With President Barack Hussein Obama's re-election, there's a great deal of speculation about increased movement towards the so-called 'two-state solution.
Much is being made of an interview Abbas gave to Israel's Channel 2 TV, implying that the people who identify themselves as Palestinians were now giving up the 'right' to swamp Israel with thousands of refugees.
Needless to say, Abbas' interview inspired a great deal of hostile blowback among Palestinians, and he promptly walked it back saying to the official Palestinian news agency WAFA, “I have not and will not forgo the right of return.”
Actually, Abbas has said repeatedly that he will never recognize Israel as a Jewish state, and that he will never make any concessions to Israel in negotiations whatsoever, including on the Palestinian 'right of return'.
Now, why Mahmoud Abbas or any other Arabs whom identify themselves as Palestinians should be allowed to return to a place most of them, like Abbas, left voluntarily while the almost one million Jewish refugees ethnically cleansed by the Arab world after 1948 get no compensation for the billions of dollars worth of property that was stolen from them is an interesting notion. Meanwhile, that one interview seems to have energized the anti-Israel left as to Abbas' stance as a peace maker. Of course, in spite of his track record, Mahmoud Abbas would never lie, right?
Rather than being fooled by one interview in English that Abbas quickly repudiated in Arabic, let's look at a few realities:
Meanwhile Abbas is adamant about foregoing negotiations anyway and going to the UN General Assembly to have them sign off on 100% of his demands as they grant 'Palestine' "super-observer" status in an attempt to have the UN General Assembly sign off on all his territorial demands and give 'Palestine' access to UN institutions and agencies.
Abbas reportedly turned down a direct appeal from President Obama to return to negotiations with Israel and forgo this move in the UN, which will likely happen towards the end of November.
So where does this leave us?
The so-called 'two state solution' was never alive to begin with. If it happened, it would mean(at least publicly)the end of the conflict, which is the Palestinian Authority and Hamas' raison d'etre. So the war has to continue...which is exactly how the Palestinians view it.As Arafat's old political commissar in Jerusalem Faisal Husseini famously said, Oslo was always just a Trojan Horse to fool the Jews, scam a great deal of aid money and get a base of operations on Israel's borders.
The unity deal with Hamas is another indication that Abbas is not seriously interested in the Two state vision of a couple of states living peacefully next door to each other. There is zero chance Hamas would ever sign on to any deal that recognized Israel's right to exist, an dthey've daid so many times. Read the Martyr's Oath sometime. Or even the Qu'ran.
Another thing to consider is what any deal with Abbas is worth. Abbas and his cronies are on the way out anyway. The PA ruling class all have Jordanian passports and citizenship, and the money they stole is squirreled away in Europe or the Emirates.
Any concessions Israel makes will simply be appropriated by Hamas, who will take over.
The future?
Neither Gaza or 'Palestine' is viable as they are, either economically of politically. So they'll morph into something different.
Gaza will gradually become part of Egypt's new Muslim Brotherhood regime, as Egypt abrogates the Egypt-Israeli peace treaty. War is a real possibility, especially if Israel goes in to Gaza stop the constant barrage of missiles and mortars on its territory.
A scenario of Egyptian 'volunteers' crossing the border to aid Hamas or even outright hostilities is quite possible, especially if the new regime feels the need to distract it's population from it's severe economic woes. Egyptian dictator Gamal Abdul Nasser used the same strategy prior to the 1967 War.
As for Judea and Samaria, once Abbas and the PA ruling class leave, Hamas will almost certainly take over the Arab occupied part of Judea and Samaria. Next door Jordan is ripe for a coup, and the Muslim Brotherhood is quite powerful there. King Hussein and his minority Bedouin regime are seen as American tools and are not popular with the Brotherhood, Hamas or a large portion of Jordan's majority Palestinian population. I'd say the chances are excellent for another Black September revolt, only this time with the Palestinians taking over Jordan and kicking out King Hussein.
There would be a great deal of poetic justice in that happening, since Jordan east of the river was originally supposed to be the Arab portion of the Palestine Mandate back in 1923 when the British created it... and then put their imported Hashemite clients in charge.
The people still touting the Two State solution are the same sort of people who thought Oslo and bringing Yasser Arafat in from Tunis as a 'peace partner' was just a dandy idea.
However, just like Oslo, the Two State solution is nothing but a mirage that would result in a lot of innocent blood being shed.
That's exactly why it isn't going to happen.
1 comment:
"That's exactly why it isn't going to happen."
Would someone please explain this to the US government. A two state solution to the Israeili-Palestinian war is and has been the most important aspect of US foreign policy for at least 11 years now. If it is not going to happen, would someone please tell them to stop focusing on this or at the very least stop making it the single most important aspect of our nation's foreign policy.
The problems with the current approach are really two fold. 1.)The plan as curently proposed involves Israel making enormous sacrificies to achieve peace while little to nothing is being demanded of the Palestinians. Essentially it is a one sided proposal to benefit the Palestinians. Yet the myth of the US somehow being pro-Israel remains virtually unchallenged. 2.)While Israel does receive a certain amount of aid from the US, the aid Israel receives is highly conditional. In contrast, the aid received by the Palestinains from America and Europe is unconditional. If we really want to achieve a two state solution that is workable for all parties, the first step would be either to cut off all aid to the Palestinians or at the very least make the aid conditional much like the aid Israel receives. By doing this the parties would be placed on a much more equal footing. If the parties are on a more equal footing, there will be more incentive for them to negotiate in good faith. Essentially due to the vast amounts of unconditional aid the Palestinians receive and the fact that the two state solution as currently being proposed is hugely stacked in their favor, their position relative to the Israelis is superior. As such, they face no real incentive to negotiate in good faith. Cut off this aid to them or at least make it conditional simillar to how the aid to Israel works and they no longer hold such a superior position. Perhaps then they will have much more incentive to negotiate in good faith.
Again, since the two state solution is not going to happen, will someone please inform the US government so its foreign policy can be changed accordingly. Given the problems the US has, it is strange that the single most important policy to this government right now is and has been for some time a two state solution to the Iaraeil-Arab conflict.
Post a Comment