.

  1. insane man

    insane man Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    2,892
    Likes Received:
    5
    i think a lot of this is useless rhetoric. however i think its essential to understand the mindset of many palestinians and in general muslims who feel a pro-palestinian feeling. this is their mindset. this is why the US in the 'arab street' is disliked. and this is their sentiments...

    it is also vital to note that haniyeh is accepting the pre 67 borders.



    Aggression Under False Pretenses

    By Ismail Haniyeh
    Tuesday, July 11, 2006; A17

    GAZA, Palestine -- As Americans commemorated their annual celebration of independence from colonial occupation, rejoicing in their democratic institutions, we Palestinians were yet again besieged by our occupiers, who destroy our roads and buildings, our power stations and water plants, and who attack our very means of civil administration. Our homes and government offices are shelled, our parliamentarians taken prisoner and threatened with prosecution.

    The current Gaza invasion is only the latest effort to destroy the results of fair and free elections held early this year. It is the explosive follow-up to a five-month campaign of economic and diplomatic warfare directed by the United States and Israel. The stated intention of that strategy was to force the average Palestinian to "reconsider" her vote when faced with deepening hardship; its failure was predictable, and the new overt military aggression and collective punishment are its logical fulfillment. The "kidnapped" Israeli Cpl. Gilad Shalit is only a pretext for a job scheduled months ago.

    In addition to removing our democratically elected government, Israel wants to sow dissent among Palestinians by claiming that there is a serious leadership rivalry among us. I am compelled to dispel this notion definitively. The Palestinian leadership is firmly embedded in the concept of Islamic shura , or mutual consultation; suffice it to say that while we may have differing opinions, we are united in mutual respect and focused on the goal of serving our people. Furthermore, the invasion of Gaza and the kidnapping of our leaders and government officials are meant to undermine the recent accords reached between the government party and our brothers and sisters in Fatah and other factions, on achieving consensus for resolving the conflict. Yet Israeli collective punishment only strengthens our collective resolve to work together.

    As I inspect the ruins of our infrastructure -- the largess of donor nations and international efforts all turned to rubble once more by F-16s and American-made missiles -- my thoughts again turn to the minds of Americans. What do they think of this?

    They think, doubtless, of the hostage soldier, taken in battle -- yet thousands of Palestinians, including hundreds of women and children, remain in Israeli jails for resisting the illegal, ongoing occupation that is condemned by international law. They think of the pluck and "toughness" of Israel, "standing up" to "terrorists." Yet a nuclear Israel possesses the 13th-largest military force on the planet, one that is used to rule an area about the size of New Jersey and whose adversaries there have no conventional armed forces. Who is the underdog, supposedly America's traditional favorite, in this case?

    I hope that Americans will give careful and well-informed thought to root causes and historical realities, in which case I think they will question why a supposedly "legitimate" state such as Israel has had to conduct decades of war against a subject refugee population without ever achieving its goals.

    Israel's unilateral movements of the past year will not lead to peace. These acts -- the temporary withdrawal of forces from Gaza, the walling off of the West Bank -- are not strides toward resolution but empty, symbolic acts that fail to address the underlying conflict. Israel's nearly complete control over the lives of Palestinians is never in doubt, as confirmed by the humanitarian and economic suffering of the Palestinians since the January elections. Israel's ongoing policies of expansion, military control and assassination mock any notion of sovereignty or bilateralism. Its "separation barrier," running across our land, is hardly a good-faith gesture toward future coexistence.

    But there is a remedy, and while it is not easy it is consistent with our long-held beliefs. Palestinian priorities include recognition of the core dispute over the land of historical Palestine and the rights of all its people; resolution of the refugee issue from 1948; reclaiming all lands occupied in 1967; and stopping Israeli attacks, assassinations and military expansion. Contrary to popular depictions of the crisis in the American media, the dispute is not only about Gaza and the West Bank; it is a wider national conflict that can be resolved only by addressing the full dimensions of Palestinian national rights in an integrated manner. This means statehood for the West Bank and Gaza, a capital in Arab East Jerusalem, and resolving the 1948 Palestinian refugee issue fairly, on the basis of international legitimacy and established law. Meaningful negotiations with a non-expansionist, law-abiding Israel can proceed only after this tremendous labor has begun.

    Surely the American people grow weary of this folly, after 50 years and $160 billion in taxpayer support for Israel's war-making capacity -- its "defense." Some Americans, I believe, must be asking themselves if all this blood and treasure could not have bought more tangible results for Palestine if only U.S. policies had been predicated from the start on historical truth, equity and justice.

    However, we do not want to live on international welfare and American handouts. We want what Americans enjoy -- democratic rights, economic sovereignty and justice. We thought our pride in conducting the fairest elections in the Arab world might resonate with the United States and its citizens. Instead, our new government was met from the very beginning by acts of explicit, declared sabotage by the White House. Now this aggression continues against 3.9 million civilians living in the world's largest prison camps. America's complacency in the face of these war crimes is, as usual, embedded in the coded rhetorical green light: "Israel has a right to defend itself." Was Israel defending itself when it killed eight family members on a Gaza beach last month or three members of the Hajjaj family on Saturday, among them 6-year-old Rawan? I refuse to believe that such inhumanity sits well with the American public.

    We present this clear message: If Israel will not allow Palestinians to live in peace, dignity and national integrity, Israelis themselves will not be able to enjoy those same rights. Meanwhile, our right to defend ourselves from occupying soldiers and aggression is a matter of law, as settled in the Fourth Geneva Convention. If Israel is prepared to negotiate seriously and fairly, and resolve the core 1948 issues, rather than the secondary ones from 1967, a fair and permanent peace is possible. Based on a hudna (comprehensive cessation of hostilities for an agreed time), the Holy Land still has an opportunity to be a peaceful and stable economic powerhouse for all the Semitic people of the region. If Americans only knew the truth, possibility might become reality.

    The writer is prime minister of the Palestinian National Authority.
    © 2006 The Washington Post Company
    post
     
  2. StupidMoniker

    StupidMoniker I lost a bet

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2001
    Messages:
    16,246
    Likes Received:
    2,852
    That whole 1948 thing is code for right of return for "refugees". If that is what they are trying to base their peace plan on they might as well just give up now, because it isn't going to happen. They should release Cpl. Shalit, get back their cabinet ministers in return, allow the Israelis to withdraw their troops from Gaza without incident, and allow both sides to live in peace, with the Gaza border as it stands now and with the West Bank border defined by the security wall. Then you have a free, self-ruled Palestine with a capital probably in Ramallah, and nobody else needs to get killed. Will that actually happen, probably not, but the end result is going to be the same anyway, only hundreds of Israelis and thousands of Palestinians will die along the way.
     
  3. Deckard

    Deckard Blade Runner
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    57,856
    Likes Received:
    41,344
    If they would publically renounce the "right to return," in exchange for reasonable financial restitution, I think progress could really be made. Certainly the US, Europe and, one would hope, the wealthy Arab oil states would pony up. And they should get restitution, in my opinion. Somehow, we need to move away from the violence, from both sides.



    Keep D&D Civil.
     
  4. insane man

    insane man Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    2,892
    Likes Received:
    5
    i fail to see what israel is negotiating in your plan. palestinians dont have a continguous state. they have a unilateral border forced down their throat. they dont have the right of return. they dont have jerusalem. they have a big refugee camp in gaza. what do the israelis give up in your plan?
     
  5. FranchiseBlade

    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    51,830
    Likes Received:
    20,489
    So Palestinians give up the right of return, and Israel gives up nothing? That security wall should not be the border. It should be the 1967 borders, and then the Palestinians give up the right of return. They also should be allowed a capital in part of Jeruselem.

    Israel's expansion shouldn't be rewarded.
     
  6. Franchise2001

    Franchise2001 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2001
    Messages:
    2,284
    Likes Received:
    20
    If Israel withdraws to the 1967 borders, how do they know rocket fire will stop? There has been no precedent for a stoppage of violence after an Israeli concession.
     
  7. ROXRAN

    ROXRAN Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2000
    Messages:
    18,884
    Likes Received:
    5,270
    Very true...Thus the incestive is very low for Israel to offer further concessions.
     
  8. tigermission1

    tigermission1 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2002
    Messages:
    15,557
    Likes Received:
    17
    I think the only thing the Palestinians might concede in this case would be the 'right to return', which is a HUGE concession the Israelis have been after for a long, long time now; it secures their ethnic majority inside the borders of Israel (which is what Israel is looking for anyways, afterall Israel is an ethnic-based nation-state). The price the Israelis would have to pay for that would probably be nothing less than giving back the entirety of the West Bank, which I don't see happening.
     
  9. FranchiseBlade

    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    51,830
    Likes Received:
    20,489
    The period of greatest peace in recent times was during the Oslo process. There was little violence toward Israel at that time.

    Israel needs to withdraw to the 1967 borders and to allow peace keepers from NATO and the UN to come in and keep the peace. Israel has been set against such help from the world community, just as they have removing the settlements from the west bank.

    The deal will of course have to be negotiated, and that includes ramifications if attacks occur after the withdrawl. Recognition and relations with Israel's Arab neighbors and Palestinians should also be a part of the deal.
     
  10. Mr. Clutch

    Mr. Clutch Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2002
    Messages:
    46,550
    Likes Received:
    6,134
    Some of the rockets from Hamas are targeting areas in side the 1967 borders. So much for that idea.
     
  11. ROXRAN

    ROXRAN Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2000
    Messages:
    18,884
    Likes Received:
    5,270
    How do you do that when the top and most influential palestinian leadership already is firmly against any negotiation as stated from themselves?
     
  12. Saint Louis

    Saint Louis Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 1999
    Messages:
    4,260
    Likes Received:
    0
    Israel is not going to give up any of Jerusalem unless they are physically forced out. Israel is going to set the border it wants because they are used to getting what they want at this point.
     
  13. Ottomaton

    Ottomaton Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2000
    Messages:
    19,257
    Likes Received:
    15,515
    From the point of view of Israel it would be incredibly dangerous from a security standpoint - more dangerous than continuing with the status quo - to give up East Jeruslem. It would be like Maryland seceding from the United States to the USSR at the height of the cold war.
     
  14. StupidMoniker

    StupidMoniker I lost a bet

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2001
    Messages:
    16,246
    Likes Received:
    2,852
    Israel is negotiating from a position of strength. As such, they can get what they want without making big concessions. Palestine is negotiating from a position of weekness, they have Israeli tanks rolling through their neighborhoods. If this were the end of WWII, the Palestinians would be the Japanese and the Israelis would be America. The Palestinians get a cessation of hostilities out of the deal, and that should be enough.
    Following that logic, Palestinian terrorism should not be rewarded either, and the endless cycle continues. Neither side is really giving up anything, they are both just packing it in. The right of return, East Jerusalem, settlements in the West Bank; I hate to break it to you, but the Palestinians don't actually have any of that stuff. Basically, my solution is just a permanent cease fire.
     
  15. FranchiseBlade

    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    51,830
    Likes Received:
    20,489
    I agree that Palestinian terrorism shouldn't be rewarded. The idea is to go ahead and grant the Palestinians a viable autonomous land which means Israel going back to the 1967 borders. Deal with terrorists as terrorists, and their actions should not have any effect on the formation of a Palestinian state.

    Your solution is continued oppression of the Palestinians by Israel who would continue to illegally hold settlements in land outside of their recognized borders
     
  16. insane man

    insane man Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    2,892
    Likes Received:
    5
    do you really think the palestinians would accept that kind of an offer? regardless of whether its best for them or not...they simply wont. so your 'solution' is viable.
     
  17. StupidMoniker

    StupidMoniker I lost a bet

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2001
    Messages:
    16,246
    Likes Received:
    2,852
    No, I do not. I mentioned that in my original post:
    Good.
    Wait a sec, I thought you just said you agreed that Palestinian terrorism should not be rewarded. Giving them some of the things they want is rewarding them. Sorry, but you are not making any sense.
    The new borders (as I defined them) would become recognized, so you objection is meaningless.
     
  18. insane man

    insane man Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    2,892
    Likes Received:
    5
    its not about rewarding anyone. its about being equitable and abiding by international law and tens of UN resolutions.

    yes after israel throws up the middle finger to the rest of the world and screws over palestinians the world should recognize the unilateral creation of such a border which leaves the palestinians with a non functioning not viable state?
     
  19. RodrickRhodes

    RodrickRhodes Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Messages:
    275
    Likes Received:
    0
    israeli terrorism shouldn't be rewarded with billions of dollars either
     
  20. Franchise2001

    Franchise2001 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2001
    Messages:
    2,284
    Likes Received:
    20
    Care to research where 75% of the military aid Israel gets goes to?
     

Share This Page