Mahmoud Abbas en de Arabische Lente

 

Volgens de Jerusalem Post zijn de Palestijnen nogal ontevreden over Abbas, zijn clan en zijn corrupte partij Fatah, en zouden ze mogelijk weer op Hamas kunnen stemmen bij de volgende verkiezingen. Of het erkennen van een eigen staat door VN veel zal helpen is de vraag, als daar nauwelijks praktische consequenties aan zitten. Of heeft Abbas al vervolgstappen in gedachten? De meest logische stap is toch terugkeren naar de onderhandelingstafel met Israel, al dan niet met een papiertje van de VN op zak. Maar misschien wacht hij op de val van Netanjahoe, en hoopt op een compromisbereidere opvolger. Daar zou hij overigens aan kunnen bijdragen door zelf eens wat compromissen te doen.

 

Voor een volk onder bezetting gaat het de Palestijnen de laatste jaren niet eens zo slecht, en Hamas heeft zich ook bepaald niet populair gemaakt met haar regering in Gaza, dus ik hoop dat dat nog wel meevalt bij de verkiezingen (waarvoor nog geen datum is vastgesteld). Hoop, omdat Abbas nog altijd stukken beter is dan Hamas, en een serieus alternatief voor beide heeft zich nog niet aangediend.

 

Wouter

____________

 

 

Mahmoud Abbas and the Arab Spring

By JONATHAN SCHANZER
09/06/2011 23:31
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=236927

In keeping with the Arab Spring, the Palestinians may yet determine that their own government is the source of their frustration.

 

Last month, Libyan strongman Muammar Gaddafi fell from power in Tripoli. Syrian dictator Bashar Assad appears to be teetering on the brink of a similar fate in Damascus. With the Arab world in full upheaval, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas may be next to feel the heat.

Until now, Abbas has been largely impervious to the troubles around him. The West Bank leader has been unencumbered as he plots for his big moment on September 21, when he plans to declare Palestinian independence at the United Nations.

But while Libyans, Egyptians and Tunisians are now getting a long-deserved taste of freedom and taking charge of their futures, for the Palestinians, Abbas is not changing a thing. After he declares independence at the UN General Assembly, jubilant Palestinians may fire AK-47s into the air in Ramallah’s Manara Square, hand out sweets on the streets, flash “V” for victory signs, and sound their car horns by the hundreds, but they will see very little meaningful political impact in their daily lives.

The day after the declaration, Palestinians will realize that the vote in the UN General Assembly was non-binding. So, while two-thirds of the international community may support the idea of a Palestinian state – an idea the United States and Israel have endorsed before – that’s all they’ll have to show for it. An idea.

Moreover, when Palestinians look out the window and realize that the Israeli military has not withdrawn and that the borders of “Palestine” are still not settled, their frustration will really sink in. The Palestinians will see that, even after the long and dramatic build-up to the unilateral declaration, independence cannot be achieved until the Palestinians negotiate the final-status issues that Abbas has assiduously sought to avoid.

IF THE Palestinians wish to act on their anger, here are two potential outcomes.

The first is another intifada (armed uprising) against Israel. On the day before the declaration, a million Palestinians are reportedly planning to take to the streets.

Abbas and other leaders insist on non-violence, but what happens when these same frustrated people come out the next day, and the day after that? As Palestinian columnist Daoud Kuttab warned recently, “there is no telling which route the Palestinians will take.”

The other possibility is an “intra-fada,” an uprising against Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian leadership. In keeping with the Arab Spring, the Palestinians may yet determine that their own government is the source of their frustration.

The PA is little better than the other regimes of the region. Its elites have siphoned off hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars of international aid to enrich their own families and cronies.

Fatah, the dominant faction of the government, is ossified, corrupt, and cozy with almost all of the other unpleasant regimes in the neighborhood. This led in no small part to Hamas’s shocking victory in the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections.

Hamas, it should be noted, did not campaign on suicide bombings and firing rockets at Israel. It campaigned on good governance, a theme that resonated among the Palestinians. If another election were held tomorrow, Hamas might well win again for the same reason.

Fatah – and by default, the PA – has not reformed.

TODAY, ABBAS has the support of the international community, but only because he looks great compared to Hamas. In truth, he is little better than Hosni Mubarak or Gaddafi.

Both of those leaders stayed in power long after their legitimacy had waned. Abbas, too, has now extended his presidency, even after it expired in 2009.

Mubarak tried to use his power to build an empire for his son, Gamal. Gaddafi did the same for his son, Saif al-Islam.

Abbas’s two sons, Yasser and Tarek, have been gobbling up US contracts and are running the West Bank like a mafia family.

On this point, a former adviser to the PA notes that the Abbas oligarchy is growing at hurtling speeds, while the population loses patience at roughly the same rate.

With the exception of Saudi Arabia and a few others, corrupt Arab regimes are collapsing under their own weight. Will Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority be next?

The writer is vice president for research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, and author of Hamas vs. Fatah: The Struggle for Palestine’ (Palgrave 2008).

 

 

VN-rapport Palmer comité: Gaza-blokkade legaal

 

Hieronder de reactie van het CIDI op het Palmer rapport, dat Israel, maar ook Turkije de doden aanrekent, en de Gaza blokkade en het ingrijpen op zich nochtans legaal verklaard. Citaat uit het rapport:

 

It is clear to the Panel that preparations were made by some of the passengers on the Mavi Marmara well in advance to violently resist any boarding attempt. The description given in the Israeli report is consistent with passenger testimonies to the Turkish investigation that describe cutting iron bars from the guard rails of the ship, opening fire hoses, donning life or bullet proof vests and gas masks, and assuming preagreed positions in anticipation of an attack. Witness reports also describe doctors and medical personnel coordinating before the boarding in anticipation of casualties. Furthermore, video footage shows passengers wearing gas masks, life or bullet proof vests, and carrying metal bars, slingshots, chains and staves. That information supports the accounts of violence given by IDF personnel to the Israeli investigation.

The Panel accepts, therefore, that soldiers landing from the first helicopter faced significant, organized and violent resistance from a group of passengers when they descended onto the Mavi Marmara. Material before the Panel confirms that this group was armed with iron bars, staves, chains, and slingshots, and there is some indication that they also used knives. Firearms were taken from IDF personnel and passengers disabled at least one by removing the ammunition from it. Two soldiers received gunshot wounds. There is some reason to believe that they may have been shot by passengers, although the Panel is not able to conclusively establish how the gunshot wounds were caused. Nevertheless, seven other soldiers were wounded by passengers, some seriously.

Both reports concur that three soldiers were overpowered by the passengers as they descended from the first helicopter and were taken below the deck of the vessel.The Panel is not persuaded that claims that the three were taken below merely to receive medical assistance are plausible, although it accepts that once below deck other passengers intervened to protect them and ensure that assistance was provided. It is established to the Panel's satisfaction that the three soldiers in question were captured, mistreated and placed at risk during the incident. In the face of such a response, the IDF personnel involved in the operation needed to take action for their own protection and that of the other soldiers.  

 

 

Opvallend overigens dat anti-Israel activisten nu opeens de VN ervan beschuldigen niet objectief te zijn of onder de knoet van de Israellobby te zitten terwijl ze er Israel altijd zo graag van beschuldigen VN resoluties  en rapporten  naast zich neer te leggen....

 

RP

------------- 

 

VN-rapport: Gaza-blokkade legaal

http://www.cidi.nl/Nieuwsberichten/Palmer-rapport-Gaza-blokkade-legaal.html

MA 05-09-2011 

 

Vorige week kwam eindelijk het langverwachte VN-rapport van de commissie-Palmer uit over de Gaza Flotilla van 2010. De belangrijkste conclusie: de Gaza-blokkade die door Israel in stand wordt gehouden, is legaal. Het rapport heeft al meteen geleid tot woedende reacties in Turkije: de Israelische ambassadeur is weggestuurd uit Ankara. 

 

Naast de legitimiteit van de blokkade, zijn er nog een aantal punten uit het meer dan honderd pagina's tellende rapport van belang. Zo stelt het rapport dat de activisten aan boord van de Mavi Marmara geweld uitlokten en dat de soldaten van het Israelische leger zich daartegen verdedigden. Wel gebruikte het leger daarbij teveel geweld, concludeert het rapport. Ook zegt het rapport dat er geen humanitaire crisis is in Gaza en dat hulpgoederen voor Gaza gewoon over land naar Gaza getransporteerd moeten worden. 

 

Tijdens de actie om de Mavi Marmara te beletten naar Gaza te varen, kwamen negen passagiers om. Het Palmer rapport zegt nu dat hoewel het overgrote deel van de activisten aan boord van de zes flotilla schepen inderdaad humanitaire hulp aan Gaza wilde geven, dit niet het geval was voor een stuk of veertig activisten van de Turkse organisatie IHH, die zich aan boord van de Mavi Marmara bevonden: zij lokten opzettelijk geweld uit. 

 

Als de Gaza-blokkade legaal is, dan was de poging van het Turkse schip Mavi Marmara om de blokkade te doorbreken illegaal. Het rapport vond dat Israel compensatie moet geven en moet zeggen dat het betreurt dat er doden zijn gevallen, maar Turkije eist excuses. Israel heeft laten weten dat het inderdaad betreurt dat er levens verloren zijn gegaan, maar het is niet bereid om excuses te maken voor het feit dat Israelische soldaten hun leven verdedigden. Turkije is hier zo verbolgen over, dat het direct de Israelische ambassadeur weggestuurd heeft en ook zijn eigen ambassadeur uit Israel heeft teruggehaald. 

 

Het doel hiervan zou de isolatie van Israel in het Midden-Oosten zijn. Wat echter uit het oog verloren wordt, is dat Turkije wellicht meer te verliezen heeft dan Israel. Turkije heeft Westerse steun hard nodig en deze afwijzing van het VN-rapport zal de reputatie van het land niet veel goed doen. Turkije heeft immers geen schone lei waar het bijvoorbeeld de Koerden, Armeniërs of Cyprus betreft en ook de relaties met Amerika zijn niet heel goed. 

 

Deze verkoeling van de relaties tussen beide landen is zorgelijk te noemen, omdat er nogal wat economische en militaire banden zijn, die nu op de tocht komen te staan. In reactie op het incident aan boord van de Mavi Marmara besloot de Islamistische regering in Ankara vorige zomer al om af te zien van het leveren van water aan Israel. Volgende week gaat de Turkse premier Erdogan naar Egypte en een Turkse krant berichtte zelfs dat hij naar Gaza zou gaan. Dit gerucht is inmiddels tegengesproken: omdat Hamas door zowel de VS als de EU beschouwd wordt als een terroristische organisatie, zou het een onverstandige stap zijn: Turkije wil immers nog steeds toetreden tot de EU. 

 

Het is weinig verrassend dat Hamas Turkije gelijk gaf. In een reactie liet een vertegenwoordiger van de organisatie weten dat de conclusies van het rapport te wijten zijn aan pressie van Amerika en Israel en dat Turkije daarom heel verstandig was in het verbreken van diplomatieke banden met Israel. Een andere Hamas-functionaris vond dat het rapport 'oneerlijk en onrechtvaardig' was. Daarnaast werd er ook gezegd dat excuses van Israel de doden niet terugbrengen. Islamitische Jihad riep naar aanleiding van de gebeurtenissen alle Arabische landen op om het voorbeeld van Turkije te volgen. 

 

De VN commissie-Palmer bestond uit Sir Geoffrey Palmer, voormalig premier van Nieuw-Zeeland, Álvaro Uribe, een voormalig president van Colombia, een vertegenwoordiger van Israel en een van Turkije. 

 

Het officiële Israelische communiqué over het Palmer rapport kunt u hier lezen. 

 

 

 

Arabische lente brengt Israel genoeg zorgen maar weinig gevaar

 

Terwijl Barry Rubin hieronder voorzichtig optimistisch is wat betreft Israels veiligheidssituatie, waarschuwt een hoge officier van het Israelische leger voor de mogelijkheid van een regionale oorlog:

 

Weapons of mass destruction?

Referring to what he characterized as the possibility of a "radical Islamic winter," Major-General Eisenberg said: "This raises the likelihood of an all-out, total war, with the possibility of weapons of mass destruction being used."

During his address, the senior IDF official revealed that new, more lethal arms surfaced in the hands of Gaza terror groups during the latest round of fighting in the area. As result of the disturbing development, Israeli civilians were instructed to adopt greater precautions, he said.

"We discovered a new weapon, and as result of this we instructed the public to hide under two roofs, rather than only one," he said.

Eisenberg added that some 25% of local authorities in Israel are ill prepared to face emergency situations.

 

 

Volgens Rubin wordt de Arabische wereld er weliswaar niet Israel vriendelijker op maar blijft zij zo verdeeld dat er geen groter gevaar voor Israel vanuit zal gaan.

 

The vision of a united Arab or Muslim world wiping Israel off the map—or making a serious effort to do so—is as distant as always, more distant than from the 1950s into the 1970s. The Arab Spring is in fact the start of an internal Arab political winter, 20 to 40 years fighting over who will run each country. While they fritter away money, resources, and energy, Israel will continue to advance economically and militarily.

Disastrous populist, radical nationalist, and Islamist domestic policies will also slow Arab development and widen Israel’s advantage. I do not rejoice at the Arab world’s self-made misfortune. A prosperous, happy, moderate, and democratic Arab world at peace with Israel would be a wonderful thing. But that won’t happen. Neither will there be a prosperous, united, radical Islamist world at war with Israel.

 

RP

------------ 

 

Israel’s Strategic Situation: Plenty to Worry About But Little to Fear

http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/2011/09/israels-strategic-situation-plenty-to.html

This article was published in the Jerusalem Post. I own the rights and this is my unedited version. I have also added an addendum answering reader's questions So please read and link to this site.

 

 

Israel’s Strategic Situation: Plenty to Worry About But Little to Fear

 

By Barry Rubin

 

Since much of what I write about regional politics seems pessimistic, I periodically remind people why I’m an optimist, at least when it comes to Israel.

 

Even today, Israel’s security situation is as good as or better than it has been since any time since the establishment of the state. The two main threats have always been either a potential attack by most or all Arab armies or a high level of successful cross-border terrorism.

 

At present, though, by Israeli standards, these two threats are relatively low. The immediate problem is rocket, missile, and mortar attacks from the Gaza Strip. The longer-term threat—that seems to be continually postponed--is an Iranian nuclear capability

 

On the level of threats from states, the problem is relatively minimal. The Saudis and Gulf Arabs, whose economic support would be vital in any confrontation, don’t want war with Israel. The same point applies to Jordan. Syria is militarily weaker than ever and entangled in a revolution whose effects will convulse the country for years whatever the outcome.

 

Muammar Qadhafi’s likely overthrow in Libya won’t bring a friendlier regime but will reduce the sponsorship of international terrorism arising from his personal ambitions. Similarly, Iraq has dropped out of the conflict and turned inward, while the Kurdish-ruled sector in the north is friendly toward Israel. A new addition to that short friendly list is the Republic of South Sudan.

 

What of Iran?  The “Arab Spring” may be a victory for Sunni Muslim Islamism but for that reason is an Iranian defeat. Tehran’s ambition of being hegemonic in the Middle East is blocked since it can no longer hope to become leader over the majority Sunni Muslims. Its rival, the Muslim Brotherhood, is the single most powerful force in Egypt, has “stolen” Hamas from Iran, and may do the same with Syria.

 

Moreover, Iran is taking far longer to get nuclear weapons than expected due to technical and other problems. The regime also faces potential internal revolt. Of course, Iran is a legitimate Israeli concern but the threat today is far less than it was expected to be several years ago.  The likelihood of Israel attacking Iran’s nuclear installation has also dropped sharply.

 

This leaves Egypt. For the moment, the military regime wants to maintain the peace treaty. That could change when an elected government comes to power, especially with a strong Muslim Brotherhood contingent in parliament. The most likely president, Amr Moussa, doesn’t like Israel but he is also experienced and pragmatic enough to avoid a confrontation, even though he is also demagogic enough to talk tough. Egypt is going to be a problem for Israeli security but it might be manageable.

 

As for non-state actors, to the north, Hizballah is having trouble controlling Lebanon. The loss of its Syrian patron and growing Sunni-Shia tensions make its task tougher. Hizballah doesn’t want a war with Israel now and during the next few years. The threat must be closely watched and no assumptions made, but that front should remain relatively quiet.

 

The big problem is Hamas, especially as it tries to leverage Egypt into a conflict.  Nobody is going to throw Hamas out of power and periodically it will periodically send barrages of missiles and rockets into Israel. Yet if this is Israel’s main security problem it is hardly existential.

 

A third intifadah on the West Bank is also possible but would be far costlier to the Palestinians than to Israel. Whatever the UN General Assembly decides will change nothing on the ground. The Fatah-Hamas conflict won’t go away and the demographic issue is totally phony. Israel’s intelligence and counterterrorism is in good shape.

 

Time is not against Israel but it is against the Arabs. They are splintering rather than uniting. Each country faces some level of civil war between Islamists and nationalists, monarchies and oppositions, and religious-communal groups.  

 

social and economic terms.We are going to be seeing more assertive Kurdish (in Syria and Iraq) and Berber movements (in North Africa). The Sunni-Shia rift is heating up. Two Islamist blocs will contend, sometimes violently as we have seen in Iraq. True, both sides hate Israel but they are hardly likely to cooperate against it, and neither has a superpower ally.

 

The vision of a united Arab or Muslim world wiping Israel off the map—or making a serious effort to do so—is as distant as always, more distant than from the 1950s into the 1970s. The Arab Spring is in fact the start of an internal Arab political winter, 20 to 40 years fighting over who will run each country. While they fritter away money, resources, and energy, Israel will continue to advance economically and militarily.

 

Disastrous populist, radical nationalist, and Islamist domestic policies will also slow Arab development and widen Israel’s advantage. I do not rejoice at the Arab world’s self-made misfortune. A prosperous, happy, moderate, and democratic Arab world at peace with Israel would be a wonderful thing. But that won’t happen. Neither will there be a prosperous, united, radical Islamist world at war with Israel.

 

As for Israel itself, when one gets beyond all of the usual self-flagellating self-criticism, it is a strong country in both economic and military terms. Israel has weathered the international economic crisis better than any other developed country. When Israelis have time to bicker over housing and cottage cheese prices, it’s a sure sign of an improved security situation and relative consensus on “foreign conflict” issues.

 

There are, of course, no lack of problems and threats. Yet Israel is in good shape when compared in strategic terms to every other country between Morocco and Pakistan—and even in social and economic terms compared with virtually every European country.

 

Appendix:

A reader, trying to explore every possible pessimistic scenario, asked me some questions in addition to the above text. Obviously, Israeli policymakers and military officers are thinking about such things--and they should be--but these aren't realistic threats. Below are brief answers:

 

What are the risks of a military confrontation between Turkey and Israel should Turkey send warships to accompany “civilian” ships trying to reach Gaza ?  A defense pact between Turkey and Hamas, Egypt or Hizballah/Lebanon? 

 

--Won't happen in any meaningful way. Erdogan does not want to embroil Turkey in a costly and unnecessary international confrontation that would sacrifice U.S. support, frighten international investors, and divide Turkey. Erdogan's motive is domestic political gain for his plan to Islamize Turkey through demagoguery. He knows precisely what he's doing. And the Arabs neither want nor need Turkish boots on the ground. That would be a public relations' disaster from their standpoint.

 

Might Syria fire some chemical weapons at Israel as a last ditch to save itself?

 

--There is no indication of that happening and the Iraqis--who had much more motive to do it--didn't follow that path in 2003. Israel would have plenty of warning time and could take countermeasures. Not a realistic scenario. 

 

--Will Iran let Syria fall and lose her investment ?

 

--I think clearly Iran cannot determine Syria's future. It is trying to save the Assad dictatorship but already there are signs that Tehran is thinking of jumping ship. Too much effort to help the Syrian regime will create an intense anti-Shia and anti-Persian feeling among Sunni Muslims and be more negative for Iran than even the fall of the Syrian regime. 

 

What about Israel’s porous border with Sinai....and the rush to now build a security fence ? Why was this not done before ?

 

--Because Israel doesn't have unlimited money and resources. Notice those mass demonstrations wanting the government to spend more money on housing and other things to benefit Israel's people? It cannot spend millions to build new security fences and ask people to devote more reserve days to military service without a clear need to do so.  

 

What is the prospect of an Islamic (Sunni) curtain stretching from Morocco to Turkey....even with temporary gaps in the curtain ?

 

--If you mean Islamist regimes that's doubtful. It isn't happening in Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Jordan or in Saudi Arabia--in the sense we mean it--and the Gulf Arab monarchies. It also isn't going to happen in Lebanon or Iraq which are dominated politically by Shia Muslims.

 

Will Jordan survive a MB take over of Egypt and the subsequent support by Egypt to Islamists in Jordan ?

 

--Yes, indeed the better the Brotherhood does in Egypt, Libya, or Syria, the more the remaining non-Islamist states will work harder and act tougher to prevent their meeting that fate. Increasingly, the Saudis and other Gulf Arab monarchies are taking Jordan under their protection and the monarchy in Amman has basically brought the unrest there to a standstill, though they could use a lot more foreign economic help. 

 

With Europe increasingly scared of its own muslim populations...what will this mean for Israel’s trade, security cooperation ?

 

--Trade? Nothing. Security cooperation? Precisely because of nervousness about Islamists at home and in the Middle East, a number of European countries--notably France, Italy, and Germany are increasing security cooperation with Israel. European states can play their usual game of pro-Palestinian rhetoric combined with little or no action in order to cover themselves.

 

What will Israel do should Hamas, Hizbullah, Syria all start firing missiles into Israel at same time ?

 

Syria won't. If Damascus attacked Israel it would be the end of the regime. Rather than mobilize mass support, as in the past, Syria's regime would have its armed forces heavily damaged and fall within a week or two, with very poor prospects for the life spans of its elite. As for Hizballah-Hamas cooperation, that's less likely than ever. Those two groups are now on different sides of the Sunni-Shia divide and didn't even work together in 2008-2009 when they were much closer to each other. Reportedly, Hamas asked for help and Hizballah refused, unwilling to risk its own interests to help its "brothers" in the Gaza Strip.

 

How strong relatively is Israel ? 

 

--Much more so than its neighbors.

  
Another reader has asked: But won't huge numbers of Islamist fanatics rush suicidally at Israel's borders?

--No.The number of people ready to commit suicide is always limited. Islamists have frequently expressed frustration at this reality. Here's one of my favorite examples. Many years ago the key recruiter of suicide bombers was captured and interviewed on television. Why, he was asked, since you believe in the cause so much, didn't you become a suicide bomber? I'll never forget watching his answer which I will reproduce word for word: "I didn't think I'd be good at it." It has been pointed out that no son of a Hamas or Fatah leader has ever been killed in combat or become a suicide bomber. Israel publicized the fact that a then imprisoned leader of Hamas got his son abroad the moment he heard he was thinking of becoming a suicide bomber. There's the real world and there's theory. That's the real world.

The above analysis isn't based on wishful thinking. But there are good reasons why the worst-case scenarios we can think up don't happen. As I said in the original article, my biggest concern is that Hamas will try to drag a post-election Egypt into a war with Israel. Other than that, remaining scenarios of war or high-level terrorism are unlikely.

 

 

Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal, and Middle East editor and featured columnist at PajamasMedia http://pajamasmedia.com/barryrubin/. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). GLORIA Center site is http://www.gloria-center.org.His articles published originally outside of PajamasMedia are at <http://www.rubinreports.blogspot.com/>

 

Wie wil vrede?

 

http://www.zionism-israel.com/blog/archives/00000588.html

IMO Blog, 2011

De Palestijnse president Abbas zei onlangs nog maar eens dat de nagestreefde VN erkenning van een Palestijnse staat niet tegen Israel is gericht, maar slechts tegen de bezetting, en dat de Palestijnen niets liever willen dan onderhandelen om tot vrede te komen. Nou ja, indien Israel aan een serie eisen voldoet, want je kunt natuurlijk niet gaan onderhandelen zonder van tevoren al alles te hebben binnengehaald, nietwaar? De Jerusalem Post meldt:


The Palestinian Authority is prepared to listen to any proposals that would lead to the resumption of peace talks with Israel, PA President Mahmoud Abbas told members of the Fatah Revolutionary Council in Ramallah late Sunday.
Abbas reiterated his position that the peace talks should be based on a full cessation of construction in the settlements and acceptance of the pre-1967 lines as the borders of a Palestinian state. He also said that the talks should have a clear and acceptable timetable.
He said that the PA's statehood bid was not aimed at isolating or delegitimizing Israel.
"The goal is to delegitimize occupation which must end," he explained. "The Palestinians are the only people in the world who have remained under occupation."
Abbas added that the Palestinians have "knocked on all doors seeking the resumption of the peace talks, which is our first, second and third option."

Mooi gelogen. Israel dringt al jaren aan op onderhandelingen, waaraan de Palestijnse Autoriteit steeds weer nieuwe eisen stelt. Niet bouwen over de groene lijn (dus ook niet in de oude stad van Jeruzalem), en de pre-1967 wapenstilstandslijnen als grenzen van een Palestijnse staat en vlug een beetje. Onderhandeld hoeft er dan niet meer echt te worden, hooguit een paar praktische zaken geregeld. Toch geldt Israel als de partij die vrede tegenhoudt en Abbas als welwillend en toegeeflijk. Hij moet een erg goede spin doctor hebben.

Uit WikiLeaks blijkt ondertussen dat de PA weliswaar heeft beloofd de opruiing en het verheerlijken van geweld vanuit moskeeën en media tegen te gaan, en ook beweert dat men zich daaraan houdt, terwijl er niets veranderd is. Zo werd vorig jaar nog een preek gehouden waarin de volgende vredelievende woorden werden gesproken:

"Oh Muslims! The Jews are the Jews. The Jews are the Jews. Even if donkeys would cease to bray, dogs cease to bark, wolves cease to howl and snakes to bite, the Jews would not cease to harbor hatred towards Muslims. The Prophet said that if two Jews would be alone with a Muslim, they would think only of killing him. Oh Muslims! This land will be liberated, these holy places and these mosques will be liberated, only by means of a return to the Quran and when all Muslims will be willing to be Jihad Fighters for the sake of Allah and for the sake of supporting Palestine, the Palestinian people, the Palestinian land, and the holy places in Palestine. The Prophet says: 'You shall fight the Jews and kill them, until the tree and the stone will speak and say: 'Oh Muslim, Oh servant of Allah' - the tree and the stone will not say, 'Oh Arab,' they will say, 'Oh Muslim'. And they will not say, 'Where are the millions?' and will not say, 'Where is the Arab nation?' Rather, they will say, 'Oh Muslim, Oh servant of Allah - there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.' Except for the Gharqad tree [tree mentioned in the Quran - Ed.], which is the tree of the Jews. Thus, this land will be liberated only by means of Jihad..."
[PA TV (Fatah), Jan. 29, 2010]

Ook blijft de PA terroristen eren zoals Dalal Mughrabi, de masterminds achter de moord op de Israelische Olympische ploeg in 1972, en de aanslag op de Sbarro pizzeria in Jeruzalem in 2002. Onlangs eerde de minister voor gevangenen de vrouw van de mastermind achter de bloedigste aanslag, die van de Pesach ceder in Netanya in 2002 waarbij 30 doden vielen en 140 mensen gewond raakten, met een bezoek en een plaquette.

Hoe vredelievend de Palestijnen zijn blijkt ook uit de logo's van diverse organisaties, en uit kinderprogramma's waarin keer op keer op keer wordt herhaald dat Jaffa, Beersheva, Tiberias, Akko en andere steden in Israel 'bezet Palestina' zijn, dat 'Palestina' grenst aan Syrië, Libanon en Egypte, dat 'Palestina' van de Middellandse zee tot de Jordaan loopt. Uit een recente enquête blijkt dat dergelijke propaganda zijn werking op de bevolking niet mist: grote meerderheden zijn tegen ieder compromis en onderschrijven radikale en zelfs antisemitische uitspraken.

Ondertussen laat Anja Meulenbelt op haar weblog de 'Vrouwen in het Zwart' aan het woord:

Vooral Israël, de VS en natuurlijk onze minister van BZ, Dappere Dodo Rosenthal zijn fel gekant tegen de eenzijdige onafhankelijkheid van de Palestijnen. De laatste tijd horen we de grijs gespeelde grammofoonplaat weer: 'alleen directe vredesbesprekingen tussen beide partijen kunnen tot een onafhankelijke Palestijnse staat leiden'. Maar er zijn geen vredesbesprekingen meer; ze worden al sinds 2008 geboycot door Israël en Amerika, terwijl het bouwen van de nederzettingen dag en nacht door gaat, Palestijnse huizen in Jeruzalem onteigend worden en Gaza nog steeds achter slot en grendel zit.
Wat is de achtergrond van de protagonisten van de 'eenzijdige onafhankelijk'? Uit de WikiLeaks onthullingen en de 'Palestine Papers', [zie ook onze juni nieuwsbrief] komt een beeld naar voren van een smekende Abbas, die samen met zijn hele Palestijnse autoriteit op de knieën liggend, steeds meer concessies doen voor die nooit opkomende vredeszon. Allerlei saillante details, maar wàt ze ook voorstellen: de buiging is nooit diep genoeg voor de koloniale Israëlische onderdrukker.

Knap bij elkaar verzonnen. De vredesbesprekingen worden niet geboycot door Israel en de VS; het was Abbas die er vanwege de Gaza oorlog de brui aan gaf, waarna ze nog heel eventjes werden hervat aan het einde van het moratorium op de bouw in nederzettingen van vorig jaar. Toen dat bijna was verstreken verscheen een tegenstribbelende Abbas aan de onderhandelingstafel, om er binnen een maand weer vandoor te gaan. Je zou maar onder druk worden gezet om ook enkele concessies te doen. Israel en de VS hebben niks geboycot.

Zie hier de 'smekende Abbas' die op zijn knieën ligt voor het machtige Israel:

 

 

Ratna Pelle

 

 

Adolf Netanjahoe in Egypte

 

Meer 'goed nieuws ' uit Egypte.... 

 

--------- 

 

Egyptian magazine draws Netanyahu as Hitler

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2011/09/egyptian-magazine-draws-netanyahu-as.html

Here is the front cover of the current issue of Egypt's state-run October magazine:

The article goes through a history of Israel's supposed "war crimes" which they claim is on par with those of Nazi Germany.

 

 

Turkije tegen Israel - het raadsel van de Turkse Teflon

Vergelijkingen gaan natuurlijk altijd mank (zo is de PKK niet uit op de vernietiging en overname van Turkije), maar het verschil in internationale reacties en verontwaardiging blijft verbluffend.

_____________


Turkish Teflon
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/09/turkish-teflon.html

It’s a well-known fact that our governments, the media, and the United Nations observe a double standard in their treatment of Israel over the Palestinian issue. It’s just business as usual; we’re used to it.

However, the following essay, posted yesterday at Vlad Tepes, points out the blatant absurdity of it all by comparing the treatment of Israel to the carte blanche handed to Turkey over the PKK: 


Turkish Teflon
An article written by ‘J-Practical’ for Vladtepes blog

According to Reuters, Turkey’s armed forces said on Monday that some 145-160 Kurdish guerrillas were killed in Turkish air and artillery strikes in northern Iraq this month.

So why is Turkey bombing Kurds in Northern Iraq? After all, like the Turks, most Kurds are Sunni Muslims, fellow members of the Religion of Peace, and they’re neighbours of Turkey, living in a semi-autonomous region under limited self rule — so you’d think Turkey would make an effort to live in peace with them.

Actually, the peace is being broken by the Kurdish PKK (Kurdistan Workers Party), a terrorist organization recognized by Turkey, the United States and the European Union. Recently PKK assaults in Turkey have killed more than 40 Turkish security force personnel.

Turkey is simply defending itself from terrorists, which is why the Turkish air force sent warplanes to bomb Kurdish towns which the Turkish intelligence say contain PKK bases and arms depots. As it happens regularly in such bombings, seven civilians were killed a week ago, though the Turkish General Staff said more than 100 PKK militants were also wounded.

Now, let’s see if this makes sense to you, because I’m scratching my head:

1.        Kurdistan — semi-autonomous region containing PKK terrorists. Gaza — semi-autonomous region, wholly controlled by Hamas terrorists. The actions of the PKK are internationally denounced, the actions of Hamas are internationally ignored or celebrated.

2.        PKK kills Turkish security force personnel, which justifies two months’ worth of Turkish military campaigns that bomb PKK bases in Kurdish towns (occasionally killing innocent civilians), in order to defend Turkish citizens from terrorism.

3.        Hamas targets and kills Israeli civilians, but that doesn’t justify any Israeli response intended to defend Israeli citizens from terrorism.
    
4.        When Israel bombs Hamas bases, or enters Palestinian towns, a media feeding frenzy draws in crowds of journalists, who film and report the action. Turkey bombs Kurdistan, and the media pretend it’s a non-event.

5.          If Israel inadvertently kills a Palestinian civilian, the media are all over it: We see pictures, interviews with relatives, the outraged headlines (especially from CBC) proclaim the deaths first, report the facts later. Turkey, on the other hand, apparently enjoys a special relationship with the media. CBC, for example, hasn’t bothered reporting any of this since June 18th. At that time, they told us that “The conflict has killed as many as 40,000 people”, but it wasn’t worth any in-depth reports, nor significant enough to merit a journalistic follow-up.

6.         The UN has done next to nothing about it. There have been no impassioned speeches in the UN General Assembly, and the UN Human Rights Council are much too busy to address the Kurds — after all, the plight of the Kurds, like the horrors in Darfur, Congo, or Nigeria, doesn’t deserve the same grave words and permanent agenda item as the plight of the Palestinians.

       
Can somebody explain the logic that dictates that perceived Israeli injustices can be obsessively scratched at with the energy of an Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, while these concurrent Turkish injustices (happening in the same general region of the world), are ignored, unreported, and apparently excused?

Can someone explain how the Turkish government can kill 40,000 Kurds, without even a single UN Special Commission looking into it? And then turn around and call Israel “brutal” because nine Turkish extremists died aboard the Mavi Marmara, while attacking Israeli soldiers?

But mostly, I’d like to understand how they get away with it, and why the CBC and other ‘responsible media’ have chosen to be complicit in the Turkish Teflon.

Who are the real turkeys here? It sure isn’t the Turks.

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/09/turkish-teflon.html

Is de Westelijke Jordaanoever bezet?

 

Wat is een bezetting en wanneer is gebied bezet? Amnesty International geeft de volgende definitie (overgenomen uit de Haagse Conventie):

"Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised."
The sole criterion for deciding the applicability of the law on belligerent occupation is drawn from facts: the de facto effective control of territory by foreign armed forces coupled with the possibility to enforce their decisions, and the de facto absence of a national governmental authority in effective control. If these conditions are met for a given area, the law on belligerent occupation applies. Even though the objective of the military campaign may not be to control territory, the sole presence of such forces in a controlling position renders applicable the law protecting the inhabitants. The occupying power cannot avoid its responsibilities as long as a national government is not in a position to carry out its normal tasks.

Je kunt hier tegenin brengen dat de Palestijnse Autoriteit geen volledige controle heeft over het gebied, want men heeft geen nationale soevereiniteit. Het gebied (althans A en B) is autonoom, niet onafhankelijk. In uitzonderlijke gevallen kan het Israelische leger Palestijnse steden binnengaan om daar terroristen van hun bed te lichten. In de praktijk is de controle van het leger in dit deel van de Westoever zeer beperkt: er zijn nog enkele checkpoints, maar het leger is vooral in het door Israel gecontroleerde deel van de Westoever aanwezig, waar maar 4% van de Palestijnen woont. Dit is wel gebied dat zij voor een eigen staat willen hebben en dat de verschillende autonome gebieden van elkaar scheidt.

Wat betreft de Gazastrook is een en ander een stuk eenduidiger. Volgens deze definitie is er geen sprake van een bezetting, want de enige Israelische soldaat die er zit is Gilad Shalit. Een blokkade (of belegering) kan wel of niet juist zijn, maar is geen vorm van bezetting. 

RP
----------- 

 

A quick poster

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2011/09/quick-poster.html  

 

 

Just because people don't know the basics:

 

And by the way, Amnesty International wrote a very nice legal definition of "occupation" in 2003, a definition they themselves ignore in respect to Israel. They wrote:

The definition of belligerent occupation is given in Article 42 of the Hague Regulations:

"Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised."

The sole criterion for deciding the applicability of the law on belligerent occupation is drawn from facts: the de facto effective control of territory by foreign armed forces coupled with the possibility to enforce their decisions, and the de facto absence of a national governmental authority in effective control. If these conditions are met for a given area, the law on belligerent occupation applies. Even though the objective of the military campaign may not be to control territory, the sole presence of such forces in a controlling position renders applicable the law protecting the inhabitants. The occupying power cannot avoid its responsibilities as long as a national government is not in a position to carry out its normal tasks.

 

So 96% of West Bank Arabs are not living under "occupation" according to the Hague - and Amnesty - definitions. (The same applies to 100% of Gaza's Arabs.)

 

 

Wikileaks: Palestijnse Autoriteit liegt tegen VS diplomaten over opruiing

 

Volgens de Oslo Akkoorden en de Roadmap moet de Palestijnse Autoriteit een einde maken aan de verheerlijking van geweld en het antisemitisme in de media en moskeen, maar dat doet zij niet. De PA heeft dit meermaal toegezegd zonder dat er iets veranderde, zo blijkt uit onderstaand artikel van Elder of Ziyon. Het is jammer, ik herhaal het nog maar eens, dat de Nederlandse media hiervoor volkomen blind zijn terwijl wel iedere aankondiging van het bouwen over de groene lijn groot in de krant komt (hoewel het niet bevorderlijk is voor de vrede heeft Israel geen algehele bouwstop afgekondigd behalve vorig jaar gedurende negen maanden, met uitzondering van Jeruzalem). Ik zie deze opruiing als een van de grootste obstakels voor vrede; het leidt ertoe dat de Palestijnen in meerderheid tegen concessies aan Israel zijn, zoals niet lang geleden uit een enquete bleek, en dat ze antisemitische uitspraken ondersteunen. Het houdt de haat en het wantrouwen in stand. In Israel wordt ook niet altijd even aardig over Arabieren gedacht en gepraat, maar van een dergelijke opruiing in algemene kranten en media is geen sprake. Wanneer politici of rabbijnen zich anti-Arabisch uitlaten wordt dat fel bekritiseerd, terwijl imams die oproepen de Joden te doden niet worden bekritiseerd. 

 

RP

---------- 

 

Palestinian Authority lies to US diplomats about incitement (Wikileaks)

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2011/09/palestinian-authority-lies-to-us.html

A new Wikileaks cable talks about how the PA was supposedly fighting incitement against Israel in its mosques in 2009:

On October 1, PA Minister of Religious Affairs Mahmoud al Habash outlined his ministry's efforts to eliminate incitement from 1,500 West Bank mosques, 80-90 percent of which are currently controlled by the PA. Al Habash told Post: "we monitor and control the Friday sermons with unified talking points of approved themes, and (imams) are not allowed to stray to other topics." If an imam deviates significantly from approved themes, he said, "we bring him in, counsel him and see if we can fix the problem. If we can't, he'll be relieved from his duties and given an administrative job -- or we may separate him from service altogether." Al Habash noted the PA has partial cooperation from, but no control over, Gaza mosques. 

When asked to cite specific instances in which the PA had acted against incitement in mosques, al-Habash noted that an imam from the Tulkarm village of Qaffin was recently fired for inciting worshippers against the PA. Pressed on actions taken against imams inciting against Israel, al-Habash asserted that "There is no more incitement against Israel in (our) mosques, because compliance with our guidelines keeps such views out of the mosques (that the PA controls)." He admitted, however, that Area C mosques are a problem. "In Bethlehem's Husan (village) there are four mosques not under our control; we've been asking the IDF for two and a half months to let PASF enter Husan for this purpose and we've had no response." NOTE: Husan is an Area B/C "seam-zone" village west of the separation barrier, bordering on the Beitar Illit settlement. END NOTE. 

Al Habash noted that his ministry is currently reviewing the curriculum of eight religious schools in the West Bank and Gaza. In addition, he said, "President Abbas has approved giving (our ministry) jurisdiction over the religious programming in the Palestinian Broadcasting Company's radio and TV programs; no publications by official Palestinian media violates the rules." Referring to recent incidents in Jerusalem (reftel), Al-Habash said, "there was no violent reaction in any Palestinian city or village; this is indicative of success in our efforts to reduce the culture of violence." NOTE: Al Habash was a member of Hamas until 1996; after that he worked with PA security services in Gaza against Hamas and joined Salam Fayyad's 2007 government as Minister of Social Affairs, changing to Religious Affairs last May. END NOTE.

 

The PA eliminated incitement from mosques by October 2009?

Then how could the following televised sermons have been possible?


Palestinian TV preaching genocide: Jews are enemies of humanity from Palestinian Media Watch on Vimeo. 

 

"Oh Muslims! The Jews are the Jews. The Jews are the Jews. Even if donkeys would cease to bray, dogs cease to bark, wolves cease to howl and snakes to bite, the Jews would not cease to harbor hatred towards Muslims. The Prophet said that if two Jews would be alone with a Muslim, they would think only of killing him. Oh Muslims! This land will be liberated, these holy places and these mosques will be liberated, only by means of a return to the Quran and when all Muslims will be willing to be Jihad Fighters for the sake of Allah and for the sake of supporting Palestine, the Palestinian people, the Palestinian land, and the holy places in Palestine. The Prophet says: 'You shall fight the Jews and kill them, until the tree and the stone will speak and say: 'Oh Muslim, Oh servant of Allah' - the tree and the stone will not say, 'Oh Arab,' they will say, 'Oh Muslim'. And they will not say, 'Where are the millions?' and will not say, 'Where is the Arab nation?' Rather, they will say, 'Oh Muslim, Oh servant of Allah - there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.' Except for the Gharqad tree [tree mentioned in the Quran - Ed.], which is the tree of the Jews. Thus, this land will be liberated only by means of Jihad..."
[PA TV (Fatah), Jan. 29, 2010]

 

Sheikh Muhammad Hussein, Mufti of Jerusalem and Palestine:

"The Al-Aqsa Mosque is threatened by the plans of the enemies of Allah [the Jews], who have violated all faith and religious laws, and even deviated from their humanity."
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida (Fatah), June 26 2010 & al-msjd-alaqsa.com (Al-Aqsa Mosque Forum), June 25, 2010]

 

PA TV broadcasts Friday sermon with preacher Dr. Subhi Ubeid. PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and Secretary General of the Chairman’s Office, Al-Tayeb Abd Al-Rahim, are in the audience.  

 
“Saladin [Muslim military leader who conquered Jerusalem] was embarrassed to smile while Jerusalem was occupied. And now Palestine is occupied by the colonialist invaders. Where is Saladin to restore to this nation its glory and its greatness?”

Habash himself directly incites against Israel!

Speaker: Mahmoud Al-Habbash, PA Minister of Religious Affairs 
PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas is in the audience. 

 
"Jerusalem is not just a city. Al-Aqsa is not just a mosque. Jerusalem is the key to peace, and Jerusalem can ignite a thousand and one wars. Unless the issue of Jerusalem is solved, so that it returns to its owners; unless Jerusalem will be Palestinian, as it was throughout history, the capital of the Palestinian state and the capital of the Palestinian people, the place which is the object of heartfelt longing and which all Muslims aspire to reach; unless Jerusalem is like that way, there is no peace. There is no peace without Jerusalem. There is no stability without Jerusalem. If Jerusalem is dishonored, if Jerusalem is disgraced, if [Jerusalem] is lost, it may leave the door open to all possibilities of struggle, all possibilities of war. The term 'war' cannot be erased from the lexicon of this region as long as Jerusalem is occupied, as long as Jerusalem is disgraced, as long as the residents of Jerusalem are being targeted. It's not possible; Jerusalem has to return to its owners. And we are its owners."
[PA TV (Fatah), Aug. 20, 2010]

 

 

Verslag Fact Finding Mission 2011 Israel

 

De zoveelste 'fact finding mission' naar Israel-Palestina misschien, maar actiegroepen als de roemruchte UCP kunnen niet tippen aan de gebalanceerde reizen die het CiJO aanbiedt aan Nederlandse, Joodse en niet-Joodse jongeren, die echt beide kanten van het verhaal te horen kregen.

 

Maar eerlijk is eerlijk: met een citaat van Amos Oz heb je mij al snel ingepalmd :-)!

 

Wouter

__________

 

Verslag Fact Finding Mission 2011

http://www.cijo.nl/activiteiten/verslag-fact-finding-mission-2011/

Geplaatst op 31 August 2011 door Joel

 

 'De meest gebalanceerde factfindingreis die ik tot nu toe ben tegengekomen', stelde een van de betrokkenen. Niet als je het aan de sprekers vraagt, natuurlijk. De medewerkers van de PLO vinden dat het programma teveel nadruk legt op het Israelische 'narrative', kolonisten op de Westelijke Jordaanoever vinden precies het tegenovergestelde. Zonder relativeringsvermogen is CiJO's Fact Finding Mission een drama.

 

 De organisatie waarschuwde de deelnemers al van tevoren. 'Jullie zullen gebombardeerd worden met extreme (en minder extreme) opvattingen die lijnrecht tegenover elkaar kunnen staan. Het is aan jullie om te bepalen waar voor jullie de waarheid ligt'. Ik zal alvast verklappen dat indien er een waarheid bestaat, deze in het midden ligt. 

 

De groep, bestaande uit 20 studenten met diverse achtergronden, heeft aardig wat informatie moeten verwerken. Er is onder meer gesproken met de Nederlandse Vertegenwoordiging in Ramallah, de beleidsadviseur van de Negotiations Affairs Department van de PLO, Israelische studenten, Hannah Goslar (Holocaustoverlevende en voormalig vriendin van Anne Frank), Palestijnse en Israelische ouders van de Bereaved Parents Circle, een voormalig kolonel uit het Israelische leger, Palestijnse ondernemers uit Jenin, kolonisten uit de Westelijke Jordaanoever en Nieuwsuur-correspondente Ankie Rechess. 

 

Een samenleving van tegenstellingen. De wereld van de kolonist die de Tempel wenst te herbouwen komt niet of nauwelijks overeen met de wereld van een willekeurige leeftijdsgenoot uit Tel Aviv. En dan te bedenken dat deze tegenpolen in sommige gevallen slechts tien minuten van elkaar verwijderd zijn. 

 
In het zuidelijke Sderot, de stad die al jarenlang bestookt wordt met raketten uit Gaza, moeten burgers de gewelddadige aanvallen van Hamas en andere terroristische organisaties verdragen, terwijl aan de noordgrens bewoners van Metulah moeten toekijken hoe de Hezbollah-vlag sinds enkele weken wappert bij het hekwerk dat Israel van sji'itisch Libanon scheidt. Een angstaanjagend gezicht, als je bedenkt wat Hezbollah met Israel van plan is. 

 

Maar we mogen onze ogen niet sluiten voor de dagelijkse realiteit in de betwiste gebieden. Door iedereen aan het woord te laten, zijn we er met de hele groep in geslaagd een goed beeld te vormen van de status quo en wat er allemaal op het spel staat. 

 

Oplossingen? Je moet van goede huizen komen wil je na een week en wat literatuurstudie met oplossingen kunnen komen. Toch vormden deelnemers die een mogelijke oplossing met de groep wensten te delen geen uitzondering. 

 

Pas na een zware maar enorm bevredigende reis waren we echt goed in staat alles wat op ons was afgekomen, te verwerken. Ondanks de complexe realiteit in de regio, ligt de prioriteit bij een oplossing voor het slopende conflict tussen Israel en het Palestijnse volk. Amos Oz , schrijver en vredesactivist, beschreef in zijn pamflet 'Between Right and Right' de situatie aan de hand van een toegankelijke metafoor. Volgens Oz is de relatie tussen Israeli's en Palestijnen als een onvrijwillig huwelijk dat nooit liefde of vriendschap heeft gekend. Een plotselinge wederzijdse uitbarsting van liefde ligt ook niet in het verschiet. Waar beide volkeren naar moeten streven is een beschaafde scheidingsprocedure. Een pijnlijke scheiding, dat wel. Dat beide ouders namelijk in hetzelfde appartement zullen wonen, met kleine kamertjes en een badkamer en keuken waar duidelijk een duurzame oplossing voor gevonden moet worden, is evident. In de praktijk betekent dit grenzen op basis van de wapenstilstandslijnen van 1949, met een speciale oplossing voor Jeruzalem en, met het oog op de toekomstige rust, economische samenwerking. Een gezamenlijk kopje koffie op z'n tijd moet dan best haalbaar zijn. 

 

De klok heeft gesproken en we kunnen niet terugdraaien wat er in het verleden gebeurd is. Iedere staat maakt fouten, ieder volk beschikt over z'n eigen zure appels, maar een vredesoplossing is noodzakelijk, wil de situatie in de regio trekjes van draaglijkheid aannemen. Israel is een fantastisch land en komt pas echt tot z'n recht zonder een constante militaire staat van paraatheid. Dat is ons allemaal wel duidelijk geworden. 

 

We concludeerden dat vrede geen sprookje is, maar ook absoluut geen 'piece of cake'. Je hoeft niet te kiezen of je 'pro-Israel' of  'pro-Palestijnen' bent. Het betreft hier geen voetbalwedstrijd, maar een onhoudbare situatie die schreeuwt om vrede. Deze vrede komt niet dichterbij als niemand bereid is radicale ideologieën los te laten of concessies te doen. Wat dat betreft zou iedere radicaal zich in mogen schrijven voor CiJO's Fact Finding Mission. CiJO's aanmeldingssysteem draait in dat geval met plezier overuren.