Booman Tribune ~ A Progressive Community

Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas

by BooMan
Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 01:17:41 PM EST

Well, isn't this a good sign?

JERUSALEM (AFP) — President Barack Obama plunged straight into the Middle East conflict on his first day in office calling the Palestinian president on Wednesday after the last Israeli soldier withdrew from Gaza.
Obama assured Mahmud Abbas that he intended "to work with him as partners to establish a durable peace in the region," the Palestinian leader's spokesman told AFP.
The new US leader told Abbas that the Palestinian president was the first foreign leader he called since taking office, said spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeina.
"This is my first phone call to a foreign leader and I'm making it only hours after I took office," he quoted Obama as telling Abbas.
Obama and his secretary of state-designate Hillary Clinton had vowed to deal with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict immediately after taking office.
There was no confirmation if Obama also called Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, while a close Abbas aide admitted surprise at the speed with which Obama moved.
"We were not expecting such a quick call from President Obama but we knew how serious he is about the Palestinian problem," said Yasser Abed Rabbo.
During his inauguration speech Tuesday, Obama pledged a new approach to the Muslim world saying "we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect."

That's change I can believe in.

Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas | 67 comments (67 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (4.00 / 4)

Mahmoud `Abbas is not the person Obama needs to be talking with, and Fatah is not the party. Hamas is the party elected to govern them by the majority of Palestinian, and the fact that the U.S. and Israel instigated and actively supported Fatah in an attempt to overthrow Hamas does not add to Mahmoud `Abbas's credibility. Further, Fatah and Mahmoud `Abbas have lost a great deal of support since Israel launched its long-planned, carefully-timed attack on Gaza.

If he will not talk with Hamas any effort on his part will be useless. He needs to stop listening to the AIPAC types he has gathered around him and have a talk with Rashid Khalidi, or even Juan Cole.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 02:09:23 PM EST

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 1)

What is left of Hamas remains to be seen. It is obviously U.S.-Israeli policy not to recognize the results of the 2006 elections as in any way legitimate. Given the facts on the ground, I can't see how any other approach is really tenable. Obama has said that he would be willing to engage in talks with Hamas leaders behind the scenes, and I expect them to do that. But they are not now considered partners for peace going forward, and any change in that will have to come thru discreet negotiations.

Making the first call to Abbas at least signals that he is putting the Palestinians high on his list of concerns. It also signals that Fatah is still in the game, regardless of the difficulties presented to their credibility by the Gaza atrocities.

If you thought Obama was going to place his first call to a leader of Hamas, well...

What can I tell you? It would never happen in a billion years. Need I remind you of the recent vote in Congress in support of the Israeli's actions in Gaza?

It's clear that any new framework for peace is not going to involve negotiating with a two-headed Palestinian government. It's a non-starter among the Israelis, Fatah, and America, and isn't desired by Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, or Turkey.

If you start out with totally unrealistic expectations, you will get absolutely nowhere.

by BooMan on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 02:29:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Hamas IS the legitimate democratically elected government of the Palestinians whether the U.S. and Israel choose to accept them as such or not. The sooner the Obama understands that the more likely it will be that he can be effective.

And if he cares at all about getting off on the right foot with the Arabs and the Muslims, he will pay attention to the Arabs and the Muslims and not Israel and his AIPAC advisers on matters that concern the Arabs and the Muslims.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 03:11:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

I wish you were joking.

by BooMan on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 03:26:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

BooMan, what part of continuing to talk to the usual corrupt U.S./Israel puppet dictators - you know, the guys whom the United States rewards for "cling[ing] to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent", do you think is going to solve anything? As Obama said they "are on the wrong side of history".

And you are too knowledgeable about the Middle East to be unaware of the results of the 2006 Palestinian election. Therefore, you know damned well that Hamas won fair and square. The fact that you might not like it does not give you the right to deny it.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 03:46:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

what part?

Jesus. Do I really have to explain this?

Peace in Palestine requires that Israel feels a very, very, very, very high level of security. That means no fucking rockets, no fucking suicide bombers, and extremely well established peace agreements with Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon.

It also will require Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia signing off on the solution.

Anything short of that is going to prevent Israel from challenging the settlers. Why would they?

Do you want to wait until the governments of Jordan and Egypt are taken over by popularly elected members of the Brotherhood and rip up their peace agreements with Israel?

Yeah, it's a fantastic idea to wait for that as a way towards a settlement.

As to your second point, I don't dispute that Hamas won the election. I really don't see how it matters now except to complicate the path forward. A solution in Palestine has nothing to do with respecting elections no one but Hamas wants to acknowledge.

by BooMan on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 04:01:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Insecurity is the price Israeli politicians have been willing to pay in their desire for a greater Israel that, by its very nature, reduces the Palestinians to a permanently inviable state.

I see nothing to change that tradeoff on the part of the Israelis.

The impediment is not Israeli security. The impediment to peace is Israeli intransigence and sabotage of a two-state solution.

by sleepy (imcotton1991@yahoo.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 07:41:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

"The impediment is not Israeli security. The impediment to peace is Israeli intransigence and sabotage of a two-state solution."

That is crystal clear to those of us who have paid close attention to Israel's behaviour throughout its history.

Israeli Prof Avi Shlaim, who is recognized as one of the foremost authorities on the Israeli conflict summed it up beautifully "throughout its sixty years, Israel has been remarkably reluctant to engage in meaningful negotiations with its Arab opponents to resolve the dispute between them and only too ready to resort to military force in order to impose its will upon them. And the current vicious Israeli onslaught on the people of Gaza is the climax of this longstanding Israeli policy of shunning diplomacy and relying on brute military force."

If security were really what Israel craves, the way has been clear for decades. Instead, it has chosen to create its own insecurity by denying security to its neighbors.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 at 02:32:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Do you want to wait until the governments of Jordan and Egypt are taken over by popularly elected members of the Brotherhood and rip up their peace agreements with Israel?

I don't care.

Do Jordan and Egypt sell us oil?

by Cee on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 08:25:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

spoken like a true zionist enabler...ooohhhh it's Israel that must feel secure, not the human beings in Gaza, not the United States, not anyone but the fascist Zionists who occupy Israel. You do realize you live in a country that went through a violent revolution against a much more powerful empirical power ? You do realize that the only way to peace in the ME is not to coddle the Zionists on everyone of their whims? You buy into their logic anyway when you say they feel the least bit insecure - actually, militarily, Hamas could simply never inflict 1/1000th of the damage that the Israeli's inflict on Gaza. If Obama chooses your path and makes deals with the devil he loses, Israel loses,the whole world loses. This isn't about the nunbnuts in congress, it's about survival.I'm hoping Obama is secure and brave enough to choose the right path.

by wildrez on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 08:53:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

you want something for the Palestinians? Or would you rather win debating points? Israel isn't going to make concessions if they feel even remotely threatened. And they feel threatened when there are rockets flying that they can't stop or when there are suicide bombers than they can't stop.

It doesn't matter if they are culpable for creating this response. It doesn't matter that they have shown bad faith repeatedly. All that matters is that they are psychologically capable of making the concessions. All steps that move them in the wrong direction psychologically just delay the prospect of peace. The stronger party will never respond to signs of of their own weakness with concessions, but only with larger demonstrations of strength.

Whenever Israel has felt remotely weak they have responded will overwhelming force. This will not change. Israel must be made to feel not only safe, but very, very, very safe. Only then will they feel secure enough in their power to make concessions.

Ignore my advice if you want, but that's the crux of it. And along with making them feel physically safe, they must be made to feel ethically bankrupt. The two go hand and hand and follow each other as day follows night.

The weaker party must be smarter (understand their adversary better than they are understood) and take the higher road (turn the other cheek).

Make Israel feel incapable of protecting their citizens and they will not only refrain from making peace or concessions, they will strike out with ever increasing levels of violence.

by BooMan on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 09:18:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

"A solution in Palestine has nothing to do with respecting elections no one but Hamas wants to acknowledge."

The Palestinian human beings who voted for Hamas - the Muslim human beings, the Christian human beings, the secular human beings, and the "other religious category" human beings - who voted for Hamas, and who just happen to comprise the great majority of the human beings living in Palestine, want to acknowledge those elections. And they have a right to demand that you acknowledge those elections. They are the only ones in the world who actually have a right to decide that issue. You don't have that right, Israel does not have that right, Bush does not have that right, Obama does not have that right, Mahmoud `Abbas does not have that right. The Palestinian people do.

Way to respect the Palestinian people's rights, BooMan! Way to respect their choices. Way to respect human rights in general. Way to teach those brown people over there the true meaning of democracy.

Sometimes, BooMan, you almost appear to have within you a touch or two of good old fashioned American hubris.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 at 02:41:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Any new US policy toward the Middle East may be hampered by the emergence of a "new chapter in Middle East affairs", to paraphrase Ali Larijani, the powerful speaker of parliament (Majlis) in Iran, referring to the ramifications of the Gaza war and what he called "Hamas' victory".

"My advice to Obama is to take into consideration the reality of an emerging new Middle East," Iran's Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki has stated, adding that Obama needs new experts on the region. This sentiment is echoed by such US pundits as New York Times columnist Roger Cohen, who has pointed out that nearly all of Obama's foreign advisors are of Jewish background with not a single Muslim among them.

Iran's President Mahmud Ahmadinejad, on the other hand, has emphasized that he does not want to "pre-judge" Obama and prefers a wait-and-see approach on Obama's ability to bring about tangible changes to US foreign policy. Such restraint comes even as Iran has become increasingly critical of Obama's silence on the war in Gaza. Still, pro-Obama sentiment runs pretty high among ordinary Iranians, and his hopeful message to the Muslim world must be heartening to many.

The bottom line is that the US and Europe, if they are sincere about peace in the Middle East, must negotiate with the right parties. This means Hamas, which has now earned a place at the negotiation table.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/KA22Ak02.html

by Cee on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 09:07:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

PS The reason that there is a "two-headed" Palestinian government is that the United States and Israel attempted to get rid of Hamas by instigating and supporting (finanacially, materially, and politically) a Fatah coup. The coup failed.

As for what is left of Hamas, Khalid Mash`al is left, and so is Isma'il Haniya. And most of Hamas is left, since an estimated 75-90% of the victims of the Israeli mass murder in Gaza were civilians. More than 1/3 of the victims were children, and around 50% were women and children. And that's only the ones they found. It does not include the ones whose bodies are lying buried in the rubble of buildings, or who were blown into too many little tiny pieces or too burned by white phosphorus to recognize.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 03:17:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

I don't dispute the events that have led up to this point and I have written about them candidly.

That doesn't change the fact that Hamas was just routed and all vestiges of their government reduced to rubble.

Open your eyes. Hamas no longer has the ability to govern. And regardless of whatever legitimacy Hamas might claim as the parliamentary power of Palestine, they are not the legitimate presidential power.

by BooMan on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 03:20:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Hamas doesn't "claim legitimacy". It is given that legitimacy, even today, by the majority of Palestinians. If anything, the Gaza war increased its legitimacy among Palestinians, and reduced whatever was left of Fatah's to that of collaborator.

by sleepy (imcotton1991@yahoo.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 07:44:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Obama called the wrong person. Many Palestinians consider Abbas a traitor.

That doesn't change the fact that Hamas was just routed

Hardly.

Newsweek - The war is making Hamas more popular

------------------------------------------------------

www.newsweek.com/id/179967

It is hard to see what exactly the Israelis have accomplished so far in their 21-day-long war in Gaza. If the plan was to stop Hamas from firing rockets into southern Israeli towns, it hasn't worked; the rocket firing hasn't ceased for a single day. If it was to smash Hamas by killing its leaders, and reducing its offices and headquarters to rubble, the toll of death and damage is undeniable; the accomplishment, less so.

To win, as Hamas sees it, they merely have to survive. The bar is much higher for an Israeli victory. Now that they've gone into Gaza, any withdrawal will be denounced as a defeat; any new ceasefire Hamas will claim as a victory. Hamas leaders have boasted lately that they're already writing their victory speeches. "Yesterday they destroyed my house," says Hamis Odeh, a driver, "and today I have joined Hamas for the first time."

by Cee on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 08:33:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Hamas was routed?! I don't think so. Israel failed to accomplish its goals in Gaza, just as it failed in Lebanon. They were forced to stop without realizing their goals because time ran out.

Israel has reportedly pulled out completely, Hamas, just as Hezb Allah did in 2006, now has more support than ever (my Lebanese Maronite relative-by-marriage is still apoplectic because his elderly aunt, who is a nun, became in 2006 and remains to this day an adoring fan of Hezb Allah), the tunnels are already back in operation, bringing in food and medical supplies, among other things. As of a week ago telethons in the Arab world had gathered $500 million, and it's no doubt significantly more by now, Saudi Arabia has pledged $1 billion. and other Arab and non-Arab countries are prepared to bring in thousands of tons of aid, including food, medicine, equipment, and materials, which Israel will continue to block at great peril to its already eroded reputation.

Hamas is not routed. On the contrary.

When will Israel learn to stop doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result each time? Probably never, since it has been doing the same things for 60 years now. The trouble is now that each time they do this kind of thing it comes back and bites them harder and harder.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 at 03:09:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

I hope that when he called Abbas, Obama expressed a willingness to support a coalition government between Fatah and Hamas, which many Palestinians have long supported and the Bush Administration did its best to undermine. Even after they prevented the US backed Fatah coup in Gaza, Hamas leaders like Haniyeh were willing to enter into negotiations with Fatah to work out joint governance. Hamas has always been willing for Fatah leaders to negotiate foreign policy. They have been very clear about having more investment in domestic policy and cleaning up corruption.

None of the actors are perfect. However, demonizing Hamas has contributed to the dysfunction in Palestinian governance. A peace process with Israel cannot move forward without a workable relationship between the leaders of Fatah and Hamas, between Abbas and Haniyeh.

A Progressive Christian perspective on I/P at Beyond Bethlehem

by RustyPipes (rustdotypipesatyahoodotcom) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 07:45:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 1)

I gotta agree with you here on everything, except that I think you understated the Bush administration's involvement in the attempted coup by Fatah. In fact, it would not be unrealistic to call it a Bush/Israeli coup using Fatah as proxy. The Bush regime did not merely back a coup, they planned it, instigated it, funded it, provided weaponry for it - it was pretty much their coup.

And of course, as I am sure you are aware, right after the elections Israel arrested tens of the newly elected Hamas officials, severely crippling the new born little baby democracy (see, we can use sappy terms to invoke heart-warming images just like the Zionist propagandists could). Israel also punished the peopleo of Gaza for their democratic choices by launching a number of major unprovoked attacks on Gaza, and imposing a blockade that has crippled the economy and the lives of the 1.5 million people who had made the terrible mistake of believing they had the freedom to elect the people they felt would best address their needs.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 at 03:42:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Other called, too

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said that on Wednesday, Obama placed calls to four leaders in the region, including Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, King Abdullah of Jordan and Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority.

by BooMan on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 02:03:30 PM EST

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (4.00 / 3)

He is talking to ALL the wrong people, and NONE of the right people. Talking to three U.S./Israel puppet dictators and the murderous PM of Israel is not the way to fix things in the Middle East. Nor is it the way to make a positive impression with Palestinians or in the Arab and Muslim worlds. I can guarantee you that millions of Arabs are now rolling their eyes and saying "here we go again!"

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 02:11:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 1)

Thanks!
Exactly my thought. That is totally tone deaf, except maybe for US domestic consumption where most don't know the difference anyway.

by ask on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 02:17:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

The fact that is first call as president was to a Palestinian leader is very very heartening. I'm elated.

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; now we know that it is bad economics;" - Franklin Delano Roosevelt

by Salunga on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 03:03:44 PM EST

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

The three Arabs he called are all U.S./Israel puppets who fully supported the attack on Gaza, and who brutally suppressed public dissent against it. How is that heartening?

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 03:19:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

you expected him to call Assad, Nasrallah, Khalid Mash`al, and Ahmedinejad?

by BooMan on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 03:25:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

I don't think people expect Obama to make his first call to Hamas or Hizbullah or Iran. The first call to a foreign leader is a stupid honorary gift that is merely one of trappings of the presidency . . . I think Bush bestowed his great gift on Mexico (which I believe was heartfelt on Bush's part).

I think the sentiment here is that it's not such the great symbol you seem to think it is that Obama called Abbas and the other U.S. client states in the region first.

by SFHawkguy on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 03:50:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Quite so. Thank you.

It would have been better to wait a few weeks before calling anyone connected with the mass murder in Gaza than to make his very first calls to Arab leaders to the three oppressive puppet dictators who most strongly supported it, and who suppressed (sometimes brutally) public dissent against it. It sends a very bad message to the Arab world in general, and the Palestinians in particular.

In the minds of many it also turns the already deep and bitter irony of his speech "To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist" into the standard contemptuous hypocrisy we have come to expect from the United States over the last four or five decades or so. How do you think it reads in the Arab world and in Palestine that the first Arab leaders to whom he extends his hand or those who, with the assistance and support of the United States government "cling to power through corruption and deceit and the [brutal] silencing of dissent"?

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 04:23:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Abbas? He's not even head of state. His term expired last week.

But, elections for a new head of govt.? We know how the last Palestinian elections turned out.

by sleepy (imcotton1991@yahoo.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 07:47:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

This is not about my expectations. In fact, this is exactly the kind of thing I expected - that he would keep on doing the same things that have failed for decades with the expectation that he will get different results this time.

This is about him searching under the lamp post for something that was dropped a block away because, after all, it's dark where the object was dropped, and there is light here.

And by the way, Asad is no less legitimate a leader than are King `Abd Allah and Hosni Mubarak. As for Ahmadi Najad, I don't know what he has to do with this, but he IS the legitimately elected President of Iran, which is more than you can say for `Abd Allah, Mubarak, or the Sa`ud family. And there will be no solution to this thing ever if Obama will not include Hamas and Hezb Allah.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 03:55:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

your analysis makes no sense.

Obama called the leaders of three countries plus the president of Palestine. You apparently wanted him to place phone calls to people leading popular resistance movements and/or cowering in bunkers hoping to avoid Israeli/drone-fire.

If the government is going to talk to Hizbollah or Hamas leaders, it's going to do so at a much lower level than Obama. This call is not an example of repeating past mistakes or continuing failed policies unless you consider the standard's of basic diplomatic protocol to be failed policies.

Complaining about him making his first call to Abbas is asinine. Complaining about him calling Jordan, Egypt, and Israel is beneath meriting response.

by BooMan on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 04:20:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

The trouble is, BooMan, that you are only looking at this from an American political point of view. I am telling you how it looks from the other side. You can call it asinine or "beneath meriting a response" all you like. That does not make it so, except in your very, very narrow American veiwpoint.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 04:32:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

What seems to be a consistent pattern with you is to not understand/respect/account for power and differential ethics based on power.

Peace and justice for Palestinians can only come through concessions from a much more powerful party. Understanding what motivates that more powerful party and what positively inclines them and what negatively inclines (and what makes them insane) is critically important to success. Additionally, the other powers in the region are nearly as important as Israel and America. We don't have time to wait until there are new powers. We must attempt to pursue justice with the powers that are in place and that can satisfy Israel as to their security if they make concessions.

Proving to Israel that they are helpless to stop rocket attacks unless they completely fucking beserk is not a good strategy. It's about the worst strategy. It's the equivalent of MLK proving to southerners that they couldn't prevent a relentless campaign of arson unless the crushed all freedom of movement for blacks.

The way towards peace has nothing to do with Hamas, with rockets, with an ill-fated election and its bygone legitimacy. In fact, the path is almost in the complete opposite direction.

by BooMan on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 04:42:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (4.00 / 2)

Your premise that Israel's real concern is security, or that any of this was about rocket attacks is faulty in the extreme. I don't have time to address it properly right now, but I will start by saying that if this were about rocket attacks, experience has shown that the best way to end those is for Israel to adhere to a ceasefire. The latest ceasefire resulted in a 99% reduction in rockets. Furthermore, according to the Israeli Ministry of Defense, and a report from a right wing Israeli "security and terrorism" think tank, the rockets that were fired during that 4.5 month period were not fired by Hamas. In fact, the majority were fired by Fatah's military wing.

I will have more to say about this tonight.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 05:39:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

What does an end game for durable peace look to all of you if every starts acting more mature as of today and follows some plan to the letter?

I still can't game it out in my head.

Either the Palestinians and their allies have to accept serious humiliations without resisting for the long term and/or Israel has to give up it's nukes and ethnocentric identity, no?

Declaring the bottom is the only way back up..

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 05:18:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

End game?

Any short-term end game would involve extremely emphatic support from all parties in favor Israel's existence and security. That kind of support will obviously not come with a small price tag. Israel will have to make painful concessions. They will never make them under threat, but only with the promise and example of security that has been provided already for some time.

Firing rockets at them is the worst possible way of incentivizing them. In fact, given their incredible power and the strength of their alliance with America, any threat to them whatsoever just makes them inclined to destroy the peace process itself.

by BooMan on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 05:28:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Ok, so what is the price that Israel might pay? What could possibly convince folks in the region to emphatically support Israels right to exist?

I hear you about the rockets.

Declaring the bottom is the only way back up..

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 05:45:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Stopping the rockets for extended periods even in the face of repeated and serious provocation has proven utterly ineffective in incentivizing them.

As for painful concessions, the only "painful" concessions being demanded of Israel is compliance with international law, specifically UNSC Resolution 242, to which they are a signatory.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 06:28:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Like pulling the plug on the billions of dollars in US arms to Israel ? In this brave new and totally broke world, Obama has to make some painful choices himself - one may be to abandon the idea that we have to continue propping up an openly fascist regime. A strong argument can be made to stop bleeding money to Israel. In old common wisdom that's a non starter, in the new world it may look like common sense.

by wildrez on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 09:04:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

BooMan, your readiness to accept that any of this is about Israel's security shows how poorly you understand the dynamic. If Israel's real concern were about security, it would pursue the courses of action that have proven in the past to produce greatest security, or that contain the greatest promise of security. For example, it would seek to institute long-term cease fires with Hamas instead of consistently being the one to break the cease fires which Hamas, according to the Israeli Ministry of Defense's own statistics, is very careful to observe. It would also enter into very serious talks with the Arab League about the very generous peace offer it has had on the table for seven years. Instead, Israel disdains those courses of action in favour of actions that are clearly designed to perpetuate conflict.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 at 03:27:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

What Israel has to give up for starters is its lust for territorial expansion. Then it has to deal with the collective need to create and perpetuate enemies in order to feel under constant threat and constant conflict. The latter did not originate with me, but is a relatively popular theory amongst Israeli sociologists, psychologists and other thinkers. And it fits well.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 05:33:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Eliminating slavery in this country required the military defeat of the enslavers. Israel will not be defeated militarily, so that isn't an option.

Eliminating Jim Crow in this country involved convincing a critical mass of the public that it was both just and safe to give negroes their full rights.

In both cases, as blacks were raped, lynched, denied freedom of movement, and humiliated, it was always possible to justify retaliatory measures. Why not burn a white church, rape a white woman, lynch a white man?

In fact, there are episodes in our history where those things were done by frustrated blacks. In every case that I know of, the response was massive, overwhelming retaliation that set back black rights in a dramatic and lasting way.

Blacks had to adopt a power-specific ethics. What might be justified had to be eschewed. The more powerful party could not be confronted frontally, but only with what King called 'soul-power'. Only when these tactics were adopted and adhered to with massive human courage, did the more powerful party find its power sapped and feel the need for concessions. And, even then, an outside power (the federal government) had to step in to enforce the new agreement.

For Palestinians, they must learn these lessons. They cannot tell the Israelis to get over their sense of victimization and then prove to them that they are not secure. If Israel makes a concession that they worry will threaten their security (like leaving Lebanon or Gaza) then prove to them that it was a safe and prudent decision and reward them.

Attacking Israelis with rockets and human bombs makes them insane. When you make them insane, do not expect them to believe you when you tell them they can have peace for land, or peace at all.

Learn from the people that have succeeded and do not follow the example of those that have failed.

by BooMan on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 05:47:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Dead wrong. You're talking about a totally different country from Israel. Israel lost in Lebanon in 2006 and just lost in Gaza in fundamental ways. World opinion has turned against the zionists. Hamas has won. Obama must talk with them. Americans are not going to care now if Israel squalls in rage as they've been doing that for years. They have become like neo cons, stupid, brutal and lacking in true arguments.

by wildrez on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 09:10:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Israel didn't lose in Gaza. From my vantage point, they won in the short-term...not that it'll buy them anything worth having.

They just did to Hamas in Gaza what they did to the Palestinian Authority during the second intifada. They destroyed the government and all institutions that make government possible. And they stopped the rocket fire and will get Egypt to stop supplies coming from their border. And they got almost every single American politician to go on the record supporting what they were doing. Doesn't look like a short-term loss to me. They did far better than I expected. Hamas gained nothing but proved they are no Hizbollah.

But my point is not that Hamas didn't have a right to run for office or to govern once elected or even to launch rockets in protest. I have written about all of these things. My point is that what just happened to Hamas will happen over and over and over again until people realize that fighting Israel strengthens the settlers and undermines all there who speak for peace.

by BooMan on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 09:33:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

You are simply wrong, BooMan. Israel did not achieve its goals in Gaza. It did not destroy Hamas, it did the opposite of turning the population against Hamas, and it lost big time in world opinion.

And if you think it stopped the rocket fire by attacking Gaza, then you live in an alternate universe. The rocket fire did not begin until Isael broke the ceasefire on November 4, and did not stop until Israel decided, because its time was up, to call a unilateral ceasefire.

Here is what happened, according to the Israeli Ministry of Defense, as confirmed by a respected right wing Iraeli "security and terrorism" think tank:

Israel agrees to an Egypt-brokered six-month ceasefire to begin June 19, 2008.
Hamas ceases rocket fire despite multiple daily violations by Israel during the first week.
Hamas does not fire a rocket for 4.5 months, and does a creditable job of reining in other militant groups that are not parties to the ceasefire. The net result is a 99% redution of rocket fire. According to the Israeli Ministry of Defense, the majority of the 11 rockets that ARE fired in the 4.5 month period come from the military wing of Fatah, the party of Mahmoud `Abbas.
Israel breaks the very successful ceasefire by launching a major attack on Gaza on November 4-5 while the world's attention is riveted on the U.S. elections, followed by other major attacks that result in the deaths of around 25 Palestinians, including several children. Hamas responds by resuming rocket attacks in what the Israeli Ministry of Defense terms "retaliation".
Israel launches a devastating 22 day sustained air and ground attack during which it targets civil infrastructure, and kills approximately 1400 Palestinians, more than one third of whom are children, and the overwhelming majority of whom are civilians. Hamas continues major amounts of rocket fire throughout Israel's attack.
Israel declares a unilateral ceasefire, the ceasefire begins, Hamas stops firing rockets, and agrees to give Israel one week free of rocket fire to withdraw from Gaza.

Given those facts, confirmed by the Israeli Ministry of Defense, do you really expect anyone to believe that it was Israel's 22 day blitzkrieg on Gaza that stopped the rocket attacks?

I don't know, maybe it's just me, but the statistics seem to suggest that agreeing to and meticulously observing a ceasefire is by far the most effective means of stopping the rockets, and violating the ceasefire virtually guarantees their resumption.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 at 04:01:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

"Attacking Israelis with rockets and human bombs makes them insane. "

And NOT attacking them with rockets and human bombs makes them what? Happy? Willing to negotiate? On the contrary, it seems they WANT those rockets very badly - so badly that they will do almost anything to get them to resume.

A recent study, based on information obtained from Israeli sources, covers the period from September, 2000-October, 2008. It quantifies a clear pattern of behaviour that many of us have observed over the four decades of occupation. These results are consistent with the reports of U.N. and other third party observers beginning in the first years of Israel's existence, and with Israeli accounts of events, such as Moshe Dayan's description of Israel's methods for deliberately provoking fire from Syrians along the border.

The study found that when there has been a pause in violence lasting one day or more, Israel has clearly broken the pause in 79% of the cases, Palestinians in 8% of the cases, and both, or "too close to call" in 13% of the cases. Also interesting is the fact that the longer the pause, the more likely it is that Israel will be the one to break it. Israel unilaterally broke 96% of the pauses of more than one week, and 100% of the pauses of more than 9 days.

One of the realities not addressed in the study is Israel's practice of progressive provocation (Moshe Dayan described it well, and his description also makes it clear that they will keep going until the other side really has no choice but to fire back.

So, it seems that what bothers Israel the most is not having rockets fired at them, but NOT having rockets fired at them. They just can't stand that, and feel compelled to do whatever it takes to get them to resume.

More to the point, Israel knows by now how to make the rockets stop, and how to make them start up again, and their behaviour is not that of someone who wants the rockets to stop.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 at 05:21:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

This doesn't sound like an end game to me, although I agree with most of it. What will bring this change in Israel's psyche and allow it to endure? What sort of galvanizing event or policy? I can't see it, although I am not the creative sort.

Is this another way of saying that any stable situation requires that Israel be content within it's original borders? That marries nicely with Boo's assertion that there has to be emphatic support for Israel's existence. Perhaps that is the large part of the Israeli price Booman alludes to.

So, it sounds to me that step #1 is for regional players to renounce all calls for Israel's destruction and at the same time demand a return to it's original borders. Jerusalem would almost have to fall under a third party. Problem is I think most of the Israeli factions are convinced that those borders themselves were an existential threat. Hence the expansionist tendencies.

So, to remove the expansionist tendencies, the threats from beyond Israel and Palestine must be mitigated, hence much of US foreign policy in the region. Problem is we tried force recently and shit the bed after losing patience with the blow-back from early mistakes like installing the Shah.

The more we coerce the region the farther everything seems to get set back, so I was very encourage to hear Obama refer to investing in the people of the region. Perhaps that is the start of something much better indeed.

Declaring the bottom is the only way back up..

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 06:00:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

"it sounds to me that step #1 is for regional players to renounce all calls for Israel's destruction and at the same time demand a return to it's original borders."

You mean kind of like the proposal for peace, recognition, and normal relations (i.e. embassies, ambassadors, trade relations - the whole megilla) that the Arab League unanimously offered to Israel seven years ago, and has unanimously agreed to keep on the table continuously for the past seven years despite everything Israel has done? Like that? And like Hamas agreeing to accept a two state solution with Israel existing inside the pre-1967 borders? Like that? The fact that Israel prefers the status quo to even a consideration of those offers suggests that removing an allegedly existential threat is not their priority.

I can't think of any regional player that is calling for Israel's destruction. Can you name one?

"Jerusalem would almost have to fall under a third party."

The Palestinians and other Arabs have been very flexible as to what they will accept as a solution in regard to Jerusalem, and have offered several creative solutions themselves. Jerusalem's legal status is still a corpus separatum, belonging neither to Israel nor Palestine, but an entity unto itself, as put forward in UNGA Resolution 181, aka the Partition Resolution. Israel violated that part of the Resolution in 1948 by forcibly ethnically cleansing and taking over the western part of the city. I am personally acquainted with a number of Palestinians, most of them Christians, by the way, who were ethnically cleansed and who have vivid memories of the events.

The solution for Jerusalem that would satisfy most of the demands of both sides would be to have Jerusalem as a shared city, with the capital of Palestine in East Jerusalem, and the capital of Israel in West Jerusalem, and free access by all to the entire city. That the scenario proposed by `Arafat.

The Palestinians have always been prepared to accept any arrangement for Jerusalem that would not shut them out of it. It is the Israelis who are intransigent on this question, once again suggesting that removing an existential threat is not their motivation.

"Problem is I think most of the Israeli factions are convinced that those borders themselves were an existential threat. Hence the expansionist tendencies."

I'm afraid that is backward. The existential threat thing is a fabrication to justify expansionism, and has been since, in February, 1948, Ben Gurion reassured the members of Mapai that "the war will give us the land" (it would also give them cover for the planned ethnic cleansing of the land). Ironically, it is Israel's lust for territory and control over resources (water principally), and the wars it has embarked on for that purpose, that has caused virtually all of its "existential" troubles.

"So, to remove the expansionist tendencies, the threats from beyond Israel and Palestine must be mitigated, hence much of US foreign policy in the region."

What threats? The threats from the Arab countries that have unanimously agreed for seven years to offer Israel peace, recognition, and normal relations in exchange for its compliance with the U.N. prohibition against acquisition of territory by war, and the colonization of occupied territory? Threats from the Arab countries that have not attacked Israel in more than a decade despite the fact that Israel has attacked them? Let's be realistic and recognize that the threat is not to Israel from its neighbors, but vice versa.

"Problem is we tried force recently and shit the bed after losing patience with the blow-back from early mistakes like installing the Shah."

I'm not following your logic here as it relates to Israel.

"The more we coerce the region the farther everything seems to get set back, so I was very encourage to hear Obama refer to investing in the people of the region. Perhaps that is the start of something much better indeed."

Coercion never pays of in the long term, and rarely does even in the short term. That is precisely because human beings do not react positively to coercion. Any "investment" by the United States in a third world country is highly suspect. There is no U.S. "investment" without very thick and heavy imperial strings. The best thing Obama could do would be to stop trying to "influence" the Arab countries, either by coercion, or by "investment", and simply let them develop themselves. It is western meddling that has created the awful regimes that exist today in the Middle East.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 at 03:14:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

First, thanks for all the detail. And Yes, yes, yes.

I'm not following your logic here as it relates to Israel.

That followed the previous thought on external threats to Israel. Basically, as far trying to reduce external threats to Israel goes, we're not good at it (intentionally or not).

I am sure we are agreeing. Ultimately, US disengagement is desirable, but right now that is not necessarily a path that leads to Palestinian liberation. I really think consistent investment in the social infrastructure by the US, through local authorities for local culture's idea of self-improvement is the right kind of meddling the moment needs. And if there are strings that require transparency, all the better. Transparency is democracy fertilizer. Funneling money to militants is also probably off. Are those strings too onerous?

Declaring the bottom is the only way back up..

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 at 09:08:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

I can't think of any regional player that is calling for Israel's destruction. Can you name one?

Does Iran still qualify?

Declaring the bottom is the only way back up..

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 at 02:49:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Iran has never called for Israel's destruction. The statement attributed to Ahmadi Najad about "wiping Israel off the map" is a malicious mistranslation, and a misrepresentation on top of it. Further, Ahmadi Najad has nothing to do with foreign or military policy. It is completely out of his hands, so even if he DID say he wanted to destroy Israel, he does not have the power.

In any case, for starters, those were not Ahmadi Najad's words. He was very clearly repeating a well-known Khomeini quote. Second, that quote, when properly translated and put into context, says nothing about wiping anyone off any map. There is no reference there of any kind at all to map or a "wiping off", it is not a threat of any kind of action. It is a statement about something that will simply happen over the course of time, and it is not ambiguous enough to even remotely justify the way it was translated or presented.

It is a reference to the Israeli occupation of Jerusalem, and not to Israel itself. Essentially what Khomeini said was that the Zionist regime in Jerusalem will vanish from the pages of time. In other words, over time Jerusalem will be free from the Zionist occupation, and all traces of it will be gone. There is no hint there about anyone taking any action, or harming anything or anyone, let alone destroying Israel. The verb used is in no way indicates an action to be taken by anyone.

The party responsible for this and other mistranslations intended to demonize arabs and Muslims is MEMRI, an uber-militant right wing Israeli group whose raison d'etre is to go through the Arabic and Persian media and other sources with a fine-tooth comb, and "translate" and publish material that serves to demonize Arabs and Muslims and present them as a bunch of hate-filled madmen who present a threat to Israel and the civilized world. If they can manage this by accurately translating the material, they will do so, and if they cannot, they will do what they need to do in order to make it sound crazy and evil on the assumption that Americans do not know Arabic or Persian, and no one will take steps to confirm their translation or check the context of the material. Many if not most of the translations you see in the media are from MEMRI.

One of the most memorable of their works was a clip from an episode of a Palestinian children's program featuring a Mickey Mouse-like character. It was all over the news for a week or more, and Jon Stewart even did a bit on it. Not one news organization bothered to confirm the accuracy of the translation, or to bring on a Palestinian, or even an American Arab speaker to explain what the program was about and what the intention was behind the dialogue in the clip.

I did a side-by-side chart of it, with three columns, one with the original Arabic, one with MEMRI's translation, and one with a accurate translation. Here are two examples that I cannot manage to forget.

1 - The mouse asks an adorable little girl what will she do "for the sake of Al Aqsa" (the famous mosque in Jerusalem). Correct translation of her reply: "I will draw a picture". MEMRI's "translation": "I will shoot". There is simply no earthly way to confuse "shoot" with "draw a picture".

2. At one point the little girl says "the Jews will shoot at us" (something virtually every Palestinian child has either experienced or witnessed at least once). MEMRI's translation: "We will annihilate the Jews". Again, simply no possible way to confuse the two.

There are about six or seven items like this, some more egregious than others, that add up to what looks like teaching children muderous hatred of Jews. What is, in fact, going on in the clip is nothing of the kind.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 at 06:26:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

He ran on change and he better start making those calls.

You left out the Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh.

Obama should tell him that we'll be contributing the funds to rebuild Gaza out of the Israeli foreign aid budget.

by Cee on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 08:40:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Yes I do.

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; now we know that it is bad economics;" - Franklin Delano Roosevelt

by Salunga on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 09:00:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

As a sign, it's good that there is any talk at all, but one should always negotiate with the person who can deliver. I wonder who that is for the Palestinians in the near future.

I think Israel's "victory" was in part to ensure that no such person exists for the foreseeable future.

Not that there was any negotiating. I'm sure most of these calls were just to make contact and express this canned statement or another.

To wade into this mess on any level is to deal with some of the most unsavory folks/regimes there are. While their people are to be assume innocents, leadership on all sides are tainted.

I'd hope that their taint can't spread over phone lines (ew?) and infect Obama after just a few calls.

Declaring the bottom is the only way back up..

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 04:58:20 PM EST

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

excellent points.

Think about this. What message would it send if Obama didn't place these calls and, instead, ignored the region in favor of calling our traditional European and East Asian allies? What message would it send if he called Abbas last, or not at all?

by BooMan on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 05:01:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 1)

Unfortunately, I don't think it would matter as much as one might think. On the Palestinian 'street', Abbas and even Fatah may seem to be more a figments of the West's regional aspirations at this point.

I am afraid that Israel is simply continuing it's policy of stalemate, central to which is preventing strong Palestinian leadership of any kind.

Declaring the bottom is the only way back up..

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 05:25:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

"To wade into this mess on any level is to deal with some of the most unsavory folks/regimes there are."

And what does it say that the most unsavory folks/regimes are "friends" that are being supported, kept in power, and in some cases were put into power by or with the assistance of the United States? Not to mention that some of the less unsavory folks/regimes are enemies who are subject to "regime change" projects?

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 05:19:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

It means that US moral leadership of the world is neither.

Declaring the bottom is the only way back up..

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 05:26:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Yes, for starters.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 05:27:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

What will happen when Hamas is reelected in the next election, which will happen? My working theory is that Israel acts in bad faith. They want land, land and more land. The whole disagreement is basically about property, of which pieces of land on this earth are the ultimate form of property.

by Quentin on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 06:45:45 PM EST

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Quentin, what is precisely what is wrong with most of the arguments here is that they are predicated on the assumption that Israel acts and speaks in good faith, when the opposite is the case.

The attack on Gaza was planned a year in advance, and carefully timed to begin and end just before regime change in the U.S. was finalized (in fact, Israel was forced to end the carnage before achieving any of its goals). It had as much to do with rockets as the invasion of Iraq had to do with WMD's - less, in fact. The ceasefire resulted in a 99% reduction in rocket fire, and according to the Israeli Ministry of Defense, the few rockets that WERE fired did not come from Hamas.

If it had been about stopping the rockets, Israel would not have broken the cease fire in the first place, and would have worked hard to extend it for another six months, another year, another five years. The rockets were a pretext, and if Hamas had not provided that pretext, Israel would have found another, up to and including inventing one. This is a pattern in Israeli conduct that has been recorded going back to the first years of statehood.

And if Israel's real concerns were, as they claim, security, peace, recognition, and normal relations with their neighbors, they would not have given the Arab League the finger for the last seven years whenever they re-offered exactly those things.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 07:47:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Until the US stops being the largest arms supplier to the world, & until it stops supplying dictatorial countries with aid, (that always turns into military aid, or to further these regimes power), I doubt there will be an end to most conflicts.
As Cee said above, I would replace any further military aid to Israel, towards rebuilding Gaza. Any other aid would be contingent on a cease fire from both sides.
I think a large number of US citizens (the resolution not being the real voice of American citizens, imo) would rethink their positions, if after spending tax dollars towards rebuilding Gaza, some other bully country came in & destroyed it.
Hamas, a democratically elected government, ceases to be able to govern, by the non support & even the undermining of it, by countries who claim democracy is the "end all" & this country has even invaded another sovereign country to bring democracy to it.
If the US, wanted a lasting peace in the middle east, it would do so as fast as it spent hundreds & hundreds of billions of dollars to attack another country who had done the US no harm, a country who previously had been supplied weapons & military tacticians to fight the evil regime in Iran, another country the US interfered with in the 50`s.
That worked out well also.
A public statement by Obama, stating that he would soon be getting talks together with his new state department secretary & ALL parties involved in the IP conflict, rather than calling the head of Fatah, Israel, & other leaders, while completely ignoring Hamas, the democratically elected government, would in my very limited knowledge of the subject, have been the best way to show the world especially the arab world, that he would be an honest broker for peace.
The way it was done, cannot be perceived as that, by the arab world, at the least.

The difference between theists and atheists is that the atheists don't set the theists on fire for refusing to agree with them.

by KNUCKLEHEAD on Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 at 12:01:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

these issues are very difficult.

It's true that Hamas won parliamentary elections and also true that those elections were pretty good elections. It's also true that Abbas won an election as president. Yet, Abbas's election was not as clean as the Hamas election and his term just expired two weeks ago and he now serves in an extraconstitutional capacity. So, wow!! what a mess!!

If there is a president (or executive counterpart to Obama) in Palestine, that person is Abbas. He is the appropriate person for Obama to call. Obama didn't call the head of parliament or the foreign minister of Jordan or Egypt. So, the beginning of this debate was predicated on something stupid. Of course Obama is going to call Abbas.

Now, the next layer of complication is in dealing with the distinction between what the Arab street thinks and what their leaders think. Arab leaders generally dislike Hamas. Hizbollah is a bit of a rival to Hamas and al-Qaeda allegedly doesn't get along with them at all. So despite winning an election three years ago, Hamas really has no allies in government and they even have strained alliances within the Palestinian resistance movements and terrorist organizations. They're isolated. But they do have some serious cred with ordinary Arabs on the street and with the Palestinian people.

If we emphasize their cred and contrast it, for example, with Fatah's lack of cred, we might be led to believe that we have to deal with Hamas. The problem with that thinking is that the Obama administration is not going to be negotiating with the Arab street, but with Israel and Arab leaders. Obama would get nowhere by trying to rehabilitate Hamas.

There is going to be a debate about whether to pursue a unity Fatah/Hamas government or to build on Hamas' defeat in Gaza to cut them out of the process going forward. We know what all the regional powers want. They want Hamas cut out.

Do we go in the teeth of that sentiment in the full knowledge that it is a complete non-starter with the Israeli government and people? I would suggest not, even though there are excellent arguments in favor of such an approach.

The way forward appears to be to recognize that Hamas cannot be a partner despite excellent claims to have a seat at the table. To do otherwise would be to wish away the insurmountable obstacles to getting regional powers to accept Hamas in the immediate aftermath of their complicity in their destruction.

As the British say, 'Not Bloody likely.'

Likewise, you make recommendations on military assistance that I fully support in the abstract but do not see as remotely likely to happen. I have bushels full of good advice that will not be taken by either side. But knowing what might be acceptable is the key to moving forward. Aren't we tired of arguing over shit that doesn't change a thing?

by BooMan on Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 at 12:43:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

I`ve been reading thousands of comments from both sides of what are called IP diaries since Dec. 27.
The levels of these discussions, (heated on both sides, to say the least) did not one thing to further the cause of peace in that area.
Nothing that has been done since 1948, 1967, 71, Lebanon for years, intifadas, suicide bombings, cluster bombs (Lebanon 2006), Kasams, Hezbollah, IDF, Fatah, Arafat, AIPAC, OSLO, Hamas, Camp David & on & on & on, has stopped the killing, so there must be something that has not been tried. I do hate to take sides in any conflict but do always side with those who suffer from the idiocies of those, who`s arrogant claim to be peace brokers, are in reality merchants of death.
I make no claim to have the answers, but there is a way to leave out the innocents in these unending conflicts. Stop killing them.
This "self defense" demolition of Gaza, & the murder of civilians there, was planned for at least a year, (according to reports). (I use "self defense" & 'murder' because it was pre-planned). Large containers of weapons were being assembled & being prepared for shipping in Oct. Someone in the US, knew this, profited well by it & had the knowledge that many would be killed. They knew that the weapons, used in such tight quarters, would not only kill many innocents, but that it would serve to terrorize the survivors, ensuring that new fighters would be born out of this wanton killing to perpetuate the cycle.
I`m not arguing with anybody, but Jesus Christ on a unicycle, somebody do something.
Don`t you think that pouring billions of dollars into a peace project would do more than throwing it at weapons systems.
If the no-bid Haliburton dollars, the billions lost with that dim bulb Brennan, in Iraq, Petraesus` oops (losing a few hundred thousand weapons in Iraq,) {I`m just reminding you of that incompetent], were spent on raising the quality of life for the Palestinians, with schools, running water, health care & jobs, IOW`s a right to live like humans rather than imprisoned behind walls, I tend to believe they would have no time for conflict or hate.
Maybe that`s something that they haven`t tried yet.
Who could have predicted, that, you know, it just might work.
By Golly I think we`re onto something.
Get me Hillary on the phone.
No disrespect meant in any of my rantings BooMan

The difference between theists and atheists is that the atheists don't set the theists on fire for refusing to agree with them.

by KNUCKLEHEAD on Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 at 02:06:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Knucklehead, the Palestinians do not engage in conflict, and they do not feel rage, and yes, sometimes hate, simply because they have time for it, or even simply because Israel makes their lives a living hell. They engage in conflict and they feel rage, and sometimes hate, for exactly the same reason all other human beings do so when their most fundamental human rights are trampled every moment of every day, when they are deprived of all dignity and hope, and when all other avenues are systematically closed off to them.

And all the crap about existential threats to Israel is just that - crap. It has been from the beginning Zionism, and since 1948 Israel, that presents an existential threat to Palestinians, not vice versa. From Herzl onward Israel's founders, and later its leaders understood absolutely clearly that a viable Jewish state necessitated establishing and maintaining an overwhelming Jewish majority, and that in turn necessitated controlling the size of the non-Jewish indigenous population. Ethnic cleansing was a necessary part of the creation and maintenance of the State. As for the occupied territories, the goal is to annex the territory without the people. Even the Palestinian "less equal" citizens of Israel are in increasing jeopardy. Recent polls have shown that around 40% of Israelis are in favour of expelling them from the country, and very high level Israeli politicians (Tzipi Livni, for example) have advocated it it openly and without shame.

The sooner American people begin to throw off the decades of myth and propaganda and see reality, the better it will be.

by Hurria (Muslawia@gmail.com) on Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 at 07:40:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Hurria,
Don`t they realize that they`d have to run population control programs , because as I see it, there`s a limited number of "breeders" on one side, versus a gaining population on the other, or is the population control, the killing fields in Gaza?
So who is trying to wipe whom off the face of the earth?
I`ve read that the idea of annexing land is to create security zones, but then it seems people rush in as settlers, needing more buffer zones.

How much smaller can Gaza get. If you keep creating piles of rubble, you essentially make the place more crowded, more unhealthy, more inhumane. I don`t know of many who would not start throwing stones while assembling more potent things to lob, even against a stupidly overpowering force, if they were in that position.

I was reading Steven D`s diary on the weapons they were using in Gaza.
That is a sick weapons system. Meant to be a surgical weapon to minimize collateral damage, by having a much more powerful blast wave but in a smaller radius, it`s the last weapon that should be used in such close quarters, especially after you`ve forced every one to be confined to close quarters.
I better stop before I say something my better self will regret, but the situation has been making me sick for years, even though I could never understand what the problem was & that it was so important that children had to die.

The difference between theists and atheists is that the atheists don't set the theists on fire for refusing to agree with them.

by KNUCKLEHEAD on Fri Jan 23rd, 2009 at 03:21:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas (none / 0)

Palestinian shot dead after Israel's unilateral ceasefire
news.xinhuanet.com

-- A Palestinian farmer was shot dead on Sunday morning by an Israeli soldier in Khan Younis in southern Gaza Strip, becoming the first fatality since Israeli declared an unilateral ceasefire, local witnesses said. The witnesses said the farmer was killed while checking his farm.

by Cee on Wed Jan 21st, 2009 at 08:49:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama's First Foreign Call to Abbas | 67 comments (67 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Go to: [ Booman Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]

. Home
. About
. Contact
. Advertise
. FAQ
. Search

Username:
Password:

. Make a new account
. Reset password

Gift Cards * New Arrivals

NOTE: Overstock bests Amazon's prices and is "blue."

THE BOOKS WITH "BUZZ":
______________

Senator Edward M. Kennedy tells his extraordinary personal story:

True Compass: A Memoir
by Edward M. Kennedy.

Read Barack Obama's vision for America:

The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream
by Barack Obama

Boran2 and maryb2004 recommend:

The Big Over Easy: A Nursery Crime
by Jasper Fforde

Must-have information for all presidents-and citizens-of the twenty-first century?

Physics for Future Presidents: The Science behind the Headlines
Richard A. Muller

rae recommends:

Dark Ages America: The Final Phase of Empire
by Morris Berman.

On BooMan’s shelf:

Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln
by Doris Kearns Goodwin

This looks interesting:

Adventure Divas
by Holly Morris

Here’s a good one from
Elizabeth Gilbert:

Eat Pray Love
by Elizabeth Gilbert

"Crash" * Best Motion Picture, Academy Awards * Only $11.79 at Overstock * 2006 SAG Winner, Best Ensemble

Check out
Powell's new section:
NEW FAVORITES
Selected new arrivals at 30% off

Recommended by Indianadem and ejmw:
The Conscience of a Liberal
by Paul Wellstone

From northcountry’s bookshelf:

The New Golden Age:
The Coming Revolution Against
Political Corruption and Economic Chaos by Ravi Batra

A novel about contractors in Iraq from the woman that runs The Spy That Billed Me:

Outsourced: A Novel
from RJ Hillhouse.

Great Deals
----- * ^ * -----

Find mystery novels by Nancy Pickard ("Kansas")

Challenging Empire: How People, Governments, and the UN Defy US Power by Phyllis Bennis (interviewed on DN!)

Featured by Keith Olbermann, New (Powell's Sale): Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower by William Blum (whose other books merit serious consideration)

"Explosive" State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration
by James Risen

The book the CIA doesn't want you to read: Jawbreaker: The Attack on Bin Laden and Al Qaeda: A Personal Account by the CIA's Key Field Commander
Larry Johnson's review

BT's all-time best seller:

PERMACULTURE:
A Designers' Manual
$79.95 * Sale: $59.95

Unequal Sisters: A Multicultural Reader in U.S. Women's History (Third Edition)

The Undercover Economist: Exposing Why the Rich Are Rich, the Poor Are Poor And Why You Can Never Buy a Decent Used Car!

The Worst Hard Time: The Untold Story of Those Who Survived the Great American Dust Bowl
by Timothy Egan

Green Press Initiative
----- * ^ * -----

Journalistas: 100 Years of the Best Writing and Reporting by Women Journalists by Eleanor Mills * NYT review

Bury Me Standing: the Gypsies & Their Journey

1491: New Revelations of the Americas before Columbus

Brokeback Mountain
by Annie Proulx
----- * ^ * -----
Check out Powell's
"At The Movies"

Imperial Ambitions: Conversations on the Post-9/11 World by Noam Chomsky (Power & Terror: Post 9-11 Talks)

The Price of Privilege:

How Parental Pressure and
Material Advantage Are Creating a Generation of
Disconnected and Unhappy Kids
by Madeline Levine

Save 35-70% on
name brand clothing,
footwear, and outdoor gear
at SierraTradingPost.com
:

We listened to PEN American Center's "State of Emergency" and found 1940s books by Curzio Malaparte only at Alibris. (Selection (MP3) excerpted from "The Skin.")

Banned Books * Are you a fan of Film Noir, Art House, Documentaries or Hong Kong Action? * Searching for a long-lost children's book or a first printing of Miles Davis' Kind of Blue on vinyl? Find it at Alibris!

:
:

Booman Tribune Homepage
admin@boomantribune.com
powered by Scoop

More blogs about Blogs at Technorati.

Technorati Profile