Article

2004-11-17 Israel-Palestine

Abbas fails to win Palestinian militant truce pledge

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Seafarious 2004-11-17 12:55:31 PM|| || Front Page|| [11138 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 am I wrong to believe that they will become so bogged down in political infighting for the crown, that we can all just stand back and watch as they self-destruct?

Posted by 2b 2004-11-17 1:18:16 PM|| 2004-11-17 1:18:16 PM|| Front Page Top

#2 From what I can tell, the upcoming Palestinian election will be like holding a beauty pageant in a Leper colony. Small wonder the Palestinians are considered the Pollacks of the Middle East. Why do we continue to countenace this charade? These people are not capable of self-goverenance.

Posted by reality check 2004-11-17 1:25:54 PM|| 2004-11-17 1:25:54 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 abbas is the "veteran Pal moderate" Of course thats a pretty awkward phrase - does it mean a veteran Pal whos a moderate, or a Pal whos a veteran at being a moderate? Certainly Abbas aint a life long moderate - can anyone find one who has ANY influence among Pals? But he WAS apparently pushing for moderate policies from the time of Oslo forward, and was widely reported to be aghast at Arafats flat rejection of the Taba peace proposal, and of the call to Intifada. After that he was no longer really a member of Arafats "guard", old or otherwise. He became Pal PM only cause the US essentially imposed him on Arafat, and Arafat proceeded to out maneuver him.

With Arafat rotting in hell, the question becomes what will Abbas try to do, and what will he be capable of doing. I, for one, am not willing to prejudge that either way at this point.

His unwillingness to give in to Hamas on the date and format of Pal elections is a good sign, but more important will be how he deals with the Hamas violence that is likely to result.

Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-11-17 2:00:24 PM|| 2004-11-17 2:00:24 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 This is a complete farce. The Israeli-Palestinian war will end, if it ever does, the way all wars end: when one side gives up. I'm not betting on that side being Israel.

Posted by lex 2004-11-17 2:02:53 PM|| 2004-11-17 2:02:53 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 plenty of wars end with no clear winner. You could say that still means a side giving up, in fact both sides. Israel has certainly given up the claim to ALL the West Bank. On the Israeli side the question is whether it will give up 95% of the West Bank. Barak was willing to, and I suspect the majority of Israelis are. Its not clear what Sharon is willing to give up, exactly. As for the Pals, it seems Abbas was willing to give up alot, and at least to the point of not being willing to reject the Taba out of hand. Whether he will really give up the "right of return" is a matter of some debate. Whether the rest of the Palestinian Polity will give up as much as Abbas would is another difficult question. Im not optimistic about the outcome, but farce it is not.

Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-11-17 2:11:49 PM|| 2004-11-17 2:11:49 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 Israel has certainly given up the claim to ALL the West Bank

It ain't about the West Bank; never was. It's about Israel's existence.

Posted by lex 2004-11-17 2:12:45 PM|| 2004-11-17 2:12:45 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 I agree that Arafat probably never accepted Israels existence. I am not convinced that Abbas and Dahlan dont accept it.

Certainly Israel will never accept its own destruction. The question of the West Bank is however tied with the question of Israels existence, in that improvements over the 1967 green line are widely seen in Israel as needed for the sake of security, to insure Israels existence. Barak and others thought the offer at Taba did that. Some doves think an even more generous offer (the Geneva accords) would still do so. Sharon has given the impression that he thinks the Taba lines were not adequate to Israels security, and thus existence.

Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-11-17 2:17:43 PM|| 2004-11-17 2:17:43 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 What are the chances that a coherent Palestinian regime will emerge that will renounce, in its foreign words and its domestic ones, and in deeds as well, the commitment of every Palestinian armed faction to the destruction of Israel?

Posted by lex 2004-11-17 2:20:42 PM|| 2004-11-17 2:20:42 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 The Paleo terrortories is the first society in the history of the world where the majority of the population is incapable of supporting itself. It exists as a giant UN run welfare scheme. The notion that a Paleo state will somehow magically solve this problem is absurd. Destroying Israel would be unlikely to solve it either. I can not see how this will end other than badly for the Paleos.

Posted by phil_b 2004-11-17 2:42:56 PM|| 2004-11-17 2:42:56 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 #8, about the same as the chances of a meteorite crashing through my office ceiling within the next five minutes.

Posted by reality check 2004-11-17 2:45:08 PM|| 2004-11-17 2:45:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 "What are the chances that a coherent Palestinian regime will emerge that will renounce, in its foreign words and its domestic ones, and in deeds as well, the commitment of every Palestinian armed faction to the destruction of Israel?"

Foreign words - 100%, Arafat already did that, but this was contradicted by his domestic words, and even more so by his actions, as you correcly imply. Chance that regime will emerge which will do all you suggest, including renouncing right of return, and effectively cracking down on those who continue to call for violence - id say 40 to 50%. Odds of it surviving for more than 12 months, say about half of that. This at any time in the next 3 years. But the odds are NOT unaffected by Israeli actions.

Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-11-17 2:58:34 PM|| 2004-11-17 2:58:34 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 Realitycheck, any sign of that meteor yet?

Posted by Seafarious 2004-11-17 4:22:56 PM|| 2004-11-17 4:22:56 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 LH, if your probabilities are correct, then to use Bush's capital investment metaphor, I'd say that the expected return on US invested capital in the "peace process" is somewhere around the ROIC for pets.com. Or maybe the ROIC on Delta Airlines bonds.

More evidence of Bush's cunning and good judgment. Won't get snookered as Clinton did.

Posted by lex 2004-11-17 4:28:11 PM|| 2004-11-17 4:28:11 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 It depends what capital he has to invest. Going in personally like Clinton did would certainly be a mistake, besides I cant see Dubya doing something like that even if the payoff was high, not a "details" guy. Just as well. Appointing a special envoy, sending Rice to the region, etc, putting SOME pressure on Sharon to keep give some space to Abbas, would all make sense however.

And you assume (at least implicitly) that the only return is if there is if a coherent Pal regime emerges with the desired policies. In fact there are benefits to the United States from acting even if that does not occur. Notably in softening attitudes among the (sigh!) fence sitters in the muslim world. And reconciling with those Europeans who are reconcilable. And helping out Tony. And yes, these are all real benefits - (no Putin isnt going to substitute for Blair anytime soon, and yes there are reasonable people in Europe, whom we need, and yes, there ARE fence sitters in the muslim world).

Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-11-17 5:19:56 PM|| 2004-11-17 5:19:56 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 It depends what capital he has to invest

I'm thinking a very small investment in a straddle, using Other People's Money.

Posted by lex 2004-11-17 5:22:09 PM|| 2004-11-17 5:22:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 Nothing is going to happen until an entire generation of pali violence addicts is either dead or dead.

Posted by Shipman 2004-11-17 5:38:12 PM|| 2004-11-17 5:38:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 LH, can't buy any of your purported benefits. As the earlier commenter asserted, surrender by the Palestinians is the pre-requisite here. Sure, in this case it won't look so simple, but that's the sine qua non. Surrender as to destroying Israel, that is. Everything else of course is open to discussion, please sit and have some more tea ... .

But the "fence-sitters" in the Muslim world are mostly of no consequence, and also mostly not fence-sitters when it comes to irrational anti-US feelings anyway. All that we need from them is for them to continue to be weak and demoralized and thus marginal and for their scared/intimidated/bribed regimes to cooperate on essential matters with us. Europeans already provide adequate cooperation, including even contemptible fools like the French. Their need for us makes any need for them undiscernibly small by comparison. Blair's articulate and engaging, etc., but so are some friends of mine. The Conservatives in the UK may be leaderless and pathetic, and Labor half-useless, but whoever follows Blair will have to deal with reality, and will knock him aside for domestic reasons having no relation to PR peace offensives in the MidEast.

External intervention in the mess has almost invariably resulted in more deaths, more suffering, and prolonged impasse -- precisely because without Palestinian and Arab surrender on the fundamental question, all such intervention is pocketed when it walks the Israelis back and contemptuously discarded when it comes to Arab obligations (see last 30 years for examples).

Ninety-nine percent of the change, hard decisions, internecine conflict, and china-breaking must take place on the Palestinian and wider Arab side. "Interventions" by outsiders will simply delay and dilute all of these, as it always has. One can only hope that Dubya follows his correct instincts and avoids any pernicious, naive attempts to "help," and further that he torpedoes any Euro-meddling as well. Given the nihilism, racism, and death-cult that now permeate the Palestinian side, it's a safe bet that it'll be 10-20 years before any real change takes place.

It's to the point where advocates of mediation have to account for their apparent indifference to Palestinian degradation and death.

Posted by Verlaine 2004-11-17 10:30:11 PM|| 2004-11-17 10:30:11 PM|| Front Page Top

23:15 JonS
10:22 2b
10:22 2b
23:57 .com
23:54 someone
23:54 Frank G
23:51 .com
23:47 CornÃ®liÃ«s
23:44 .com
23:35 mojo
23:30 mojo
23:29 Kalle (kafir forever)
23:26 JosephMendiola
23:16 .com
23:16 JonS
23:15 JonS
23:14 OldSpook
23:11 Frank G
23:07 Frank G
23:06 .com
23:06 Frank G
23:05 .com
23:00 Mike Sylwester
22:58 Alaska Paul