Abbas is in no position to commit to ending the conflict.
By Moshe Arens, HAARETZ
Before leaving Israel for Geneva, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry tried his best to scare the hell out of us. In a television interview with an Israeli and a Palestinian reporter he warned that unless Israel reaches an agreement with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas it will be isolated in the international community, and, what’s more, will face another intifada. There you have it – sign on the dotted line, or else. More bad news for Israel came from Geneva, after his arrival there.
Actually, as Kerry knows only too well, the “international community” is not what it was 30 years ago, nor is it what it is made out to be by those trying to frighten Israel into giving in to Abbas’ demands. Europe is not what it used to be, and the European Union is struggling to stay afloat. The anti-Israel voices emanating from the Brussels bureaucracy of the EU do not necessarily reflect the policies pursued by the leaders of the European nations, while the eastern European nations who are members of the EU continue to pursue a policy of friendship and cooperation with Israel.
But more significantly, Europe is rapidly being overtaken in importance by China, India and Russia, none of which give any indication of wanting to isolate Israel if the negotiations with Abbas are not successful. Quite the contrary. Each, pursuing its own interests, seeks to enhance cooperation with Israel, especially in the areas of science and technology.
And of course, as Kerry knows only too well, the United States, still and for years to come the most important country in the world, continues to pursue a traditional policy of friendship and alliance with Israel.
That the U.S. Congress would participate in a campaign to isolate Israel is unimaginable. When Canada and Australia, both ideologically allies of Israel, are added to this evolving picture, it is clear that the threats of Israeli isolation are far-fetched and possibly even in the realm of wishful thinking.
Surprisingly, Kerry was lent a helping hand by none other than Ya’akov Amidror, Israel’s outgoing national security adviser. In a farewell address to the cabinet last week, he too harped on the theme that unless Israel reached an agreement with Abbas it would find itself isolated. Israel must take very seriously the threat of an economic boycott, he said. Whereas Kerry surely knows better, Amidror, who knows the map of the Middle East well from his previous military career and should by now be well acquainted with the global map, certainly should have known better.
As for the specter of renewed Palestinian violence against Israeli civilians – another intifada – in the event the negotiations with Abbas do not succeed, that is quite another matter. We have been through two intifadas, and we have succeeded in putting them both down. We have shown that terror can be defeated. It is a lesson that has been absorbed by those Palestinians who engaged in and supported terror activities – including Abbas himself, who in the past supported Palestinian terrorism.
This terrorism essentially ceased long before the negotiations began. Anyone who thinks these negotiations can advance in the shadow of the threat of renewed terrorism if Abbas’ demands are not met is grossly mistaken.
Everyone concerned, including Kerry, must remember that Abbas represents barely half of the Palestinians and is in no position to commit himself, on behalf of the Palestinians, to ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
In that sense the negotiations are no more than make-believe. To attempt to scare Israel into agreeing to Abbas’ demands at this point is certainly not conducive to the continuation of these talks. They are in any case unlikely to lead to any positive conclusion, and it is best to let them take their course.
Most important of all, somebody forgot to tell Kerry that Israelis don’t scare easily.
Kerry a J-street convert.
mikewise Said:
think about this: does it make sense to allow a people, who you yourself have stated cannot accept coexistence with the jews, to freely roam among the Jews? Its like opening the henhouse door to a pack of foxes. All of these ideas are postulated to avoid transfer and appease the gentiles but transfer of Jews from arab nations, gaza and sinai was never a problem for the gentiles.
Therefore, the real problem is for Jews to repudiate the double standard that transfer is ok for jews but not for arabs. As long as the jews continue to embrace these anti semitic double standards the gentiles will continue to exploit Jewish idiocy. Con artists continue with the same scam until the sucker wakes up. It is not about solutions but about Jewish awakening to reality and to unilateral jewish assertion. The real solution is obscured by double standards presented as “2 wrongs do not make a right”: this is a gentile fraud. Paid 5th column Israeli and jewish leftists are in collusion with the fraud.
mikewise Said:
I think this is where you make your error. You assume that the historical fact of their behavior as muslim arabs will suddenly change if they get designated as Israeli citizens and given full rights. On the contrary I think this will be a disaster based on prior illogical behavior. They are most likely to be spoilers in spite of incentives to the contrary. Furthermore, their ability to freely move around Israel will multiply the danger to Israel in that the enemy is invited in to be a dangerous 5th column with access to every Israeli and the ability to link up with Israeli arabs. While they are across a line with restrictions on movement the danger is kept away and if necessary they can be bombed in dire circumstances. Once among the Israelis they become a rebellious minority who can do massive damage and impede normal daily activities. There is no basis for the belief that they will change their behavior or attitude simply by designating them Israeli. In fact, if it is a unilateral Israeli action that allows them freedom of movement in Israel through Israeli residence or citizenship I guarantee that they rebel and resist. funding for this violence will continue from the muslim world and the funding will dictate how they behave.
mikewise Said:
It is easier to put down those on the other side of the line than within your nation. IN the nation, even if you put them down, your daily life is negatively affected; whereas across the line they can be put down without affecting daily life in Israel.
It is important that with any annexation the arabs are restricted to their existing area, not given a say in Israeli elections and all those who came to Israel from Tunisia, their descendants and their families under Oslo should be immediately deported to Gaza. This represents tens of thousands of hostile arabs who belong elsewhere. These represent the most obstructive and dangerous elements to Israel. They can be legally transferred by declaring that Oslo has been materially breached and that their only claim to residence in Israel is due to the Oslo agreement: therefore the breach of Oslo annuls the right of residence. Furthermore, Israels leaving of gaza is not necessarily an abandonment of sovereign claims to gaza which Israel can claim allows it to renter. The same reasons to consider Gaza sovereign would support Israels sovereignty over area C: defacto control of territory, boundaries, govt. The main thing is not to allow the hope for a change in arab attitudes resulting from Israeli annexation or citizenship to cloud facts. The international lynching of Israel would continue because they would support the arabs in any rebellion against israel. You rely too much on expecting logical outcomes from illogical people.
The real solution is to start with what is best for jewish Israel and then find the strategy and tactic to implement that solution. That solution must be able to be sustainable and unilateral. Any solution that depends on agreement from internal or external arabs/muslims, the UN or other foreign entities, will not be succesful or sustainable. The best solution begins with the unavoidable acceptance that the arabs must leave and that Israel must develop a strategy that is not dependent on agreement from anyone. Legal arguments may be employed as a basis for unilateral action in order to give those who wish to accept Israels actions an excuse for that acceptance plus give those who do not want war or sanctions against israel an excuse for tolerating Israels unilateral actions.
Laura Said:
Ah, he is what is called in Texas a “piss ant”. He codled to be a “Mafia Don”.
Comparing Kerry to a mafia don:
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-Ed-Contributors/Secretary-of-fate-331528
threats are always made by the weak.
@ bernard ross:
As for the specter of renewed Palestinian violence against Israeli civilians – another intifada – in the event the negotiations with Abbas do not succeed, that is quite another matter. We have been through two intifadas, and we have succeeded in putting them both down. We have shown that terror can be defeated. It is a lesson that has been absorbed by those Palestinians who engaged in and supported terror activities – including Abbas himself, who in the past supported Palestinian terrorism.
bernard,
remember that after annexation there will be no palestinian arabs. only israeli arabs…
when well-known Israelis echo their masters it is a good indication that they are on the payroll
Perhaps it is make-belive in every sense. Perhaps it is a distracting drama, with its manufactured ups and downs. It strikes me that the only reason that BB released prisoners was not to pay abbas to negotiate towards a real agreement but precisely to allow Abbas to claim succesful achievements when the negotiations break apart. In other words when it fails abbas can claim he got the prisoners plus the money. Why would he need to show something if negotiations were expected to be successful? Just wondering.