Our enemies are either collapsing on the brink of collapse. No Israeli interest is served by saving them. - by Caroline Glick

Israel's security community isn't alone in its preference for stability – even at the cost of strengthening enemies.

Caroline Glick..
Israel Hayom.
24 July '20..
Link: https://www.israelhayom.com/2020/07/24/stability-for-our-enemies/

Since the 1990s, the dominant view in Israel's national security community has been that Israel's top priority in relation to the Palestinians is to maintain the stability of their leadership. This is the case in relation to both the Fatah-controlled Palestinian Authority in Judea and Samaria and the Hamas regime in Gaza.

The rationale behind this view is that despite their hostility, if the regimes lose control, things will be worse, not better for Israel. Israel will have to take over, at great cost in lives and international stature. In other words, it's either Fatah and Hamas or the Israel Defense Forces. And Israel's security establishment prefers the former.

To achieve the goal of preserving the Fatah regime, Israel's generals and their think tank colleagues have long insisted the government ensure its financial viability. In practice, this has required Israel to collect customs and other indirect taxes for the PA and transfer the funds, with no strings attached to the PA every month. The fact that the PA has always used large portions of its budget to finance terrorism was of little consequence to the generals and their colleagues.

In the case of Hamas-controlled Gaza, preserving the terrorist regime has required Israel to permit the PA to transfer funds to its employees in Gaza, even though by paying their salaries the PA effectively enabled Hamas to devote its resources solely to waging its war against Israel. Preserving Hamas has also involved Israel allowing Qatar to send truckloads of cash to Gaza to keep Hamas's terror state afloat.

Safe in power – thanks to Israel – Fatah has been free to devote its energies waging its multidimensional war against Israel. It funds terrorists – with the tax arrears Israel collects for it. It incites terror on its media organs – again paid for by the taxes Israel transfers. It pays its security forces and indoctrinates its members to seek Israel's destruction. It engages in large-scale theft of government lands and illegal construction in Judea and Samaria to choke off Jewish communities. And the Fatah-PA wages diplomatic war against Israel at the UN, in the world capitals, and increasingly at the International Criminal Court.

Safe in power in Gaza, Hamas builds up its forces. It develops collaborative ties with Hezbollah and the Houthis and strengthens its client relationship with both Iran and Turkey. And every so often, it opens another missile offensive against aimed at killing and terrorizing Israeli civilians.

Whether they like it or not, the denizens of Hamastan and Fatahland alike have no choice other than to live under the jackboot of their regimes. Thanks to Israel – and its stability minded security experts – they have no chance of competing for power or rebelling.

Israel's security community isn't alone in its preference for stability – even at the cost of strengthening enemies. Their American colleagues are in the same cognitive boat. The place where the Americans have been pushing this position most strongly in recent years is in Lebanon. Following the Second Lebanon War in 2006, despite the direct assistance both the Lebanese government and the Lebanese Armed Forces provided Hezbollah in its war against Israel, the Bush administration massively expanded US civilian and military assistance to the Lebanese government and the Lebanese Armed Forces. Obama expanded the aid packages still further. And despite opposition from some quarters of the Trump administration, the Pentagon insists on maintaining the assistance.

Much like their Israeli counterparts, the US security brass insists that despite the fact that Hezbollah is a more powerful military force than the LAF, and indeed dominates it, and despite the fact that Hezbollah controls the Lebanese government, both the government and the LAF should be treated as independent organizations. Their stability and ties to US aid may in time, enable them to assert national authority over their country.

There are several problems with this view. The main problem is that under the current system, Hezbollah rules the roost and so long as the system remains unchanged, Hezbollah will continue to control the government and the LAF; no matter how many aircraft, night vision devices, mortars, and artillery pieces US taxpayers buy the LAF and no matter how much civilian assistance they buy the Lebanese government. The only way to change the situation is to change the system. And the US military and civilian assistance to the Lebanese government and LAF preserves the system.

Surprise? Gaza’s electricity crisis continues but BBC reporting does not - by Hadar Sela

...Remarkably though, the BBC now seems to have lost interest in the subject of the plight of Gaza residents struggling to make do with a few hours of electricity a day – despite having extensively covered that story for six months.

Hadar Sela..
BBC Watch..
27 November '17..

When the long-running electricity crisis in the Gaza Strip was exacerbated by the Palestinian Authority’s decision to cut payments for electricity supplied to the territory in April of this year, BBC audiences saw coverage of that topic (albeit often lacking accurate background and context) on a variety of BBC platforms.

After Hamas and Fatah announced their latest ‘reconciliation’ in mid-September, BBC coverage of the electricity crisis in the Gaza Strip suddenly waned and no further reporting on the topic has since appeared.

However, if BBC audiences perhaps assumed that reason for that dramatic drop in coverage is that the Hamas-Fatah ‘unity deal’ (which was reported profusely and enthusiastically by the BBC) has solved the long-standing crisis, they would be mistaken...

(Continue to Full Post)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

An opportunity to advance Hamas's genocidal agenda against Israel and Jews - by Bassam Tawil

...The bluff of Palestinian "reconciliation" is far from being about peace. Instead, it is about pursuing the fight against Israel and the "Zionist enterprise" -- namely, Israel and Jews. In his accord with Hamas, Abbas has signed onto Hamas's version of violent "resistance" against Israel and Jews. This is the real meaning of the Abbas-Hamas deal.The bluff of Palestinian "reconciliation" is far from being about peace. Instead, it is about pursuing the fight against Israel and the "Zionist enterprise" -- namely, Israel and Jews. In his accord with Hamas, Abbas has signed onto Hamas's version of violent "resistance" against Israel and Jews. This is the real meaning of the Abbas-Hamas deal.

Bassam Tawil..
Gatestone Institute..
15 October '17..

Buoyed by the "reconciliation" agreement reached with President Mahmoud Abbas's Palestinian Authority (PA), Hamas has announced that it seeks to unite all Palestinians in the fight against the "Zionist enterprise." In other words, Hamas views the agreement as a vehicle for rallying Palestinians behind it toward achieving its longtime goal of destroying Israel.

When Hamas talks about the "Zionist enterprise," it is referring to the establishment of Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people. Hamas is not only opposed to the existence of Israel on what it and most Muslims perceive as "Muslim-owned" land; it reiterates, at every opportunity, its desire to annihilate Israel.

Those who think that the new "reconciliation" accord will have a moderating effect of Hamas are both blind and deaf to what Hamas itself has been stating both before and after the agreement. One has to give Hamas credit for being clear, honest and consistent about its goal of destroying Israel.

(Continue to Full Post)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

Continuing to mislead on Gaza electricity crisis at BBC News - by Hadar Sela

...Once again we see the BBC making do with superficial presentation of the Hamas-Fatah unity deal story that fails to meet its obligation to provide reporting “of the highest editorial standards so that all audiences can engage fully with issues”.

Hadar Sela..
BBC Watch..
15 October '17..

The announcement of a preliminary agreement between Hamas and Fatah on October 12th was the subject of a long report that appeared on the BBC News website’s Middle East page under the optimistic headline “Palestinian factions Hamas and Fatah end split on Gaza“.

“Hamas and Fatah have signed a landmark reconciliation deal in Cairo in a key step towards ending a decade-long rift between the two Palestinian factions.

The deal will see administrative control of the Gaza Strip handed to a Fatah-backed unity government.

Egypt has been brokering the reconciliation talks in Cairo.”

Over 20% of the report’s word count presents background to the decade-long rift between Hamas and Fatah but readers found very little concrete information concerning the terms of the agreement which is the article’s subject matter.

(Continue to Full Post)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

Mr. Trump, There Won’t Be Peace While the Power Is Out - by Evelyn Gordon

If any Palestinian government ever prioritizes its own people’s welfare over anti-Israel terror, it might be possible to talk about peace. But as long as killing Israelis is the top priority for both Hamas and Fatah, the idea that either Palestinian party would ever sign a peace agreement with Israel is fatuous.

Evelyn Gordon..
Analysis from Israel..
22 May '17..
Link: http://evelyncgordon.com/there-wont-be-peace-while-the-power-is-out/

Donald Trump and the mainstream press may act like enemies on many issues, but they are the closest of allies when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Trump spouts fantasies about making Israeli-Palestinian peace, and Western media dutifully fails to report any news that might disrupt these fantasies, such as what the Palestinians’ two rival governments are actually doing to their own people right now.

If journalists were doing their jobs, they would ask Trump and his advisors one simple question: How exactly do you expect the Palestinians to make peace with Israel when both Palestinian governments have chosen to deprive their people of basic necessities–including electricity and medical care—to support anti-Israel terror?

Earlier this month, for instance, an Arab hospital in Jerusalem that mainly treats Palestinians announced it would no longer accept patients from either the West Bank or Gaza because the Palestinian Authority owes it so much money that it can no longer afford to buy medicines. The hospital, Augusta Victoria, said it urgently needs 23 million shekels ($6.4 million) to replenish its stocks. The PA’s unpaid debts to it total 150 million ($42 million).

Medicines are in similarly short supply in Gaza because, about two weeks ago, the Fatah-run PA stopped paying for them. Normally, the PA sends a shipment of medicines to Gaza every two months. But the last shipment arrived more than three months ago, and supplies of many drugs have been exhausted. Gaza’s Hamas-run government refuses to act in Fatah’s stead.

Both sides have some legitimate grounds for demanding that the other pay. Hamas bears responsibility because it is Gaza’s de facto ruler, but the PA is the one that gets billions of dollars a year in foreign aid to fund humanitarian needs in both the West Bank and Gaza. Meanwhile, however, both are refusing to compromise, and Gaza residents are paying the price.

Fatah and Hamas Finally Agree on Something. Like to Guess What? - by Stephen Flatow

...Every time the United Nations tells us that Israel is the obstacle to peace, every time the Washington Post tries to convince us that Hamas and Fatah are enemies, every time J Street declares that Abbas is a “moderate” — let’s remember who maimed and ultimately murdered Yonah Peter Malina, and which groups call the killer a “hero” and a “martyr.” In the end, that really tells us all we need to know about the Palestinian cause.

Stephen M. Flatow..
JNS.org..
12 January '17..

Fatah and Hamas don’t always get along.

Fatah, the largest faction of the Palestine Liberation Organization, is chaired by Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas. Hamas is the Islamic fundamentalist Palestinian group that rules Gaza.

Fatah and Hamas call each other names. They compete against each other in Palestinian elections (on the rare occasions that such elections are held). Sometimes Fatah goons rough up a Hamas member, and vice versa. There were even armed clashes between the two factions in 2007, leaving more than 100 terrorists dead.

But Fatah and Hamas have found at least one thing they agree on: anyone who massacres Jews is a great guy.

Jan. 5 was the 21st anniversary of the death of the most infamous Hamas bomb-maker of them all, Yahya Ayyash. He also shared his car bombing techniques, explosive vests and other deadly innovations with Islamic Jihad, the terror gang that murdered my daughter Alisa and seven other bus passengers near Kfar Darom in 1995.

Hamas honored the “hero” Ayyash Jan. 5 with a photo essay on its website, complete with images of the bodies of some of his victims. Ayyash had the blood of hundreds of Israelis and Americans on his hands. That’s why Hamas reveres him.

But guess what—the “moderate” Fatah admires the mass-murderer Ayyash just as much as the “extremist” Hamas.

(Continue to Full Article)

Stephen M. Flatow, a vice president of the Religious Zionists of America, is an attorney in New Jersey. He is the father of Alisa Flatow, who was murdered in an Iranian-sponsored Palestinian terrorist attack in 1995.

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

I’ve Killed More Jews Than You Have. So There! - by Sheri Oz

...In a previous post, I cynically wondered if a greater number of sweets are handed out when they manage to kill more Jews in any one attack. And now, Abbas is suggesting that his party, Fatah, should be the one to win the next election because Fatah has killed more Jews than Hamas. Sounds like a good reason, no?

Sheri Oz..
Israel Diaries..
09 August '16..






Why are the Arab enemies of Israel so concerned about the number of dead Jews? Just who are they competing with? Who cares who killed more Jews?

* * * * *

Numbers seems to be an important thing to people who hate Jews. And now, we see the “moderate” Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) playing the numbers game with the Hamas opponents challenging his rule in the upcoming elections this October. I’m waiting for a post by Hamas saying that THEY have killed more Jews than Fatah. As an aside, it is interesting that the Facebook post in which this grandiose claim was made has been taken down. I doubt it violated Facebook policy, but I do wonder why it has been removed.

The Facebook post was translated by Palestinian Media Watch — Palwatch — an uploaded to Twitter.

The following is yesterday's Fatah post celebrating and bragging about Fatah's murder of Israeli civilians:   

"To those who argue [with Fatah], to the ignorant, and to those who do not know history: 

• Fatah has killed 11,000 Israelis
• Fatah has sacrificed 170,000 Martyrs (Shahids)...
• Fatah was the first to carry out operations (i.e., terror attacks) during the first Intifada (i.e., Palestinian violence and terror against Israel, 1988-1993), and it was the first Palestinian faction to reach the nuclear reactor in Dimona (i.e., 1988 murder of 3 working mothers on way to the Dimona plant)
• Fatah was the first to fight in the second Intifada (i.e., PA terror campaign 2000-2005) (Baha Al-Sa'id, an officer in the Preventive Security Forces, infiltrated an Israeli settlement on the border with Gaza) [parenthesis in source]...
• Fatah was the first to defeat the Zionist enemy (Battle of El-Karameh) [parenthesis in source]...
• Fatah led the Palestinian attack on Israel in the UN."

[Official Fatah Facebook, Aug. 2, 2016

(Continue to Full Post)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

Kerry’s Peace Negotiations, Jew-Hatred and the Lethality of the Hamas-Fatah Unity Pact

...If Secretary Kerry wonders why the negotiations between the Palestinians and the Israelis suddenly went “poof,” as he put it, it might be useful for him to consider whether the problem lies with the building of some apartments for Jews in the capital of the Jewish state or with a genocidal ideology which is already intent on inculcating a new generation of shahids dedicated to slaughtering the residents of those new apartments simply because they are, in fact, Jews.

Richard Cravatts..
Times of Israel..
24 June '14..

The disheartening, though not entirely surprising, breakdown of talks between Israel and the Palestinians marked yet another failure by the two sides to come closer to an agreement that would usher the way for a Palestinian state. Yet, no sooner had the talks collapsed than blame was being assigned by both Secretary of State John Kerry and chief U.S. negotiator Martin Indyk—and naturally it was Israel that bore the brunt of their criticism. Echoing the sentiments of Palestinian leadership itself, Kerry and Indyk pointed to the dreaded settlements as the principal sticking point of the talks, with Indyk suggesting that Israel’s approval of new housing units in the Gilo neighborhood Jerusalem would, as he put it, “drive Israel into an irreversible binational reality.”

Secretary Kerry had the same complaint, insisting that Prime Minister Netanyahu’s refusal to release the final third of Palestinian prisoners, coupled with the provocative new building plans, were the Israeli actions that blew up the nine months of negotiations.

On one development even the State Department was less than enthusiastic: the reconciliation agreement reached by the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, announced at the end of April, which State’s spokeswoman, Jen Psaki, deemed “disappointing” and the timing “troubling.” Even diplomats have to face certain truths, and Ms. Psaki had to begrudgingly admit that, in her words uttered with breathtaking understatement, “It’s hard to see how Israel can be expected to negotiate with a government that does not believe in its right to exist.”

Diplomacy involving Israel and the Palestinians invariably reaches this point—the thorny and slippery intersection of the politically possible and the diplomatically desired, with the inevitable result being that it is Israel made to be seen as the guilty party in having talks collapse, regardless of the actual events leading up to such a failure. Without even the barest amount of self awareness of how the inability to hold the Palestinians responsible for any major acts of concessions for strategic negotiation, U.S. diplomacy is continually based on the assumption that it is Israel—and only Israel—that is going to make negotiation move forward, and that it is Israel, and only Israel, that has the will and ability to make changes in policy and any concessions necessary to satisfy the Palestinian’s maximalist demands.

As a result, and as the Palestinians have cleverly figured out, Israel is made to release terrorist prisoners, agreed to land swaps, or to deliver any number of other painful concessions, just to further engage the Palestinians and keep them at the bargaining table.

While it may be comforting and diplomatically expedient for Secretary Kerry to insist that it is Israel’s fault when things go awry, or that Israel alone has the ability to do things and make concessions for peace, the idea that it is the settlements, or the number of murderers released to the Palestinians, or any other of the various issues of which Israel is always accused that is actually causing the logjam in the peace talks is simply naive and overlooks some far more lethal, pernicious, and ideologically-driven, far more intractable issues underlying negotiations between the Jewish state and its Palestinian foes.

What any honest observer of the history of conflict between Israel and its Arab neighbors knows well, the Palestinians have been strident and inflexible in their maximalist demands, not to mention their intractability on such non-starters as the so-called “right of return,” the division of Jerusalem, and the proclaimed requirement that the Palestinian state will be judenrein, that, as Mahmoud Abbas himself has repeated, not one Jew will be allowed to live in the new Palestinian state.

But the unity pact between Fatah and Hamas brings to the surface a far more pernicious aspect, something that neither Prime Minister Netanyahu, Secretary Kerry, nor any other diplomat is likely to finesse in negotiations in Jerusalem, Ramallah, or Washington. While the State Department is quick to condemn the building of new apartments in Gilo, or hector the Israelis for not releasing Arab murderers in exchange for the possibility of continued talks, its seems to have been wilfully blind in not recognizing that the foundational document by which Hamas was established—the 1988 Hamas Charter—is animated with genocidal Jew-hatred, replete with a global strategy to extirpate Israel and murderous tactics based on millennial dreams of apocalyptic jihad.

Great question! Will American taxpayers keep building Hamas’ army?

...Now, however, Hamas will not need to employ the tactics of its 2007 coup in Gaza, when it shot Fatah supporters in the knees and pushed them off tall buildings (yes, if you are wondering, there are still some hard feelings in Fatah over this). It can proceed more or less peacefully and even democratically to take over the PA by winning elections. So does the PA still need an army? Will the US keep training its soldiers and equipping it? Who, after all, would they fight with it?

Vic Rosenthal..
Abu Yehuda..
31 May '14..

On Monday, if we can believe Mahmoud Abbas, a Palestinian unity government will be formed by the two major factions, Fatah and Hamas. A ‘technocratic’ government will be formed immediately until elections can be held next year.

‘Technocratic’ is a great word. It suggest a government of people interested in economics, sanitation, education, etc., and not in launching rockets, kidnapping soldiers, or stuffing explosives into tunnels underneath the border. The classic technocrat is former PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, who proved too technocratic (read: opposed to corruption) even for Abbas. Somehow I’m not optimistic about finding many technocrats in either Fatah or Hamas.

Abbas claims that the policies of the new government will be the existing policies of the PA, which ostensibly include nonviolence, recognition of Israel, and adherence to prior agreements (please don’t laugh too loudly). Hamas explicitly rejects these conditions, and plans to retain its weapons and continue its “resistance.” Apparently the EU is satisfied with Abbas’ assurances and will continue supporting the PA.

What about the US? The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2012 says that

None of the funds appropriated in titles III through VI of this Act may be obligated for salaries of personnel of the Palestinian Authority located in Gaza or may be obligated or expended for assistance to Hamas or any entity effectively controlled by Hamas, any power-sharing government of which Hamas is a member, or that results from an agreement with Hamas and over which Hamas exercises undue influence.

That would seem to mean that the US will have to stop sending US taxpayer money to the Palestinian Authority (PA) as soon as the unity government is established. This is strong, aggressive language, which probably gave some members of Congress and their constituents a warm feeling when it was passed.

But the law also contains a presidential waiver clause. The President can suspend the requirement for 6 months at a time if he thinks US national security requires it. Unlike the waiver clause in the Jerusalem Embassy act of 1995, which can be renewed indefinitely (and so far, has been), this one can’t be renewed after 12 months. So theoretically, unless Hamas turns into a bunny rabbit, the US will have to stop funding the PA, training its ‘security’ forces, etc. in at most a year.

The PA manages to absorb every dollar and euro it gets, while still barely managing to stave off insurrection. It would not survive without US aid.

Respecting The Palestinians Means Raising The Bar From The Gutter

...So a word of advice to all those who lower the bar for the Palestinians to the gutter: You aren't part of the solution. You are part of the Palestinian's problem.

Dr. Aaron Lerner..
IMRA Weekly Commentary..
28 May '14..

President Shimon Peres scheduled a photo op prayer session with Pope Francis and Mahmoud Abbas at Vatican City designed to endorse "man of peace" Mahmoud Abbas to be held hours after a unified Fatah-Hamas PA is slated to be announced.

As of this writing, the entire world community - including the US and EU, has opted to postpone any actual requirements regarding a unified PA at least until after Palestinian elections are held. And judging by the world’s track record, if there is a unified PA and it enjoys unqualified world acceptance during an interim period up to the formation of a post-elections government, then that acceptance will continue indefinitely after elections as well.

There is a common thread to this.

It is that for all practical purposes the Palestinians enjoy an automatic pass from the world.

And if I were an Arab conspiracy theorist I would suggest that this is the product of a terrible dark Israeli conspiracy against the Palestinians.

Because this policy of not requiring the Palestinians to meet the most basic standards of behavior lulls them into doing just that: not meeting the most basic standards of behavior.

Surprise! We'll Use Unity Accord To Move Terrorism To West Bank

...Ignoring Hamas's declared intentions will pave the way for the movement to use the unity agreement to seize control over the Palestinian Authority and many parts of the West Bank. It will also facilitate Hamas's plans to launch terror attacks from the West Bank against Israel. It now remains to be seen whether the U.S. Administration and EU governments, by blindly endorsing the new unity government, will help Hamas to achieve its goals.

Khaled Abu Toameh..
Gatestone Institute..
23 May '14..

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is busy these days trying to persuade the West to accept his recent unity accord with Hamas.

Abbas is especially interested in winning the backing of the U.S. and EU for the deal with the Islamist movement because his Palestinian Authority is almost entirely dependent on American and European financial aid.

Abbas's main argument is that the "reconciliation" deal with Hamas, signed last month in the Gaza Strip, would not affect the peace process with Israel.

Abbas was quoted as saying that there is "no contradiction" between the unity deal and the peace talks with Israel and that he remains committed to a "just peace on the basis of a two-state solution in accordance with international legitimacy."

Earlier, Abbas, in the context of his efforts to calm the U.S. Administration and EU governments over the unity accord, declared that the new Palestinian government would recognize Israel and reject violence. His remarks, however, have been strongly denied by Hamas leaders, who say their movement intends to pursue "jihad" against Israel.

Musa Abu Marzouk, deputy chairman of Hamas's political bureau, announced that his movement would never recognize Israel. "This is a red line that cannot be crossed," he said.

In other words, Hamas is telling everyone not to believe Abbas when he says that the Palestinian unity government will renounce violence and recognize Israel's right to exist.

This week, further evidence emerged that Hamas has no intention of changing its ideology in the wake of the unity agreement with Abbas's Fatah faction.

The presence of rockets in Gaza does matter

...When Mahmoud Abbas assured various diplomats that the unified PA would honor its commitments Abbas knew that these commitments prohibit the presence of rockets inside the area of the PA and that his unified PA partner, Hamas, had rockets. If Abbas fails to address this issue with his Hamas partner now as details of the unified PA are being hammered out, then he isn't a victim of Hamas, he is a conspirator. And the last thing we should do is let him off the hook by limiting ourselves to demanding that the illegal rockets in Gaza aren't fired.

Dr. Aaron Lerner..
IMRA Weekly Commentary..
15 May '14..

It is anyone's guess if indeed the Fatah-Hamas unified PA will actually go through, but it would be irresponsible not to prepare for such a possibility.

A unified PA would mean that the Gaza Strip would be under the authority of the unified PA.

And that would mean, first and foremost, that the PA would be responsible for the huge number of rockets now deployed in the Gaza Strip in gross violation of the agreements that the PA is ostensibly committed to.

With the notable exception of Minister Uzi Landau, I am not aware of any Israeli official who has cited the obligation of the PA, if and when it controls the Gaza Strip, to get rid of these rockets.

Here is what PM Netanyahu said when he met this Tuesday with Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida: "If President Abbas goes ahead with this national unity with Hamas...then we'll have to hold him accountable for every rocket that is fired from Gaza, to Israel."

That's right. This comment implies that the issue is not if the rockets are in Gaza but instead only if they are fired.

Unfortunately, experience has taught us that this is not a viable position.

What Kind of Palestinian State Are We Talking About?

...All that is left is to sit back and watch the establishment of Hamas's new Islamic emirate in the West Bank, an enclave of lepers against whom the whole world will unite. The Israelis and Jordanians will choke off Hamas, enabling Israel to take control of the West Bank for the next million years -- without interference.

Bassam Tawil..
Gatestone Institute..
15 May '14..

The final nail in the coffin of the Israeli-Palestinian peace was the speech given about the internal Palestinian reconciliation by the Palestinian delegate, Azzam al-Ahmed, at the home of Hamas head Ismail Haniyeh in the Shati refugee camp in Gaza.

At the end of April, the internal Palestinian reconciliation was announced, with Fatah leaders posing for the camera with Hamas leaders Ismail Haniyeh and Musa Abu Marzouk -- all wreathed in smiles. Until the catastrophic pictures were published there were many Palestinians and Israelis who honestly believed there was a chance for a peace agreement that would lead to the establishment of a Palestinian state coexisting with Israel, but the speeches given by both sides made it clear that the dream of a Palestinian state would finally have to be shelved for the foreseeable future.

It was no surprise when the Hamas' Ismail Haniyeh reassured Palestinians that their future Palestinian state would stretch from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, and that the Palestinians would return to their lands in "all Palestine."

Hamas, a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood and an extremist terrorist organization, has always held that unrealistic position and has never expressed any desire whatsoever for a peace agreement with the Jews. Its aspiration is, and has always been, to destroy Israel by force, slaughter its Jewish inhabitants and establish a Sharia-based Palestine on the ruins.

The real disappointment, however, was the speech given by Azzam al-Ahmed, who said the Palestinians would never recognize the State of Israel as the Jewish national homeland and would never waive the Palestinian "right of return" to Palestine.

Those speeches summed up the joint position agreed on by both Fatah and Hamas; it means there will not be peace. The Israelis will not agree to sign any agreement that will destroy their state through the influx of the millions of descendants of the 1948 refugees.

A few days later Mahmoud Abbas met with Hamas political bureau head, Khaled Mashaal, in Qatar. Apparently the internal Palestinian reconciliation is a done deal.

The events made it clear to one and all that this time it is not just more empty rhetoric, and that, as Palestinians, we will have to start recognizing that our lives will change, now and in the future.

The Hamasian Paradox

...The paradox is that Hamas, weakened by the loss of its Muslim Brotherhood patron, may now become stronger than ever. It is quite capable of winning elections, so it might not even need to use force to get control of the PA and its American trained and armed ‘security’ forces — which were supposed to be used to ‘fight terrorism’!

Vic Rosenthal..
Abu Yehuda..
14 May '14..





The players:

Hamas — The Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood; Sunni Islamists committed to the destruction of Israel; believe that killing Jews is a religious mitzvah.

Fatah — Yasser Arafat’s gang, secular terrorists committed to the destruction of Israel, the single organization that has murdered more Jews than any similar group. Fatah’s chairman today is Arafat’s former deputy, Mahmoud Abbas. Fatah dominates the PLO.

The PLO — An umbrella group of about 10 secular, variously leftist groups committed to the destruction of Israel. It was founded in 1964 as an Egyptian front, taken over by Yasser Arafat in 1969, and today is run by Mahmoud Abbas. Hamas is not a member of the PLO.

In one of the worst decisions in its history, Israel agreed to accept the PLO as the “legitimate representative of the Palestinian people” in the discussions leading up to the Oslo agreement in 1993.

The Palestinian Nationsl Authority (PA) — the PA was established in 1993 by the Oslo agreement. During the period following Oslo, Israel transferred control of the areas of Judea and Samaria containing from 95-98% of their Arab residents to the PA. The PA is funded by the US and the EU, and would probably be overthrown by Hamas if not for the presence of the IDF. The ‘President’ of the PA (although Oslo specifies that the chief executive will not be called a ‘president’) is Mahmoud Abbas, elected in 2005 for a 4-year term. Presidential elections have not been held since. Currently the PLO and the PA are effectively the same.

In 2006, Hamas won a majority in elections to the Palestinian Legislative Council, the PA’s parliament, and Hamas’ Ismail Haniyeh was appointed Prime Minister. In 2007, Hamas violently took full control of the Gaza strip, and Abbas dismissed the Hamas government.

Now Hamas and Fatah have agreed in principle to ‘reconcile’ and are negotiating the details. These will include Hamas (and Islamic Jihad, an Iranian-supported faction in Gaza) joining the PLO and their candidates standing for election in the PA legislature.

And Peace to You, Jimmy Baby by Michael Lumish

...I have a better idea. Instead of folding Hamas into the PLO - which, itself, is a terrorist organization, of course - why do we not defeat Hamas and thereby make it go away? I know that wishing to actually defeat one's mortal enemies is today considered dangerously hard-right radical, but I feel reasonably certain that Franklin Roosevelt approved of the notion.

Michael Lumish..
Israel Thrives..
13 May '14..




Former American President, Jimmy Carter, has an op-ed in the Washington Post today entitled, United Palestinian government may provide new opportunities for peace.

He writes:

The Palestinians’ plans for the coming months are relatively clear: to form a new unity government and expand involvement in the United Nations. Although condemned by some, the decision by the leaders of the Palestine Liberation Organization and Hamas to reconcile their differences and move toward elections can be a positive development. In the past, similar efforts have been abandoned because of strong opposition from Israel and the United States, but the resolve to succeed is now much stronger among leaders in the West Bank and Gaza. This reconciliation of Palestinian factions and formation of a national unity government is necessary because it would be impossible to implement any peace agreement between Israel and just one portion of the Palestinians.

It is hard to fathom how anyone could think that folding a genocidally anti-Semitic organization into the PLO is a good thing. It is obvious, of course, that Israel can reach no meaningful peace agreement with only a portion of the Palestinian-Arab people, but it is equally obvious that an organization that calls not only for the destruction of the Jewish State of Israel, but for the genocide of the Jews, represents a sworn enemy, not a partner for peace.

Hamas has made no gestures that would suggest that they are interested in two states for two peoples. Quite the contrary, Hamas opposes a negotiated conclusion of hostilities, yet a former President of the United States, a nuclear engineer, no less, thinks that it is in the best interest of the Jews of the Middle East to recognize and uplift an organization that screams to the hillsides for Jewish blood.

The wrong-headedness of such a notion goes well beyond casual naivety.

Pretty Foolish Not to Pay Attention When Hamas Tells Israel, 'No Hope'.

...Sure, some of these are rhetorical questions -- and anyone who doubts that Israel can take Gaza at the time of its choosing is making a big mistake. But when your enemy -- and Hamas is recognized as a terrorist organization not only by Israel, but by the EU and the United States -- describes the end game, it would be foolish not to pay attention. Hamas either really believes in the destruction of Israel, or puts out a pretty good facsimile thereof.

Shoshana Bryen..
American Thinker..
08 May '14..

Sometimes it is braggadocio. Sometimes it is the last rhetorical shot before making a political change previously thought impossible. But sometimes, just sometimes, it is truth as the teller sees it.

Hamas released a video for Israel's 66th anniversary, entitled "No Hope," (a play on Israel's national anthem, Hatikva, or "Hope"). It is vile, putrid and an absolutely true rendering of Hamas thinking, breathing, and being. The Times of Israel described it in all its slavish devotion to death, delusion and Hamas imperialism:

“The army of the Zionists was built of wax and now it is melted and has no hope,” the singer croons as a computer generated militant character smashes Israel’s state symbols into rubble. The song says that smart Israelis will be allowed to leave the country and return “to their homelands” while those who are stubborn and remain will have their fates “sealed beneath the dirt.” The YouTube clip intersperses various historical photos of the conflict with computer-generated Hamas gunmen who are seen driving the Jews out of Jerusalem and onto ships and celebrating on top of the al-Aqsa mosque, as the bodies of IDF soldiers riddle the streets. “The Holy city will return to its former name,” the singer warbles as the distorted anthem draws to a close. “My capital Beyt al-Maqdis, not Jerusalem.”

Yes, "sticks and stones" and all that, but this isn't about the words -- it is about the intention of Hamas to stick to its Charter, kill Jews, and be master of Jerusalem. It is about Hamas's intention to override whatever niggling negotiations the Palestinian Authority (PA) feels it has to conduct -- whether with Israel or with the bodies of the UN. Hamas plans to roll over the first and ignore the second. It is about the inutility of negotiations because Hamas plans no compromise with anyone -- first and foremost, it will not compromise with the PA.

Moussa Abu Marzouk, head of Hamas' political bureau, told Al-Monitor-US:

"Hamas will not recognize Israel. This is a red line that cannot be crossed." He said the Quartet's requirement that Hamas recognize Israel "does not concern us one bit." "We would have spared ourselves seven years of misery under the siege and two wars in 2008 and 2012 had we wanted to recognize Israel." He also reiterated Hamas' refusal to disarm the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades. "The Quartet negotiations require that violence be renounced, which, in effect, means that the al-Qassam weapons must be decommissioned. But this is unacceptable, and Hamas will reject it outright."

No, Hamas doesn't have the ability to take control right now, but this is where some Americans and some (but fewer) Israelis get confused. There is no neat division between Hamas and Fatah. Although Hamas rules Gaza, many Fatah operatives remain there and there are increasing Hamas cells in the West Bank. The Hamas view (shared by many Palestinians) is that the Fatah-led PA exists a) to administer the territory to free Israel of the responsibility -- how many Israelis openly admit they don't want an aid cutoff to the Palestinians precisely because they don't want to be completely responsible, and b) to cooperate with Israel on security measures that in many cases protect Israelis, but equally protect the Abbas government from its own unhappy people. The Palestinian Authority is understood by Palestinians as corrupt, malign, and Quisling in its subservience to the Government of Israel. Abu Mazen, now in the 9th year of his single 4-year term, commands neither respect nor fear -- an unhealthy situation for the ruler who faces a determined, revolutionary faction.

Dropping the ball on the illegal rockets

...The commitment not to have rockets in the Gaza Strip is not some obscure, arcane and insignificant commitment. It's a core commitment. And it is high time that Israeli officials make this crystal clear. "Quiet for quiet" is not enough for the PA. If the PA controls the Gaza Strip then the rockets must go.

Dr. Aaron Lerner..
IMRA Weekly Commentary..
01 May '14..




Mahmoud Abbas says the unified PA will honor its commitments.

And the phrase "honor its commitments" appears in pretty much every statement made by every international figure talking about a unified PA.

But this phrase has been left bereft of meaning.

At most there is a reference to an expectation for quiet.

Let's be clear about this:

The PA is absolutely and unquestionably committed to the absence of rockets in the Gaza Strip.

Here is the text of one such signed commitment:

Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip
Washington, D.C., September 28, 1995
CHAPTER 2 ARTICLE XIV 4. Except for the arms, ammunition and equipment of the Palestinian Police described in Annex I, and those of the Israeli military forces, no organization, group or individual in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip shall manufacture, sell, acquire, possess, import or otherwise introduce into the West Bank or the Gaza Strip any firearms, ammunition, weapons, explosives, gunpowder or any related equipment, unless otherwise provided for in Annex I.

And here is the Annex - rockets are not in the list:

THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN INTERIM AGREEMENT ON THE WEST BANK AND THE GAZA
STRIP
Annex I ARTICLE IV 5. c. In the Gaza Strip, the Palestinian Police will possess the following arms and equipment:
(1) 7,000 light personal weapons;
(2) up to 120 machine guns of 0.3" or 0.5" caliber; and
(3) up to 45 wheeled armored vehicles of a type to be agreed on between the two sides, and of which 22 will be deployed in protecting Council installations.

So anyone who can read a few sentences can see that the commitment is that rockets are not in Gaza.

Again: the commitment is not that rockets aren't FIRED from Gaza. It is that rockets do not EXIST in Gaza.

"Quiet for quiet" might be an appropriate policy and goal in a stand-off with Hamas. But it is not what should be expected from the PA.

This is not just a question of trying to gain points in public opinion.

In Any Case, Hamas Decision Overshadows Kerry’s Slur

...If the administration should choose to walk down this road toward recognition of Hamas, it will do so to the cheers of the foreign-policy establishment and liberal mainstream media that have always chafed against the idea that Hamas was beyond the pale. But if it does, it should also expect that Congress as well as a united pro-Israel community would make them pay a high political price for this betrayal. This is not a battle Obama wants to be fighting in an already difficult midterm elections year. If Abbas is counting on the president to risk some of his scarce political capital on such a cause, then both he and Kerry may have badly miscalculated. But should the Palestinian alliance last into 2015 with a lame duck president already feeling he has little left to lose, then it is entirely possible that Obama could make Kerry’s apartheid flap look like a picnic compared to a decision to recognize Hamas.

Jonathan S. Tobin..
Commentary Magazine..
29 April '14..

Secretary of State John Kerry’s apology for his use of the word apartheid to describe Israel’s future in the absence of peace has done nothing to lessen the impact of this slur. The secretary’s attempt to walk back his remarks was long on umbrage about anyone questioning his dubious pro-Israel bona fides and short on actual contrition. The aftermath of a taped speech in which he uses a misleading attempt to cast blame for the failure of his peace initiative equally between Israel and the Palestinian Authority is not the most appropriate moment to boast of his commitment to the Jewish state, especially when he has damned it as heading inevitably to racist tyranny if it doesn’t do as he says.

But though the Daily Beast’s scoop about Kerry’s speech to the Trilateral Commission has put the administration on the defensive for the moment, the statement has served the purpose of Israel’s critics since it has given them the opportunity to defend his assertion even as the secretary distanced himself from it. The notion that what he said is an unpalatable truth has become a piece of liberal conventional wisdom even though its premise is demographically dubious and rendered nonsensical when one considers that unless one includes the population of Gaza—which is already an independent Palestinian state in all but name—the day will probably never dawn when Arabs outnumber Jews in the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. Israel not only, as Kerry conceded in his apology, is not now and has no intention of ever becoming an apartheid state. The entire discussion is specious and tells us more about the effort to delegitimize the Jewish state than it does about Israel’s character. The real damage here is that Kerry has breathed new life into an old canard that neither facts nor logic seems to have the power to extinguish.

But for all the effort expended on this controversy, an even more important one is looming over Obama administration’s Middle East policy in the wake of the collapse of the peace talks. By entering into a unity coalition with the Hamas terrorist movement, Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas put President Obama on the spot. The president has repeatedly pledged that the U.S., like Israel, will not deal with Hamas, at least until it repudiates its genocidal charter, recognizes Israel, and commits itself to peace. That ought to mean the end of all U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority (something mandated by law) as well as putting an end to negotiations that are aimed at empowering the PA. But no one in Israel should be taking the fulfillment of that pledge for granted.

Oh My, Running Away from Statehood Again

...But why should the Palestinians engage in the daunting tasks of nation-building and state creation if they can have their hapless constituents run around in circles for nearly a century while they bask in international sympathy and enrich themselves from the proceeds of their self-inflicted plight?

Prof. Efraim Karsh..
BESA Center..
Perspectives Paper No. 246..
28 April '14..

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Palestinian Authorities’ decision to strike an agreement with Hamas instead of with Israel is of little surprise. Since before 1948, the Palestinian leadership has continually rejected any possibility of attaining statehood, in favor of a commitment to violence and promoting their self-inflicted plight for their own financial benefits. With the possibility of another failed round of peace talks, one wonders whether the Palestinian leadership is even interested in independent statehood of any kind.

The “historic” agreement of last week between The Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and Hamas, to form a united government casts a serious doubt not only on the Palestinian leadership’s commitment to a two-state solution, but also on its interest in the attaining of statehood at all.

Not that this should have come as a surprise to anyone. For nearly a century, Palestinian leaders never have missed an opportunity to impede the development of Palestinian civil society and the attainment of Palestinian statehood.

Had the Jerusalem mufti Hajj Amin Husseini, who led the Palestinian Arabs from the early 1920s to the late 1940s, chosen to lead his constituents to peace and reconciliation with their Jewish neighbors, the Palestinians would have had their independent state over a substantial part of mandate Palestine by 1948, and would have been spared the traumatic experience of dispersal and exile.

Had Yasser Arafat, who dominated Palestinian politics from the mid-1960s to his death in November 2004, set the PLO from the start on the path to peace and reconciliation instead of turning it into one of the most murderous and kleptocratic terrorist organizations in modern times, a Palestinian state could have been established on numerous occasions: In the late 1960s or the early 1970s; in 1979, as a corollary to the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty; in May 1999, as part of the Oslo process; or more recently at the Camp David summit of July 2000.

Had Mahmoud Abbas, who succeeded Arafat as PLO chairman and PA president, abandoned his predecessors’ rejectionist path, a Palestinian state could have been established after the Annapolis summit of November 2007, or in June 2009, during President Obama’s first term when Benjamin Netanyahu broke with the longstanding Likud precept by publicly accepting the two-state solution and agreeing to the establishment of a Palestinian state.

But why should the Palestinians engage in the daunting tasks of nation-building and state creation if they can have their hapless constituents run around in circles for nearly a century while they bask in international sympathy and enrich themselves from the proceeds of their self-inflicted plight?

But is it good for the Jews? Maybe a little.

What might happen, though, is a short pause in the international pressure, along with a further disillusionment with the ‘process’ in Israel (even Tzipi Livni said that there could not be “business as usual” with a Hamas-ified PA). This could be an opportunity for Israel to act decisively to end the charade started at Oslo and the pretense that the PLO is anything other than the genocidal terrorist gang that it has always been.

Fresnozionism.org..
24 April '14..

Nu, my grandmother would have asked, is it good for the Jews?

I am talking about the latest episode in the Fatah-Hamas ‘reconciliation’ soap opera. Let’s look at some of the arguments pro and con.

First, on the left, we have this: “it is good for the Jews because a unified Palestinian entity can sign a peace agreement that binds all their factions.” This is probably the weakest argument. As I wrote yesterday, the idea that the PLO, even without Hamas, would in good faith make and keep an agreement to end the conflict is at best wishful thinking. This has been proven on multiple occasions since the days of Arafat. Add the rejectionist Hamas, and the tiny probability becomes even tinier.

Turning right, we hear that it is bad for the Jews because it will strengthen Hamas. There is some truth to this. Hamas has been suffering economically since its patron, the Muslim Brotherhood, lost power in Egypt. General Sisi’s forces are continuing to destroy the tunnels that provide a path for weapons and terrorists to pass into and out of the strip, and whose operation is heavily taxed by Hamas. If Hamas gets access to the European and American funds sloshing around in the Palestinian Authority (PA), that will offset the loss.

Some object that Europe and the US will not continue to fund a PA that includes the terrorist Hamas. But practically speaking, the powers are not prepared to give up the control that they buy with their aid. US State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki reiterated yesterday that Hamas would be an acceptable partner in a unity-governed PA only if it met the three “quartet conditions” of renouncing violence, recognizing Israel and accepting prior agreements (the Oslo Accords, in particular). While this appears to be a rejection of Hamas, which has often insisted that it would never agree to these conditions, it is also a door that Hamas can pass through. If it really wants to join the PA, I suspect a formula could be found that both Hamas and State would accept. Of course, in practice nothing about Hamas would change.

All this is true and on the ‘bad’ side of the ledger. But others suggest that there may be an unexpected benefit as well, which is that union with Hamas would expose the PLO for what it is — an organization with genocidal aims no less sinister than Hamas. After all, what distinguishes the PLO from Hamas? Three things: