| Submit your comments on this article |
| Israel-Palestine |
| Daniel Pipes' Think Tank: Peace plan won't work |
| 2005-02-10 |
| PAUL LOCKYER: One of America's most outspoken critics of past Middle East peace deals is pessimistic about the ability of the Palestinian Authority to control violence in the wake of the proclaimed ceasefire. no! no! this time it's different because, um, I'll have to get back to you on that. Dr Daniel Pipes is the director of the think tank the Middle East Forum and was nominated by President George W. Bush to the United States Institute of Peace in 2003. Dr Pipes says the Palestinian Authority under Mahmoud Abbas is playing for time by agreeing to the ceasefire because it hasn't given up the idea of destroying Israel. Daniel Pipes is speaking to Hamish Fitzsimmons. DANIEL PIPES: The new leadership on the Palestinian side is saying violence hasn't worked, terrorism has been counterproductive, we are going backwards rather than forwards as a result of it, so it's time to stop it. and yet he STILL needs to convince the palis of that In other words it's a tactical decision, and it's a correct tactical decision, but it's merely a tactical decision, it's not saying that we accept Israel and we're going to live in harmony with Israel. It's saying violence at this time is counterproductive. HAMISH FITZSIMMONS: But given the rapidity that this deal was reached after Mr Abbas gaining control over the Palestinian Authority, do you think that signals that he is serious about peace? DANIEL PIPES: He is serious. He has been talking for two-and-a-half years about the need to end the violence, and so it's not surprising that he's made this his first priority. Whether he can actually clamp down on violence is one question, and then what his purposes are is another question. actually, there's no question about it. he CAN'T clamp down on violence I believe his purpose is in order to get more benefits from the Israelis in order to be stronger to fight them later on. I mean, it's purely tactical. I've heard this argument before. But I'm not sure how they would ever expect to "fight the Israelis later on." With their own pali state, Israel would no longer be fighting terrorism - it would be fighting another nation, with the rules of war more clearly articulated. Bombing cities would be acceptable. And palis would never be able to build a fighting force like Israel has. Am I missing something? HAMISH FITZSIMMONS: Is your sense of pessimism shared by many in the US, and particularly in the Bush administration? DANIEL PIPES: No, there is a widespread feeling of elation that the logjam has broken, Arafat is out of the way, there's real progress. In other words, the consensus approach is that the Palestinians have accepted Israel, and now it's just a matter of getting the circumstances correct, getting the mood right, getting the deals in place, and everything will follow. And my conclusion from the Oslo round of diplomacy between 1993 and 2000 is that it's a more profound problem. In other words, the general view is that Oslo didn't work. Everyone agrees it didn't work. But the reasons are rather superficial — Arafat's personality, not paying enough attention to public opinion, Israelis increasing their presence on the West Bank. But I don't see those as so important. I see what really is important is a reluctance on the Palestinian side to give up the long-held dream of destroying Israel. THAT is true, no matter what happens PAUL LOCKYER: Middle East commentator Daniel Pipes speaking to Hamish Fitzsimmons. |
| Posted by:PlanetDan |
| #7 TW - I hope those pop. numbers are true, where did you see those? The breeding numbers dropping are a good sign that the wymyns are wising up |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-02-10 11:29:56 PM |
| #6 Am I missing something? With their own state, the Palestinians also control their own trade, import/export, embassies, seat at the UN, etc.. Everything any other terrorist-state can do with little interference. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2005-02-10 11:26:20 PM |
| #5 Pipes sounds awfully pessimistic here, but I see where he's coming from. If Abbas is being as half-assed as Pipes thinks he is regarding a long-term peace with Israel, he might have a reason for it other than hoping to lay low until they can push Israel into the sea. It is also possible that Abbas didn't want to go too far in proposing long-term peace in order to save face within the larger Arab world. That being said, my money is on Pipes anyway. |
| Posted by: Chris W. 2005-02-10 10:01:06 PM |
| #4 "The Paleo government has to crackdown on and disarm the militants" Ah, Phil, who do you think the Paleo goverment are? |
| Posted by: gromgorru 2005-02-10 9:54:01 PM |
| #3 PlanetDan, Abbas has long believed that the Palestinians can peacefully destroy Israel using two weapons: 1. Population: Palestinian wives used to produce 7-9 children each. The number has now dropped to about 2.5, or about the same as Israeli wives, but the Palestinians haven't acknowledged the drop. But with the previous high population growth, Abbas planned to simply crowd the Jews off the map. 2. International pressure: Much of the world automatically supports the Palestinians over Israel. Every time. Regardless of the issue. Abbas is counting on this world pressure to overcome U.S. support of Israel, and to force the Israelis to sign on to increasingly deleterious Accords and Processes and... until slice by slice like a salami (Arafat's image, actually) they allow themselves to be negotiated out of existence. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2005-02-10 5:48:17 PM |
| #2 The Paleo government has to crackdown on and disarm the militants and I see no sign of that occuring. Unless and until that happens, this is going nowhere. Its just wishful thinking. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2005-02-10 5:25:11 PM |
| #1 sure its tactical. So what? tactical doesnt necessarily mean short term. At this point theres nothing to be gained for Israel by hanging on to most of the territories. |
| Posted by: Liberalhawk 2005-02-10 4:12:01 PM |