You are here:   Fatah > ONLINE ONLY: Perennial Palestinian Pawns
You can't request more than 20 challenges without solving them. Your previous challenges were flushed.
 

Judging by the Obama administrations muddled response to the unity deal, and this week's quixotic attempts to revive the peace process at a time when neither the Israelis nor Palestinians trust the US as a mediator, the US's room for manoeuvre on this issue has been significantly constrained. Whereas Egypt and Syria have quickly grasped the threats and opportunities posed by the Arab Spring, and have used the unity deal as a proactive means of exerting pressure, the Obama administration appears to still be painfully struggling to catch up.  They have not learned the lessons that this deal indicates about both the new opportunities and challenges raised by the Arab Spring; namely, that while Egypt's involvement in orchestrating the deal is intended to send a message without pushing the US and Israel too far, the current Syrian regime has no such limitations on its behaviour: it has tied its existential security to the threat of provoking regional conflict, and has already shown itself more than willing to do so.

Israel has been the reliable straw man of most Middle Eastern autocrats for the past sixty years, who have deflected international attention and domestic anger at their own dysfunctional states onto the Zionist bogeyman. This strategy has belied the loudly professed interest in securing a future for the Palestinians. Yet the survival of this trope in the context of the Arab Spring is extraordinarily ironic: the people who have taken to the streets across the Middle East and North Africa in protest have not done so out of outrage on behalf of the Palestinians, but because of their frustration at living in societies in which political liberties and economic opportunities ranged from limited to virtually non-existent.

In the meantime, the Palestinians themselves — best served by a peaceful settlement with the Israelis and the creation of a prosperous, secure Palestinian state — appear poised to be the losers in a very familiar regional game.  For all the promise of the Arab Spring, the Palestinian case may sadly demonstrate that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
juan manuel
September 5th, 2011
10:09 AM
the arabs has refused to reconize israel a millions of times, last time just a few months ago.

yaosxx
September 2nd, 2011
12:09 PM
RE:Matthew MP (Are you really an MP?What a frightening thought!!!. I feel some admiration for the commenters who have the patience to reason with someone who sympathises with Hamas and actually BELIEVES Israel should and would ever go back to pre 1967 borders!

Anonymous
August 17th, 2011
2:08 AM
Within the first paragraph we read: "...with this unity deal, the Palestinians have once again been used as a political football..." Isn't it about time we hold the PA responsible for its own decisions?

Christian
August 11th, 2011
7:08 AM
Interesting article. It's quite astonishing how constrained the vision of the Arab-Palestinians must be. Time and again they are manipulated by either their corrupt and autocratic leadership or by regional Arab powers, be they Syria, Egypt or Iran. You'd think after the umpteenth time they'd recognise what's going on. But they seem to blinded by their pathological hatred of Israel that they are fully prepared, like a Pavlovian dog, to repeat the same pattern of behaviour time and again. This begs the question of how and why a polity (if indeed the Arab-palestinians can be called a polity) can be so politically immature. But, given other phenomena occurring in Gaza and Judea/Samaria such as celebration of suicide terrorists, financial remuneration of their families, the naming of streets and squares after these murderers indicates a community suffering from a serious pathology. Given such barbarous behaviour, perhaps one shouldn't be surprised over relatively lesser issues.

IanM
August 8th, 2011
7:08 PM
Matthew: lets try and get soime specifics. You say Hamas has, at least sometimes, wanted peace with Israel. Well why retain the Protocols of the Elders of Zion in their Charter/covenant? Is that a way to make peace with Jews, do you think?

Matthew MP
August 5th, 2011
6:08 PM
Why would a Palestinian state within the '67 borders be 'liquidation' for the Israelis? Of course it wouldn't. The Israelis resort to such language, because they aren't interested in peace. They long ago decided that the world was against them, and that for their safety, they needed their own land - and would get it, by vacating the original population. They are not prepared to give up on that idea. The story of the ruthless Arabs, manipulatively scheming and plotting against them, has been a crucial support in carrying it out. Of course, if you behave badly enough to your neighbours (as Israel consistently has) they will indeed scheme against you.

Ealing207
August 5th, 2011
2:08 PM
matthew - what is odd is your recollection of history and to a large extent what are the motivators in the middle east and also northern ireland. Israel doesn't want peace - i don't think so. I think the problem is an existential one - peace as offered by the palestinians and their proxies (including the current US administration) comes with the price of liquidation. Ehud Barak gave Arafat the majority (some say 95%) of what the Palestinians wanted at the Wye River Convention. Arafat didn't turn it down - he never responded. Why? because peace would have been bad for business. Same thing in Northern Ireland - except the powers to be from the IRA and the Protestants realized that there was more money to be made in Belfast selling narcotics, extortion, etc. than fighting over some old Maoist manifesto. Armani suits and Jaguars do not come cheap.

Matthew MP
August 5th, 2011
10:08 AM
Lee...comparing Hamas to Hitler is absolutely ridiculous, as you well know. The Israelis are the ones who have had a consistent policy of ethnic cleansing. John Ryan...it was widely reported after the elections that factions within Hamas were strongly arguing that it was time to recognize the reality of Israel. Not, frankly, that I see why the Palestinians should be morally obliged to recognize Israel, which after all has never recognized Palestine. But Fatah does recognize Israel, and Hamas wanted peace,despite the maniac extremism of the Israelis. In the event, Israeli 'accidental' bombings of civilians made this politically impossible for Hamas, and then came the US-Israeli sponsorship of Fatah's undermining of the results of the democratic elections. The enormous extent of the concessions that the Palestinians have been prepared to make was shown at Oslo, and again in the Wikileaks revelations. Hamas, while less willing to bend to the Israeli boot than Fatah, has not been immune from this trend, but of course it suits you lot to be blind to this. Anyway why argue, I see the general trend. I was unfamiliar with Standpoint, and didn't appreciate that it was another Commentary-like Zionist mouthpiece.

John Ryan
August 4th, 2011
1:08 PM
Matthew, What ever gave you the impression that Hamas was reaching out for a peace deal with Israel? I have never seen, read or heard anything other than the fact that they will *never* recognize Israel and that Palestine, from the sea to the river, is completely & exclusively Arab.

Stuart
August 2nd, 2011
5:08 PM
Matthew, so "everyone" recognizes that the last thing Israel wants is a peace deal do they? Well, maybe everyone you know. It all depends what the deal is. If Palestinians and their arab puppet-masters were to stop firing rockets and making occasional terrorist suicide-bomber sorties, a peace-deal might just stand a better chance, dontcha think? This is not an odd article, just an interim reflection on a confused, confusing, and changing situation. Every article doesn't have to offer some half-baked supposed solution (if you want one of those by the way, read about Norway's foreign-policy line on Israel-Palestine - a 15 year olds' debating team tasked with "putting the case for the Palestinian cause" could probably come up with something more plausible). And in reference to the last lines of the article above, I'm not sure that the "Arab Spring" has much promise. Perhaps so in relative comparison to the Palestinians truly suing for peace, but in general terms, no.

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.