The Plight of the Forgotten Palestinian People
For the first time in about 20 years, the Palestinian issue, which had been such a part of any American presidential candidate's foreign policy, has disappeared from the radar screen.
"That which changed me in exile changed me dramatically... Palestine has become a thousand gliding bodies, cruising the streets of the world, singing the song of death because the new Christ, descended from his cross, carried his cross and left Palestine." –Mahmoud Darwish [Palestinian poet]
We are less than 60 days away from this important event on the American calendar. With the U.S. elections fast approaching, each camp is preparing for the big night. Obama’s nomination at the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte gave quite a boost to Obama's candidacy, which is thought to have put him ahead of his Republican opponent. We can expect three debates in the meantime, and candidates are ready to exploit the weaknesses of the other. It is thought that Romney will not be attacking “Obamacare” and health reform since he himself, as governor of Massachusetts, implemented the same project. However, Romney's running mate has promised to dismantle this legislation that makes it possible for Americans from a modest bracket to have access to health care.
For the first time in about 20 years, the Palestinian issue, which had been such a part of any American presidential candidate's foreign policy, has disappeared from the radar screen. Has peace been restored? Are we to believe that Israelis and Palestinians are living side by side in two separate states as Obama wished, and Bush and Clinton before him? Are we dealing with one single state with all these citizens, both Israeli and Palestinian? Have the Palestinian people disappeared? Nothing of the sort! In fact, the two sides, Republicans and Democrats alike, wish to avoid these sensitive issues that may alienate the Jewish vote, especially AIPAC [American Israel Public Affairs Committee], and they realize that there is no Arab vote in the U.S. Even though they are more numerous, they are more fragmented than ever. During this time, the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, is flying high. He is acting as if he is running a state with all these different prerogatives. (SEE HERE)
The case of the Ariel settlement, right at the heart of the West Bank, is an example of the rampant normalization of the area. The ball is now in the Israeli army's court — they are the decision makers in the West Bank. It is they who will ultimately decide on the transformation of Ariel College into a university establishment. It is the banalization of a settlement of about 18,000 inhabitants, stuck in the middle of the northern part of the West Bank that the Israelis call Samaria. If the “Ariel University Center of Samaria” emerges, it will add an element to the concealment of a current reality in people’s heads. A closer look reveals that there is still something missing at Ariel — its inclusion within the boundary of the “security fence” erected unilaterally by Israel in the West Bank. A difficult decision to take, since the de facto annexing of Ariel to Israeli territory would mark the failure of the project at the heart of the settlement, which was to create a territory that stretches to the Jordan Valley, with the twofold objective of controlling the northern part of the West Bank and preventing the creation of an eventual Palestinian state.
The Bare Minimum of Ban Ki-moon
In fact, the creeping colonization is normalizing. Justice, as Gilles Devers wrote, has a practical element so that often, one can make it say whatever one wants to hear. Until now, Israeli opponents of colonization could only defend their position using the Sasson report, written in 2005, which concluded that unauthorized settlement is illegal. However, for nearly two decades now, Israel has been adamant that it has not been creating any more new settlements in the West Bank. Based on the same premises (collusion between the settlers and the Israeli authorities), a different report, signed by the legal expert Edmond Levy on July 10, is celebrated by Israeli settlers from the other side of the Green Line [the demarcation line between Israel and its neighbors] as it concludes that these points of settlement are legal, precisely because of “guarantees” given de facto by the Jewish state to its citizens. (SEE HERE)
Ban Ki-moon warned Israel on Monday, Sept. 10 that a continued blockade on the Gaza Strip would only result in condemning the inhabitants of the coastal enclave to a sustained poverty, a situation that could benefit extremists. While addressing the U.N. Human Rights Council, the U.N. Secretary-General associated the “immense human suffering” of the Gazans with the “indiscriminate rocket fire” at Israel from the Gaza Strip, which contributed to serious violations of fundamental freedoms. “I urge Israel to lift its harsh restrictions in order to ease the plight of civilians and bring an end to the closure," he said, in reference to the blockade imposed by the Israeli government.
“Keeping a large and dense population in unremitting poverty is in nobody's interest except that of the most extreme radicals in the region," he declared. Ban Ki-moon, whose remarks were echoed by the High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay in front of the 47 members of the Council, has also urged the Israeli government to respect the rights of Palestinians and international law. He has called on the Jewish state to support efforts to create "an independent, sovereign, democratic and viable Palestinian state" at peace with Israel. A sustainable solution to the conflict in the region would result in an agreement that would put an end to 45 years of occupation. However, talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank about a possible peace agreement have stalled, each party blaming the other. The Palestinian view is that Israeli settlements are the major obstacle to any constructive discussion. Navi Pillay raised the following point during her speech before the Council. She said that the expansion of settlements “as well as violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinians” are sources of tension and called on Israeli authorities to release the 4,000 Palestinian prisoners who have been detained without any form of trial. However, she has also criticized Palestinian rocket fire. Hamas, for its part, denies engaging in systematic rocket attacks on Israeli towns and cities along the border, saying that the attacks are only sporadic and isolated responses in order to protect themselves. (SEE HERE)
We can see it: Ban has done the bare minimum, he has put the occupiers and the occupied on the same footing. By way of example, Palestinians throwing firecrackers — which are mostly ineffective reactions of arrogance — have an effectiveness a thousand times weaker than Apache helicopters or Predator drones. Even better, Ban talks from his kind heart to the kind hearts of the occupiers, naturally without calling on any sanction, and he is completely occupied by the Syrian issue.
It is a fact that the Palestinian issue does not sell anymore — it is no longer of interest to Americans, and the pro-Israel lobby is keeping a close watch. To hear the speeches by both candidates for the U.S. presidential election on Nov. 6 during their respective conventions, we could consider that, regarding the peace process, if one can still dare to use this expression, light will not come from Washington for a long time. No one is supposed to doubt the commitment of either candidate to Israel, but in fewer than 20 words from one or the other, Mitt Romney is emerging as the most succinct. In his own words, "President Obama has thrown allies like Israel under the bus.”
Romney, Obama and the Demise of the Palestinian Issue
Those interested should be content. Barack Obama, who had one of his most cutting setbacks on this issue and who has been distancing himself for two years from this puzzle is not, however, going to forget the peace objectives: "Our commitment to Israel's security must not waver, and neither must our pursuit of peace," is how Obama sums it up. It is brief. In a nutshell, avoidance is in, and without doubt for a long time. (SEE HERE)
In this particularly fierce battle that is raging in the United States between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, every blow counts. Moments of procrastination on the part of the Democrats in referring to Jerusalem as the capital of Israel gave the Republican camp the opportunity to question the sincerity of U.S. ties to Israel, a subject of broad consensus in America. What is it all about? After having been initially withdrawn, this reference awkwardly found its way back into the Democratic Party Platform, as Corine Lesnes reported in her blog. In the end, the text concerning Israel is the following: “President Obama and the Democratic Party maintain an unshakable commitment to Israel's security.”
How Many Capitals Are There in Jerusalem?
“A strong and secure Israel is vital to the United States not simply because we share strategic interests, but also because we share common values. … President Obama will continue to press Arab states to reach out to Israel. … Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.” The left-wing Democrats clearly interpreted this change as an intolerable concession to pro-Israelis. Despite protests from many Democratic delegates, the U.S. president’s program was amended in extremis last Wednesday evening, in order to refer to Jerusalem as the "capital of Israel." (SEE HERE)
For history, during his visit to Israel, Mitt Romney assured Israelis in Jerusalem that it would be the eternal capital of Israel.
The Iranian Civil Nuclear Issue
The second important issue that is also related to U.S. foreign policy is the Iranian issue. Neither the Arab Spring nor the European financial meltdown find favor with the candidates. Israeli leaders are putting on the pressure in order to define the red line, and they want the most coercive one possible, while threatening to intervene themselves.
In response, U.S. President Barack Obama has declined an Israeli request to receive Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his next visit to the United States. This snub comes at a time when Israel and the U.S. are being more and more open about their differences on the Iranian nuclear crisis. On Sept. 10, Washington proposed an end to Mr. Netanyahu’s repeated demands to impose a “clear red line” on Iran in order to prevent it from building nuclear weapons. The United States has warned Israel that setting a “red line” or deadline on Iran for its controversial nuclear program would not be helpful, with Washington favoring the path of diplomacy and sanctions against Tehran.
As for the Republican candidate, he estimates that a nuclear Iran is “the greatest threat that America faces and the world faces.” On Sunday, in an interview on NBC, the Republican candidate Mitt Romney declared that the way Barack Obama has handled the Iranian issue has maybe been his “biggest failure,” while all this time promising a different approach if elected. However, according to The Sunday Times, a British newspaper, Israel would consider launching an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) on Iran in order to cripple its transport and communications networks in their entirety, thereby halting the development of its nuclear program.
Conclusion
In all likelihood, Obama will be elected. He has had some difficult relations with the Israeli prime minister who not only defied him, but what's more, has ignored his recommendations. The idea of the two states side by side is becoming more and more a figment of the imagination. West Bank Palestinians are accommodating their conditions with a prime minister who holds favor in the West. The Gazans know what the moral and material misery of surviving as a group is; they are not expecting anything from the West. Palestinian elections have been scheduled; one might think that if Palestine votes wrongly, it will continue to suffer. The Arab Spring stopped at the gates of the West Bank, and even the attempt of young Facebookers, urging their leaders from Gaza to Ramallah, has fizzled out. We have to hope that Obama, once re-elected, will have free reign to make progress in the dialogue with Iran and to give a reason to Israelis to arrive at an Israeli-Palestinian state, which will be a state of all its citizens, finally bringing peace into this part of the world that has seen the advent of the revealed religions [Judaism, Christianity and Islam]. Amen!
"That which changed me in exile changed me dramatically... Palestine has become a thousand gliding bodies, cruising the streets of the world, singing the song of death because the new Christ, descended from his cross, carried his cross and left Palestine." –Mahmoud Darwish [Palestinian poet]
We are less than 60 days away from this important event on the American calendar. With the U.S. elections fast approaching, each camp is preparing for the big night. Obama’s nomination at the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte gave quite a boost to Obama's candidacy, which is thought to have put him ahead of his Republican opponent. We can expect three debates in the meantime, and candidates are ready to exploit the weaknesses of the other. It is thought that Romney will not be attacking “Obamacare” and health reform since he himself, as governor of Massachusetts, implemented the same project. However, Romney's running mate has promised to dismantle this legislation that makes it possible for Americans from a modest bracket to have access to health care.
For the first time in about 20 years, the Palestinian issue, which had been such a part of any American presidential candidate's foreign policy, has disappeared from the radar screen. Has peace been restored? Are we to believe that Israelis and Palestinians are living side by side in two separate states as Obama wished, and Bush and Clinton before him? Are we dealing with one single state with all these citizens, both Israeli and Palestinian? Have the Palestinian people disappeared? Nothing of the sort! In fact, the two sides, Republicans and Democrats alike, wish to avoid these sensitive issues that may alienate the Jewish vote, especially AIPAC [American Israel Public Affairs Committee], and they realize that there is no Arab vote in the U.S. Even though they are more numerous, they are more fragmented than ever. During this time, the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, is flying high. He is acting as if he is running a state with all these different prerogatives. (SEE HERE)
The case of the Ariel settlement, right at the heart of the West Bank, is an example of the rampant normalization of the area. The ball is now in the Israeli army's court — they are the decision makers in the West Bank. It is they who will ultimately decide on the transformation of Ariel College into a university establishment. It is the banalization of a settlement of about 18,000 inhabitants, stuck in the middle of the northern part of the West Bank that the Israelis call Samaria. If the “Ariel University Center of Samaria” emerges, it will add an element to the concealment of a current reality in people’s heads. A closer look reveals that there is still something missing at Ariel — its inclusion within the boundary of the “security fence” erected unilaterally by Israel in the West Bank. A difficult decision to take, since the de facto annexing of Ariel to Israeli territory would mark the failure of the project at the heart of the settlement, which was to create a territory that stretches to the Jordan Valley, with the twofold objective of controlling the northern part of the West Bank and preventing the creation of an eventual Palestinian state.
The Bare Minimum of Ban Ki-moon
In fact, the creeping colonization is normalizing. Justice, as Gilles Devers wrote, has a practical element so that often, one can make it say whatever one wants to hear. Until now, Israeli opponents of colonization could only defend their position using the Sasson report, written in 2005, which concluded that unauthorized settlement is illegal. However, for nearly two decades now, Israel has been adamant that it has not been creating any more new settlements in the West Bank. Based on the same premises (collusion between the settlers and the Israeli authorities), a different report, signed by the legal expert Edmond Levy on July 10, is celebrated by Israeli settlers from the other side of the Green Line [the demarcation line between Israel and its neighbors] as it concludes that these points of settlement are legal, precisely because of “guarantees” given de facto by the Jewish state to its citizens. (SEE HERE)
Ban Ki-moon warned Israel on Monday, Sept. 10 that a continued blockade on the Gaza Strip would only result in condemning the inhabitants of the coastal enclave to a sustained poverty, a situation that could benefit extremists. While addressing the U.N. Human Rights Council, the U.N. Secretary-General associated the “immense human suffering” of the Gazans with the “indiscriminate rocket fire” at Israel from the Gaza Strip, which contributed to serious violations of fundamental freedoms. “I urge Israel to lift its harsh restrictions in order to ease the plight of civilians and bring an end to the closure," he said, in reference to the blockade imposed by the Israeli government.
“Keeping a large and dense population in unremitting poverty is in nobody's interest except that of the most extreme radicals in the region," he declared. Ban Ki-moon, whose remarks were echoed by the High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay in front of the 47 members of the Council, has also urged the Israeli government to respect the rights of Palestinians and international law. He has called on the Jewish state to support efforts to create "an independent, sovereign, democratic and viable Palestinian state" at peace with Israel. A sustainable solution to the conflict in the region would result in an agreement that would put an end to 45 years of occupation. However, talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank about a possible peace agreement have stalled, each party blaming the other. The Palestinian view is that Israeli settlements are the major obstacle to any constructive discussion. Navi Pillay raised the following point during her speech before the Council. She said that the expansion of settlements “as well as violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinians” are sources of tension and called on Israeli authorities to release the 4,000 Palestinian prisoners who have been detained without any form of trial. However, she has also criticized Palestinian rocket fire. Hamas, for its part, denies engaging in systematic rocket attacks on Israeli towns and cities along the border, saying that the attacks are only sporadic and isolated responses in order to protect themselves. (SEE HERE)
We can see it: Ban has done the bare minimum, he has put the occupiers and the occupied on the same footing. By way of example, Palestinians throwing firecrackers — which are mostly ineffective reactions of arrogance — have an effectiveness a thousand times weaker than Apache helicopters or Predator drones. Even better, Ban talks from his kind heart to the kind hearts of the occupiers, naturally without calling on any sanction, and he is completely occupied by the Syrian issue.
It is a fact that the Palestinian issue does not sell anymore — it is no longer of interest to Americans, and the pro-Israel lobby is keeping a close watch. To hear the speeches by both candidates for the U.S. presidential election on Nov. 6 during their respective conventions, we could consider that, regarding the peace process, if one can still dare to use this expression, light will not come from Washington for a long time. No one is supposed to doubt the commitment of either candidate to Israel, but in fewer than 20 words from one or the other, Mitt Romney is emerging as the most succinct. In his own words, "President Obama has thrown allies like Israel under the bus.”
Romney, Obama and the Demise of the Palestinian Issue
Those interested should be content. Barack Obama, who had one of his most cutting setbacks on this issue and who has been distancing himself for two years from this puzzle is not, however, going to forget the peace objectives: "Our commitment to Israel's security must not waver, and neither must our pursuit of peace," is how Obama sums it up. It is brief. In a nutshell, avoidance is in, and without doubt for a long time. (SEE HERE)
In this particularly fierce battle that is raging in the United States between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, every blow counts. Moments of procrastination on the part of the Democrats in referring to Jerusalem as the capital of Israel gave the Republican camp the opportunity to question the sincerity of U.S. ties to Israel, a subject of broad consensus in America. What is it all about? After having been initially withdrawn, this reference awkwardly found its way back into the Democratic Party Platform, as Corine Lesnes reported in her blog. In the end, the text concerning Israel is the following: “President Obama and the Democratic Party maintain an unshakable commitment to Israel's security.”
How Many Capitals Are There in Jerusalem?
“A strong and secure Israel is vital to the United States not simply because we share strategic interests, but also because we share common values. … President Obama will continue to press Arab states to reach out to Israel. … Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.” The left-wing Democrats clearly interpreted this change as an intolerable concession to pro-Israelis. Despite protests from many Democratic delegates, the U.S. president’s program was amended in extremis last Wednesday evening, in order to refer to Jerusalem as the "capital of Israel." (SEE HERE)
For history, during his visit to Israel, Mitt Romney assured Israelis in Jerusalem that it would be the eternal capital of Israel.
The Iranian Civil Nuclear Issue
The second important issue that is also related to U.S. foreign policy is the Iranian issue. Neither the Arab Spring nor the European financial meltdown find favor with the candidates. Israeli leaders are putting on the pressure in order to define the red line, and they want the most coercive one possible, while threatening to intervene themselves.
In response, U.S. President Barack Obama has declined an Israeli request to receive Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his next visit to the United States. This snub comes at a time when Israel and the U.S. are being more and more open about their differences on the Iranian nuclear crisis. On Sept. 10, Washington proposed an end to Mr. Netanyahu’s repeated demands to impose a “clear red line” on Iran in order to prevent it from building nuclear weapons. The United States has warned Israel that setting a “red line” or deadline on Iran for its controversial nuclear program would not be helpful, with Washington favoring the path of diplomacy and sanctions against Tehran.
As for the Republican candidate, he estimates that a nuclear Iran is “the greatest threat that America faces and the world faces.” On Sunday, in an interview on NBC, the Republican candidate Mitt Romney declared that the way Barack Obama has handled the Iranian issue has maybe been his “biggest failure,” while all this time promising a different approach if elected. However, according to The Sunday Times, a British newspaper, Israel would consider launching an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) on Iran in order to cripple its transport and communications networks in their entirety, thereby halting the development of its nuclear program.
Conclusion
In all likelihood, Obama will be elected. He has had some difficult relations with the Israeli prime minister who not only defied him, but what's more, has ignored his recommendations. The idea of the two states side by side is becoming more and more a figment of the imagination. West Bank Palestinians are accommodating their conditions with a prime minister who holds favor in the West. The Gazans know what the moral and material misery of surviving as a group is; they are not expecting anything from the West. Palestinian elections have been scheduled; one might think that if Palestine votes wrongly, it will continue to suffer. The Arab Spring stopped at the gates of the West Bank, and even the attempt of young Facebookers, urging their leaders from Gaza to Ramallah, has fizzled out. We have to hope that Obama, once re-elected, will have free reign to make progress in the dialogue with Iran and to give a reason to Israelis to arrive at an Israeli-Palestinian state, which will be a state of all its citizens, finally bringing peace into this part of the world that has seen the advent of the revealed religions [Judaism, Christianity and Islam]. Amen!