When Washington Emphasizes Defending the Settlements!

Who among us does not remember the sign of shit and disgust present in that smile on the face of the United States’ ambassador in New York, Susan Rice, during her comments on the dual veto (Chinese-Russian) against the draft resolution on Syria? … That day, American diplomacy expressed in “non-diplomatic” words dissatisfaction and intense frustration over the two superpowers protecting the killer and providing “an additional opportunity to kill.”* On that day, the American woman nearly threw up “what was in her gut” on the table of the Security Council and not in “its toilets.”

I don’t know exactly how the American delegate was feeling when raising his hand alone in a meeting of the Human Rights Council in Geneva, which condemned the policies and practices of the settlement of occupied territories, colonization and racism, as well as decided to form a fact-finding committee on the matter. I don’t know how his features were, or her features, and I don’t know the identity or shape of the delegate; the media did not provide adequate coverage of the most exciting event of the disgusting behavior of the Russians and the Chinese (double).

Washington alone voted “no” on the draft resolution, while most of the world voted “yes.” A few abstained from voting for fear of “American intimidation” and “Israeli blackmail.” Washington, at least rhetorically, continues to support a two-state option, but its policies for a settlement expansion are prepared; that is, Washington still sees the settlements as illegal and an obstacle to peace, that they threaten stability as a whole. But, as always, Washington is willing to retreat from its principles, values, positions and the statements of its leaders when related to the security of Israel and the U.S., as well as its settlements and racism, especially when the White House is a few steps away from receiving new residents or renewing the current residents.

What really is the message of the parties involved in the Arab-Israeli conflict who have exploited this shameful and strange position? Israel has grown increasingly certain that Washington will continue to protect its back, even as it knows and commits the most heinous violations of international and humanitarian law and infringes on the rights of other people. The Palestinians have received message after message not to doubt in the slightest that the United States is part of their problem — not the cause or a means to solve them, let alone a mediator in the peace process. America speaks lies; it no longer deceives a young child in Dheisheh, Maghazi, units or Yarmouk.

Some Arabs have been Arabized. They have held up the world and have not stood down against Moscow, and they pursued Beijing for its part in the draft resolution on Syria. They even declared the “end of the dialogue with Moscow,” and they refused to greet [Russian Foreign Minister] Lavrov when he informed them that he did not stop the proxy fight back in Moscow. And their sleeper cells began to wake up after the impact of a “Salafi surge” on the republics of Central Asia and the Caucasus — no longer a secret to anyone.

But when America vetoes something in New York or Geneva, you see them rushing to the graves in silence … as if what is happening in front of them is happening on another planet, or as if Palestine is not part of the “Arabism” whose honor they protect, or as if they are “characters” that wake up only in the face of Iran. But when it comes to Israel, its aggression and the settlements, they take off from their shoulders the “cloak of Arabism.” Tucked behind their ambiguous Middle Eastern clothes, they notice their common interests with Israel and in order “to meet the objective” assume the proper attitudes and positions. Here they become rational and surrender kneeling, and then become reality the conspiracies and machinations, weapons and more weapons, and the doctrines of the exclusionary black sleeper cells begin to waken.

Palestine, gentlemen, is an Arabic state by its root and essence. To say otherwise creates a prospect for lying. We have witnessed the beginning, the first sentence of nationalism, the cornerstone in building Arab nationalism. Without this it would collapse, become a trace before your eyes. Consider and test out Arabism outside the field, which has failed miserably. What about testing some of us in our Arabism, colluding with the enemies and usurpers of the rights of Arabic people and their patrons and protectors?

And for the Islamists who are busy with other issues — most of them heading to quench their thirst for power and brilliance — we say: Enough messages of tranquility and reassurance. Have you satisfied the world to the extent that you are approaching the point of borrowing your enemies’ language from obsolete systems? We have had enough about the issue of Islam’s third holiest site. You shower us with a barrage of fatwas and sermons about the holy land. Here is an endowment that is virtually lost from our hands, as many of you are fighting, not for the benefit of the people, but about the sex of the angels, “an end to waging war” and “polygamy.” What is not presented to the public is the transmission of Rice’s mood during that meeting.

Is it not high time to awake a popular, worthy Arab Spring and put Palestine at the top of its priorities? Do we leave this issue to the government of traffickers who were “arrested” by the people? Is it not time to reconsider the worthiness of a hundred years of struggle and fight for Arab identity on this sacred spot? We leave our questions by drawing on the number of days.

*Editor’s note: This quote, accurately translated, could not be verified.