Khan al-Ahmar: A classic case of Palestinian manipulation and international meddling - by Naomi Kahn

...In 1992, Salim Fayyad, Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority, published his master plan for the creation of a Palestinian state. The basis of “The Fayyad Plan” was, and remains, the creation of a de facto state without the need for negotiation with Israel, through the creation of facts on the ground in areas under full Israeli administrative and security administration. One of the most strategically important areas on which the Fayyad Plan based its vision of Palestine runs directly through the Adumim region.

Naomi Kahn..
JNS.org..
10 May '18..

Khan al-Ahmar is an embattled Bedouin village that has been in the news—and in the Israeli courts—for more than a decade. The history of Khan al-Ahmar is an eye-opening lesson in Middle Eastern politics. This seemingly unimposing settlement may well be the quintessential example of one of the major problems facing Israel today.

Khan al-Ahmar was built on land that belongs to the State of Israel. It is situated in an area under full Israeli administrative and security authority according to both the Oslo Accords and international law. In fact, it sits on land that is part of Kfar Adumim, in the heart of an area that is strategically critical to Israel’s security.

The residents of Khan al-Ahmar are one branch of the large Jahalin Bedouin tribe. Until fairly recently, they were nomadic shepherds who lived, with the rest of the tribe, near Arad, and moved their herds and tents around southern Israel with the changing seasons. At some point, a feud broke out between different branches of the tribe; in the 1970s, the Jahalin were forced out of the Arad area and traveled northward. That’s how they ended up where they are today.

Aerial photos paint a clear picture of the Jahalin’s history ever since: They arrived in the Adumim region in the mid-1970s, most probably after the Yom Kippur War of 1973. Like almost all other Bedouin in Israel and the Middle East, the Jahalin began to abandon their nomadic lifestyle in favor of semi-permanent or permanent settlements; shepherding became more of a hobby to preserve their folklore, but they, like Bedouin throughout Israel and the Middle East, began to take up other lines of work.

The problem is that this branch of the tribe began to put up illegal structures and tap into municipal water and electricity lines in a highly sensitive, strategically critical area adjacent to a major highway, where they endanger their own lives, as well as those of motorists.

The encampment that began to take shape in the 1970s overlooks Route 1, the main artery connecting Jerusalem, Ma’aleh Adumim and the Dead Sea beyond. From their very first day on the site, the Jahalin were well-aware that the land they had squatted on was within the municipal boundaries of Kfar Adumim. The also knew that this location was not a long-term solution for their housing needs.

What happened next is a classic case of Palestinian manipulation and international meddling.

(Continue to Full Column)

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. 

.

Is there a Plan B?

Fixation on two-state solution prevents discussion, critical thinking


Moshe Dann
Israel Opinion/Ynet
26 May '10

"No," says Robert Serry, UN special coordinator for the Middle East peace process, speaking recently at the Hebrew University's Truman Institute. "I don't know of any alternatives," he added. Nor does he seem interested in exploring other possibilities.

Myopic thinking is at the root of the problem. Without a "Plan B," critical thinking is frozen, locked into a disaster model, regardless of the consequences.

This is exactly what happened in planning the Oslo Accords. According to Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Intelligence and Atomic Energy Dan Meridor, when he asked one of the architects of the Oslo Accords why the issue of Palestinian refugees was not brought up in negotiations, he was told that this would have prevented an agreement; form was more important than substance.

The result was an implosion within the Palestinian Authority, a civil war between Fatah and Hamas, and an explosion of terrorism against Israel.

Unwillingness to think about "Plan B," lack of critical thinking, led to disasters following Israeli withdrawals from the Gaza Strip and south Lebanon.

Without thinking strategically, Israeli politicians and the international community tried to fix tactical breakdowns, pouring vast sums into PA coffers and hoping that reason would prevail. Instead, it encouraged irresponsibility and dependency.

Serry's role is not as innovator, but as program facilitator – even as success remains distant. He likes to point to PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad as a leader whose projects, like building new towns and infrastructure, offer hope. But Fayyad does not possess political power, organizational backing, or popularity.

(Read full article)

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.
.

Does Fayyad want a state?

Despite his declarations, Palestinian PM doesn’t want real independence


Avi Trengo
Israel Opinion/Ynet
26 April '10

Part II of article

(Click here for Part I, The Salam Fayyad show)

Had Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad possessed real plans for independence, he would already be starting to prepare an infrastructure for independent Palestinian currency. A state that wants to develop a private sector and the ability to reward exports cannot do it by a clinging to the shekel – the currency of a modern and highly developed economy like Israel’s.

As an economist who worked for the International Monetary Fund, Fayyad knows well that the ability to carry out currency depreciation is the most important capacity demanded by the IMF from any independent state, yet this is apparently unfit for “Palestine.”

This is clear proof that he does not intend to promote real independence. He wants to continue relying on us and remain in an undefined state of half-occupation and half “independence” until demography plays its part. What Hamas is trying to do militarily, and what Arafat attempted to do diplomatically, Fayyad seeks to do economically.

The Paris Accord, which is the economic cornerstone that serves as the basis of the Palestinian Authority’s very existence, allows each side to request new discussion on the deal’s details. The agreement was signed 16 years ago, yet despite all the political and economic changes that took place since then, Israel continues to adhere to it while making voluntary additions, hoping that these “bribes” will mitigate international pressures.

How should Israel respond?
However, Israel must make three demands of the PA that will expose the latter’s lack of economic independence and its dependence on Israel:

(Read full article)

Please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

The Salam Fayyad show

Economic growth in PA result of foreign aid, not prime minister’s actions


Avi Trengo
Israel Opinion/Ynet
25 April '10

Salam Fayyad has been stating time and again that he is working towards declaring independence across all “occupied territories” in August 2011. He says that although he is willing to engage in negotiations with Israel, he does not view this as a requirement for Palestine’s establishment. The Palestinians demand the application of international laws on self-determination, he says, adding that Israel is not the only player in this game.

Fayyad has also threatened to act unilaterally: “"We are not relinquishing negotiations as a method to establish a state, but in case this doesn't work we are preparing for a second possibility – to turn our dream into a reality."

Fayyad is not a military leader. He is building himself up as a political leader, yet there is no better way to judge his actions than to examine his deeds on the economic front, thereby exposing the immense gap between his words and intentions.

Had his intention indeed been to be the Palestinian Ben-Gurion, he would have been acting for the sake of economic independence and the building of an infrastructure for the state in process. Instead, Fayyad dedicated the huge funds he’s been receiving from the world to paying salaries, in a bid to boost his support. He remembers well that the party he established years ago won less than 2% of the vote in the elections. Just like any politician, this is what truly interests him: building a support base.

Recently, he started rewarding not only the 150,000 employees of the Palestinian Authority and its security arms. Fayyad established a fund (seemingly for development purposes) that hands over funds directly from donor states to salaries in more than 500 city halls and local councils established in the PA. In the past 16 years, these grew fivefold.

(Read full article)

Please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Obama’s Two-State Delusion

Moshe Dann
Frontpagemag.com
02 April '10

Let there be no mistake: President Obama’s attack on Israel’s right to govern in eastern Jerusalem has nothing to do with American national interests, and nothing to do with a “peace process.” Other American leaders may have disagreed with Israeli policy, but none of them made it a casus belli.

No other prominent politician sought to impose the “two-state solution,” based on 60-year-old cease-fire lines with Jordan, instead of a negotiated agreement. Obama’s move leaps beyond all previous “accords,” plans and “road maps.” Never before has the United States sought to dictate the terms of Israeli surrender, thereby undermining its only reliable ally in the region.

Obama’s obsession with the establishment of a second Arab Palestinian state might be understandable if it were based on a realistic appraisal of conditions as they are, instead of what they might be. The warning signals are there.

Two dramatic shifts have made the “two-state solution” irrelevant: the stand-off victory of Hezbollah in Lebanon and the hegemony of Hamas in Gaza and many areas of the West Bank, nominally under the Palestinian Authority, controlled by Fatah. One has to be ignorant, and/or blind not to appreciate what these situations mean – especially given the threats from Iran.

The developments have led to the widespread recognition, especially among Israelis, that the so-called “Oslo process” (“land for peace”) has failed, that Israel has no “peace partner,” and, therefore, that a second Arab Palestinian state is no longer relevant.

Today, unilateral withdrawal from Yehuda and Shomron (“the West Bank”) and the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state is a “clear and present danger,” not only to Israel, but to the entire region.

(Read full article)
.

[Fear of failing?] Akiva Eldar carefully avoids hard questions in interview with PA PM

Dr. Aaron Lerner
IMRA
02 April '10
Posted before Shabbat

Dr. Aaron Lerner - IMRA:

If Akiva Eldar was certain that Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad really had answers to the hard questions he would ask them. And he would follow up on PA PM Fayyad's soft answers.

But Akiva Eldar doesn't do this.

Now if Akiva Eldar genuinely believes that Fayyad can handle the hard questions he does him a disservice.

And if he avoids hard questions because he doesn't want to hurt the Palestinian cause he is doing a disservice to his readers.

Here are some questions:

(1) Throwing rocks and firebombs is a form of "peaceful protest"?

(2) You demand that all Palestinians held by Israel be released now. Israel is holding Palestinian cop Mahmoud al-Khatib who recently murdered an Israeli soldier. Are you saying that al-Khatib should also be freed?

(3) What is your position on the right of Jews to immigrate to Israel and become citizens while the same right is not provided for Arabs with family ties to locations within Israel?

And there's more.

=============================================

Palestinian PM to Haaretz: We will have a state next year
By Akiva Eldar Haaretz Last update - 11:44 02/04/2010
www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1160513.html

RAMALLAH - Next year, "the birth of a Palestinian state will be celebrated as a day of joy by the entire community of nations," says Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad in an exclusive interview to Haaretz.

Relaying Passover greetings to the Jewish community, Fayyad hopes Israelis will also participate in the celebrations for the birth of a new state.

"The time for this baby to be born will come," he says, "and we estimate it will come around 2011. That is our vision, and a reflection of our will to exercise our right to live in freedom and dignity in the country [where] we are born, alongside the State of Israel in complete harmony," says Fayyad, 58.

He also welcomed the Quartet's announcement of two weeks ago in Moscow, which supports the PA's August 2009 plan to establish a state within 24 months.

(Read full article)
.