Thursday, June 14, 2007

Israeli Doctrine: 'Israel = No Palestine; Palestine = No Israel'

Just before he stepped down as the UN's Middle East envoy, Alvaro de Soto, the highest-ranking United Nations official in Israel, wrote a damning report of gross American interference in the Middle East which negated the UN’s impartial role there. That had effectively killed off any prospect for peace that could have been brokered by the UN.

His words were that American pressure has "pummelled into submission" the organisation's role as an impartial Middle East negotiator.

The US interference pampered Israeli interest, like boycotting of the democratically elected Palestinian Government, just because the Israelis didn’t like the choice of the Palestinian people.

de Soto condemned the Americans for their bias against the Palestinians.

He also condemned Israel for
setting unachievable preconditions for peace talks. He also didn’t spare the Palestinians lambasting them for for their violence.

It’s hardly surprising that Israel did not want peace talks with the Palestinians, any Palestinians. This has been their modus operandi for eons. Former Israeli PM Golda Meir had once told a British newspaper that there was no such people as Palestinians.

The reason is obvious. Acknowledging the Palestinians, or even worse, allowing a Palestinian State would actually call into question the legitimacy of Israel as a nation. That has been why Ariel Sharon had deliberately sabotaged Bush’s road map to peace. Had that been given a chance, Palestine would have become a State in 2008, just next year.

The Israelis would do anything to prevent Palestine from ever emerging, and the culprit behind its Machiavellian strategy has been, is and will be the USA, willing or unwitting. Where necessary, the Israelis will sabotage any genuine US efforts (as was Bush’s road map) towards recognizing Palestinian Statehood.

de Soto said that because of the US gross interference (and bias, and Israel’s manoeuvring), any Western-led peace negotiations had become largely irrelevant. He averred that the quartet of Middle East negotiators - the US, the EU, Russia and the UN - had become a "sideshow".

As an example of American interference in favour of Israeli interests, he criticised the US instigated (even through diplomatic, economic and financial threats) international boycott of the Palestinians, introduced after Hamas won elections last year, which was, in his words, "at best extremely shortsighted" and had "devastating consequences" for the Palestinian people.

He condemned Israel for adopting an "essentially rejectionist" stance towards the Palestinians. As I stated, this was hardly surprising as the sole objective of Israel was to prevent Palestinian Statehood.

In fact, the Islamic caricature scandal in Europe was believed to be instigated by pro Israeli sectors, with the objective of alienating the previously generous Europeans who were funding the Palestinians to around 600 million Euros per annum.

Many weren’t aware that the caricatures of the Islamic prophet (pbuh) were actually published twice, first in Denmark in the Jylland-Poste where there was very little reaction other than a visit to the Danish PM by several Arab diplomats, and then (to ensure the desired predictably violent Muslim outrage which the initial publishing failed to achieve) re-published in Norway in a rightwing church magazine, undoubtedly with 'adequate publicity'.

I have no doubts that if the second publishing had failed, there would have been a third, fourth etc until the desired results of Muslims going bonkers and predictably violent, and alienating the Europeans (the last bastion of support for Palestinians) was achieved.

But the Arabs, Muslims and Palestinians are the Palestinains’ worst enemies – all Israel had to do was pull the strings, and the puppets would predictably dance to the haga navila.

Another issue of gross US interference (under Israeli guidance) was the financing of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ al Fatah to neutralize Hamas. It should be noted that originally Israel had financed Hamas to dilute support for the late Yasser Arafat’s al Fatah, but obviously with Hamas now more dangerous than a corrupt al Fatah, Israel has swapped sleeping partners.

In fact, a couple of years back, the US, accepting Israel's claim that Arafat should be shunned as a sponsor of terrorism, had pressured the Palestinian authority into creating a new beefed-up post of prime minister to take over most of Arafat's functions. Obviously the PM post was designed for a friendlier more moderate (to the US) Abbas.

It was embarrassing for the US who had been preaching democracy to the Arabs when a democratically elected Hamas defeated Fatah in parliamentary elections last year. Under US encouragement (and direction) Abbas had sought to overrule the Hamas cabinet by exercising direct control over the security forces.

American and Israel openly supplied al Fatah with arms, training and finances to such an obvious extent that Hamas accused Abbas and his Gaza strongman Mahmoud Dahlan of collaborating with Israel and the US to overthrow Hamas and reject the results of a democratic election. It is well-known that Israel allowed equipment and weapons to be shipped to the Dahlan controlled Presidential Guards through its territory

But al Fatah’s power may be coming to an end as the Presidential Guard and the Preventative Security Force have fared poorly in direct clashes with Hamas's better trained and highly-motivated religious fighters in Gaza. It’s nearer to
complete defeat in the Gaza Strip following a series of damaging setbacks in clashes with its Islamic fundamentalist rival Hamas.


  1. So near and yet so far

    ... a final settlement proposal was offered. The U.S. plan offered by Clinton and endorsed by Barak would have given the Palestinians 97 percent of the West Bank (either 96 percent of the West Bank and 1 percent from Israel proper or 94 percent from the West Bank and 3 percent from Israel proper), with no cantons, and full control of the Gaza Strip, with a land-link between the two; Israel would have withdrawn from 63 settlements as a result. In exchange for the three percent annexation of the West Bank, Israel would increase the size of the Gaza territory by roughly a third. Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem would become the capital of the new state, and refugees would have the right of return to the Palestinian state, and would receive reparations from a $30 billion international fund collected to compensate them. The Palestinians would maintain control over their holy places, and would be given desalinization plants to ensure them adequate water. The only concessions Arafat had to make was Israeli sovereignty over the parts of the Western Wall religiously significant to Jews (i.e., not the entire Temple Mount), and three early warning stations in the Jordan valley, which Israel would withdraw from after six years....

    In his last conversation with Clinton, three days before his term ended, the PA Chairman told Clinton that he was “a great man.”“The hell I am,” Clinton said he responded. “I’m a colossal failure, and you made me one.”

  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  3. Aiyah, Ktemoc, "the Islamic caricature scandal in Europe instigated by pro Israeli sectors".
    Even the Arabs didn't accuse Israel of that.

    Jyllands-Posten is closely tied to the Conservative People's Party in Denmark. Like many right-wing newspapers in Europe, its taken a tough line against immigration i.e. Middle Eastern immigration. The controversial cartoon was just part of this general editorial line. The newspaper's owners are conservative Lutheran Protestants, nothing to do with Israel or the Jews.

    Years ago, there used to be people in Europe spreading rumours that Jews engaged in Devil worship, Jews were poisoning the water supply, Jewish men were all paedophiles, Jews caused the Great Depression....heheheh...

  4. im indonesian

    i support palestinean effort to stand independence. israel must get out from PA.

    viva palestina

  5. anon, you're quoting from a jewish source, hardly an unbiased party - as I mentioned, ppl like Golda Meir prefers the world to think there is no Palestinian - 'nuff said

  6. kittykat46,

    read and

    Daniel Pipes is one of the most virulent anti Arab neocon Jew there is

    In America, as a university professor he runs Campus Watch, a Hitler Youth-like watch that encourages students to spy on their professors and lecturers who said anything adverse about Israel and to post their names on the Campus Watch blacklist.

    Many professors were so incensed at this intimidating Big Brother Hitler Youth-ish surveillance that they deliberately put their own names on Daniel Pipes black list.

    Trust a neocon Jew to behave like Nazis.