Archive

Posts Tagged ‘http://www.opinion-maker.org’

Qadri’s march: Conspiracy theories galore


Posted on January 17, 2013 by Akashma Online News

Source Dunya News

The military has denied any link to Tahirul Qadri.


ISLAMABAD: To Pakistan s ruling party, a firebrand cleric camped outside parliament with thousands of protesters is looking more and more like the harbinger of their worst fear: a plan by the establishment to engineer a “soft coup”.

In their eyes, Muhammad Tahirul Qadri seems like the perfect candidate for such a mission. A practised orator who has electrified crowds with his anti-corruption rhetoric, the doctor of Islamic law leapt into action to back the last power grab by the army in 1999.

The aim this time, some politicians suspect, is to use Qadri to bring down the current administration and provide a pretext for the handpicked caretaker cabinet.

“What we are seeing is dangerous and evidence that the third force is up to its tricks again,” said Mahmood Khan Achakzai, a politician who has been a frequent critic of the army s record of interfering in politics.

The military has denied any link to Qadri, and army chief General Ashfaq Kayani has built up a reputation for standing more aloof from politics than predecessors who have not hesitated to dismiss civilian governments. Pakistan has been ruled by the military for more than half of its 65 years as an independent nation.

Critics note, furthermore, that the ruling Pakistan People s Party (PPP), which has a long record of confrontation with the military, has often been quick to portray itself as a victim of bullying by the military to distract attention from its shortcomings.

But the timing of Qadri s return from six years of living in Canada, just a few months before elections are due, and his role in supporting a 1999 coup by former army chief Pervez Musharraf have nonetheless rung alarm bells.

Qadri, who led a convoy of buses carrying thousands of protesters into the capital, Islamabad, on Monday, has repeatedly demanded that the army should have a say in the formation of an interim administration that is due to oversee the run-up to elections in May.

“You meet army officers in the night; I m asking that you consult with them on the caretaker set up under the sunlight,” Qadri said in a speech on Tuesday in remarks clearly addressed to the government.

The PPP s fears over the potential for military meddling centre on the impending formation of a caretaker cabinet.
Pakistan passed a constitutional amendment last year that requires the government and opposition to agree on the
composition of the temporary administration.

The amendment is designed to prevent any ruling party exploiting the advantages of incumbency to manipulate elections
by using state power to skew the playing field.

The PPP and the Pakistan Muslim League, the main opposition party, have spent months negotiating a list of mutually
acceptable names for the transitional cabinet, including a number of politicians noted for resisting military rule.

“The PPP has lost three generations of leaders fighting against dictatorships,” said a senior member of the PPP. “You
think we will give up now? We will take up this battle at all levels.”

Meanwhile, military officers privately do little to conceal their contempt for the PPP, whose government has been unable to end militant violence, bring down sharp food price inflation or get the economy on track since it took power in March, 2008.
They are also dismissive of the Pakistan Muslim League.

One officer, speaking in a personal capacity, said the army had no desire to seize power but might be forced to play a role
as mediator between political factions if the cleric s protests trigger a prolonged crisis.

“If this gets worse, then the army may have to intervene (as a moderator),” he told Reuters.

After years of suspicion and ill-will between the generals and the PPP-led coalition led by President Asif Ali Zardari, Qadri s protests have seemed to signal a shift in the political landscape, with unpredictable consequences.

“We can t say who is behind him. But all we know is that he can t pull this off without backing from someone,” Maulana
Fazlur Rehman, the veteran leader of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam, Pakistan s biggest religious party, said on television.

The political temperature soared even higher on Tuesday when Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry ordered the arrest of Prime
Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf in connection with a corruption case. Authorities have yet to carry out his instructions.

An aide to Ashraf said the military was behind this move as well, but the chief justice is known to be independent-minded.

If Qadri succeeds in bringing down the government, then a man whose name had faded from the limelight since he left
Pakistan for Canada in 2006 will have sabotaged the PPP s bid to be the first civilian government to complete a full term.

That would undermine Pakistan s struggle to bury the legacy of decades of military dictatorship by building institutions
strong enough to resolve the nuclear-armed country s multiple crises.

The military has a track record of picking interim administrations in past decades that have then overstepped their
mandates by hounding the army s political opponents or manipulating elections.

Army officers in Bangladesh, which was part of Pakistan until it broke away in 1971, have used a similar approach to
appoint a technocratic government to implement reforms.

But some commentators and Western diplomats argue that times have changed and the military has lost the appetite for
embroiling itself in struggles with increasingly assertive political parties and a hyperactive media.

“The military has no interest in disrupting the path to elections: in fact their interest is the opposite, supporting
the transfer of power from one elected government to another, which is a political milestone in Pakistan s history,” said
Maleeha Lodhi, a former Pakistani ambassador to Washington.

Much will depend on whether Qadri has enough rhetorical firepower left to persuade his followers to maintain their
protest, or whether the government decides to order the police to apply pressure to disperse them.

“There is nothing wrong with raising your concerns and protesting,” said Information Minister Qamar Zaman Kaira. “But
if you try to hold the capital hostage and disrupt the lives of its people, the law will take its course.”

Geopolitics of Confusion


Posted Originally on Opinion Maker on 29. Dec, 2011 by Nadir Mir
US – NATO attack on Pakistan

By Brig Nadir Mir

US – NATO attacked a non NATO Ally Pakistan!

The attack was unprovoked, wanton, cowardly and ruthless. It was open aggression and violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty. US – NATO aggression was condemned or Pakistan received support and sympathy from China, Russia, Iran, OIC (Saudi Arabia) – Turkey. Even UK expressed regrets; France supports an inquiry into the issue. Germany was obviously disappointed by Pakistan’s cancellation of participation at Bonn Conference

US filled with hubris even refused to apologize, while Delhi was gloating over the death of Pakistani Soldiers and its predicament. The Pakistani Nation is livid with rage and united to defend Pakistan. The American sanctioned attack (no other power on the planet can dare to attack Pakistan at its own) is radicalizing Pakistan. The beleaguered (mini minority) corrupt and treacherous elite in Pakistan are finding excuses to explain American aggression.

The time has come to end the Geopolitics of Confusion!

Firstly why was this aggression launched?

A long list of answers can be compiled, some are presented here:

A strategy of deflection to keep away from the ‘Memo’.
Gunship raid, attack (live) rehearsal – against Pakistan’s nuclear sites. (Helicopters at night used even earlier for ‘snatch operations’ like the Abbotabad Raid).
Daily Beast article which claims this as ‘Obama’s Foreign Policy Doctrine’ and terms it as ‘Off Shore Balancing’ (with money and bravado in short supply, avoid land battle. Use of heliborne/drone/air power for foreign policy ends of USA).
Condition Pakistan to stay prostrate during expected ‘war against Iran’ by Israel / US (urgency of expected strike on Persia)
Intimidate Pakistan before Bonn Conference. (Absurd but irrational Globalists can do anything)
Pakistan’s (offensive) containment. Degrade, disgrace Pakistan Army and drive a wedge in the Pakistani Nation. (The opposite effects have been achieved. The Pakistani Nation stands united and supports the Army vehemently)

Secondly who is with and against Pakistan?

With Pakistan stand its brave plus patriotic Armed Forces, and the nationalistically motivated people of Pakistan. The soldiers and masses stand together against foreign threats. Externally to varying – degrees Pakistan is supported by China – Russia – Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia – OIC. Almost the entire region is against US sponsored wars, or longevity for its military presence. The Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan are already in a state of war with USA. Most of the world respects Pakistan (Pakistan’s nomination to Security Council seat was testament). India is of course completely untrustworthy. It can always launch ‘Cold Start’ offensive on any pretext in harmony with US MILITARY STRIKE – against Pakistan. (In December a major Indian Army Exercise is underway in the deserts against Pakistan). Still the regional Geopolitics would have to be viewed by Delhi, more than Pakistan’s offer of MFN.

Russian support can prove a game changer for Pakistan. It would tilt the scales, Russia – China and not only China supporting Pakistan. Deterring USA to an extent, while inhibiting India from joining US for an attack on Pakistan. (Besides Pakistan’s conventional forces and nuclear deterrent – tactical weapons included, could keep India at bay)

The British even as America’s most Allied Ally are not openly clashing with Pakistan. (Both due to British Policy and British vulnerability at home. More so, the fate of the British Embassy in Tehran clearly indicates an Iranian – British clash). In fact Pakistan’s relations with the British, French and Germans (major NATO members) have been good. They could even be better if NATO withdraws from Afghanistan. (There would be little to have friction on). Pakistan – German friendship should improve further. Germany is the true and future leader of Europe and respected by Pakistanis.

Now the question who is against Pakistan?

A brutally candid answer is:

Firstly, Pakistan’s own corrupt, treacherous and incompetent elite, a mini minority which wants to keep robbing and exploiting the Pakistani Nation. They seek solace and work for foreign powers (USA – India). The treacherous elite would sell the Motherland for a song. They want to serve as slave overseers for a shackled Nation. Selling it to the first bidder. Yesterday it was USA alone but now it is USA – India. This is the Pakistan Corruption – Treachery Nexus, who are more loyal to Washington – Delhi than many Americans and Indians and of course Anti Pakistan. (After all in USA, Americans are challenging the system – Occupy Wall Street, LA etc or Anna Hazara ‘Anti corruption Drive’ in India)

Secondly the cabal of America’s Globalists, military – industrial complex, left over Neo cons who still want to conquer the world. (Despite being chastened in Iraq – Afghanistan). On the contrary, the good hearted, charity giving and amiable people of America many of whom are now questioning this perpetual war quest. They seek jobs and living at home rather than wars abroad! The White House and State Department are confused in the Geopolitical labyrinth of Afghanistan.

The war lovers of course love war. They want to continue the war in Afghanistan and start new ones in Iran – Pakistan! (Not divining that the combined Geopolitical space of Afghanistan – Pakistan – Iran – Iraq will prove a Giant Black hole (even for Uncle Sam).

Thirdly, Delhi the serpent, is always bidding its time to strike Pakistan. Still the complex and multi faceted (Delhi does not want to lose Tehran / Moscow affinity) regional Geopolitics weighs heavy on Indian minds . As does the fear of nuclear holocaust from a Pakistani response.

Veteran Indian Diplomat MK Bhadrakumar had predicted a ‘Persian Response’ by Pakistan for this attack, (asymmetrical plus Strategic Defiance). Simon Tisdall warning in ‘Pakistan has had enough’ had opinioned that an Iranian type Revolution in Pakistan could be one outcome in future.

‘A hot flash in the Cold War with Pakistan’ is how the Atlantic titled its article. The only people who still think in terms of an alliance in the Global War on terror are Pakistan’s dimwitted, thieving, treacherous elite! The rest of the world is quite clear on the real issues, which are:

Pakistan’s Denuclearization (through ‘Memo of Treachery’ or American Geo strategy)
America’s partial withdrawal from Afghanistan

From the MemoGate to Gunship attack etc, are all tactics of one supreme over arching strategy to denuke Pakistan. (War hawks controlled, Indian influenced).

Washington wants to keep its ‘Strike or Nuclear Grab Option’ open against Pakistan (before or after war with Iran). For this herculean task there are three pre requisites.

Treacherous elite support within Pakistan. (Memo and related kind)
Prepositioning, maintaining secret – clandestine forces, Special Forces in Pakistan in disguise. (To act as path finders, initial strike force)
Afghanistan Bases (operations for denuking strike)

Without these three pre requisites any Strategic Denuclearization Scenario remains fiction and outside the realm of feasibility. (Any attempt against Pakistan’s nuclear sites will have catastrophic consequences any way).

Strategic logic dictates that all three pre requisites (for denuclearization attempt) be denied to foreign forces.

· The treacherous elite have to be marginalized.

· Secretly positioned clandestine foreign forces eliminated or expelled.

· Afghan Bases Denied. (Complete pull out of all foreign forces from Afghanistan has to be Pakistan’s avowed policy)

Besides Pakistan’s brave soldiers, the Nation stands united. China, Russia and Iran at the very least seek Pakistan’s strategic autonomy from NATO. EU – NATO can be divided more so with Turkish support. British are cautious, French non hostile, Germans Peace Seeking. In America, the Afghan war has divided them, even as they unite for the war against Iran.

Pakistan should lobby for:

· An immediate ceasefire in Afghanistan and Pakistan – Afghanistan border.

· The political face of Taliban for talks.

· Early resolution of Baluch problem, where Empire (US – NATO) will strike back in Pakistan. (The next front being attacked by western – Indian Geo-strategy – Charter of Freedom for Baluchistan etc)

· Complete and early withdrawal of all US – NATO forces from Afghanistan and Pakistan. (Disagree to any stay behind NATO forces in Afghanistan).

· Moscow – Islamabad synergism can prove a game changer. Supply routes to NATO in Afghanistan should be jointly blocked by Pakistan and Russia as part of a Peace Policy.

(‘Next War – Iran’ written by this scribe for Opinion Maker has been published by Pravda Ru and Windows to Russia. A view in Moscow is that Pakistan and Russia can together choke NATO in Afghanistan!)

· Pakistan needs to muster more tangible support from China, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey on Afghanistan while keeping it cool with India for the present (through diplomacy – deterrence).

The problem in Afghanistan is very simple.

The Americans lost the war, but do not want to admit it.

There is still time for them to declare victory and go home today. Tomorrow may be a different day!US – NATO attack on Pakistan

Saudi Arabia Warns US not to Veto Palestine StateHood

September 14, 2011 1 comment

Posted on September 14, 2011 by Marivel Guzman

Former Saudi Intelligence Chief Warns U.S. Of Veto Consequences

author Tuesday September 13, 2011 21:43author by Saed Bannoura – IMEMC & Agencies

Saudi Prince, former Saudi Intelligence Agency chief, Turki Al Faisal, warned the United States that its strategic relations with its Arab allies, mainly Riyadh, will be significantly harmed, should Washington opt to veto the establishment of a Palestinian State.

Turky Al Faisal - sonara.net
Turky Al Faisal – sonara.net

The New York Times reported that Al Faisal warned that a U.S. veto against full Palestinian membership at the United Nations “will destroy the special relations between Riyadh and Washington, and will harm the U.S. in the Arab world”.

Al Faisal further stated that the United States must support the Palestinian decision to establish an independent state, and must vote for the decision this month, otherwise, “Washington will lose its already declining credibility in the Arab world”.

The Saudi Prince said that Washington must realize that losing its credibility directly impacts the security of Israel, and will lead to a stronger Iranian domination in the region, an issue that increases the possibilities of a new war.

Al Faisal said that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia “will not be willing to continue its current cooperation with Washington”, especially amidst the revolutions in the Arab world, as these revolutions demand democracy, and demand justice to the Palestinian people.

He also stated that, due to the changes in the region, the leadership in Saudi Arabia will be obliged to adopt more independent foreign policies, and will be forced to adopt policies that are not coherent with the United States.

“The Palestinians want their right to statehood, all nations will support them”, Al Faisal added, “Israel should not regard the Palestinian demand as a threat; it should look at t as an opportunity for peace, security and equality”.

More Related Posts

Palestinians Right of Return is not Debatable: UN Resolution 194 In Force and Enforceable – the UN passed General Assembly Resolution (UNGA) 194, which mandated compensation for the Palestinian refugees and assured their right to return home. The UN made Israel’s own membership in the world body contingent on Israeli acceptance of 194 and the rights it granted to the Palestinians.

Would UN General Assembly Vote for an Independent Palestine? – According to Israel’s Haaretz the UNGA is expected to okay an independent Palestinian state by a huge majority. “The wording of the draft, crafted in recent days by the Fatah leadership, is designed to enable even “problematic” countries such as Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and the Czech Republic to climb on board, or at least abstain. This version will make it difficult for the United States and the Marshall Islands, and even for Israel, to explain their votes against the proposal.

Turkey’s Upright Stance! Turkey’s President Abdullah Gul said Turkey would reject the report, regarding it as “null and void”… “The time has come for Israel to pay a price for its illegal actions… first of all, (Israel) is being deprived of Turkey’s friendship.”

Turkey’s PM rallies Arab world in Cairo with call for UN to recognize Palestine – Analysts believe Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s Egypt visit is designed to strengthen Turkey’s influence in the region and isolate Israel

 

 

Would UN General Assembly Vote for an Independent Palestine?

September 7, 2011 3 comments

Posted on September 06, 2011 by Marivel Guzman

Article by K.Gajendra Singh

The Life and Times of Arafat- Mission Incomplete

Since the Fall of the Berlin Wall ,there are enough existential and serious problems for regimes and states in the Arab and Muslim world ,from Morocco to Saudi Arabia, and beyond , greedy , ruthless White Christian Crusaders pursuing mostly illegal policy of destruction and loot of  sovereign states like Libya ,Iraq etc .There is relentless pressure on Assad regime in Syria, but the next hot item on the Middle East agenda is going to be the vote on Palestine Independence in United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in September, 2011.

According to Israel’s Haaretz the UNGA is expected to okay an independent Palestinian state by a huge majority. “The wording of the draft, crafted in recent days by the Fatah leadership, is designed to enable even “problematic” countries such as Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and the Czech Republic to climb on board, or at least abstain. This version will make it difficult for the United States and the Marshall Islands, and even for Israel, to explain their votes against the proposal. Instead of recognizing Palestine within the 1967 borders, it will state that the permanent borders will be determined in negotiations with Israel based on the borders of June 4, 1967. This approach made it possible to enlist the support of leading moderates in Hamas, who claim that recognition of the 1967 borders before the signing of a final-status deal means waiving the claim to the right of return.”

Given the Israeli government’s intransigence, the Palestinian leadership and its advisers feel that the option of settling the conflict via bilateral negotiations − the path pursued by the Palestinian leadership for 20 years − is no longer viable. Most of them “ support the option of an independent Palestinian state within the 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as its capital and a fair arrangement that will fulfill the right of return and the compensation of the Palestinian refugees. -It rejects the possibility of continuing the status quo, maintaining that the endless negotiations provide cover for expanding the settlements and consolidating the occupation. It will also erase from the agenda the option of a Palestinian state with temporary borders and limited sovereignty, under effective Israeli control.”

The Palestinian Authority leadership also examined other options like nonviolent resistance as in Egypt and Tunisia – or dismantling itself and restoring responsibility for the West Bank’s inhabitants to Israel or towards a model of a bi-national state or democratic state without distinction between Israel and Palestinian citizens. Even the possibility is a confederation between Jordan and the Palestinian state was examined. The last attempt was made by late Yasser Arafat after the failure of the Camp David talks in 2000. Arafat travelled to many capitals, to seek support for such a declaration. But most countries advised Arafat to continue with the peace negotiations rather than pursue a unilateral path.

This time the situation is different. There is little hope for real negotiations. The Arab revolts against pro-US leaders have created a favorable environment. Cairo , which was under US influence followed a pro-Israel policy .Now the transition government in Egypt has already called upon the United States to support Palestinian independence. Popular uprisings elsewhere will influence the governments in the Arab world to be more sensitive on the Palestinian issue. There is little doubt of deep the support in the Arab and Muslim Street for the Palestinians .

As regards Turkey, Ankara’s relations with Israel have plummeted to very low depth with nine Turks killed by Israeli commandos on Mavi Marmara carrying aid for embattled Gaza citizens . Ankara recently withdrew its ambassador from Tel Aviv and asked Israel to apologies .Since many years Ankara has regularly criticized Israel and its policies .When Israel  was reported to be interfering in north Iraq with the aim of creating problems in Turkey’s Kurdish South East , Turkish PM Tayep Erdogan had accused Israel of state terrorism in Gaza. Many other countries have made declarations of support but the critical issue is what the EU countries and the U.S. will do. Catherine Ashton, EU’s senior official told the media that the Palestinian Authority had made significant progress . Its institutions now compared favorably with those in the West. There have been several other positive reports by international institutions like the International Monetary Fund and the U.N. that have studied the police force, municipal services and schools that indicate that the Palestinians are almost ready to run their own state.

But do not rule out Israel’s obduracy and its deep influence in US policy making apparatus and corridors of power.

Before proceeding further let us first have a look at the tortured history of region in general and Palestine in particular.

Almost all the states in the region were once part of the Ottoman Empire and ruled by Caliph Sultan in Istanbul, which apart from Muslim countries in the regions also included Eastern Europe and Balkans right up to the gates of Vienna. As the West European powers from the end of 17 century rolled back the Ottoman arms from the Gates of Vienna ,they annexed and began exploiting the former Ottoman territories beginning with Arab Muslim peoples of north Africa .The  French, the English and the Italians being the primary beneficiaries .But colonial settlements and genocide of natives took place by Europeans in Americas, rest of Africa and far off Australia , New Zealand too, along with Portuguese ,Belgian ,Dutch, Spanish and Germans also joining in .The whole of Africa was divided along arbitrary borders , for brutal exploitation, specially by the Belgians and the Dutch.

Most of West Asia fell into European lap after the defeat of the Ottomans which had sided with Germans in WWI .

Background and seeds of Arab-Israeli disputes

Strategically and religiously speaking the Arab-Israeli disputes with its core problem of Palestine is as old as time, beginning from the days of the Trojan wars, the first struggle between the West and the East. Or the expulsion and dispersal of Jews from Palestine ( if true) ,or from the differences between Prophet Mohammed and the Jews in Medina following the Hijra. Or the Christian Crusades to recover the religious sites in the Holy Land, except that the Crusaders had treated Jews then as brutally as the Muslims. And even the Orthodox Christians at Constantinople. And now, to control the strategic space and exploit energy reserves under Arab lands.

The Tigris and Euphrates region has a turbulent history. Following the exhaustion of the Persian and Roman/Byzantine empires the armies of Islam emerging from the arid sands of the Arabia carved an empire from the Atlantic to China in the 7th Century. But after the Ottoman Sultan annexed the caliphate and guardianship of Mecca and Medina in 16 century, the peninsula became peaceful back water .

In the wake of the rollback of Ottoman Turks from the gates of Vienna, European powers started moving into Islamic lands in North Africa and from 18th century onward progressively colonized them. The British took over Cyprus and Egypt but World War I provided an opportunity for further colonial acquisitions when Turkey sided with Germany. To protect its Indian colonial possession and its lifeline, the Suez Canal, the British encouraged Arabs under Hashemite ruler Sharif Hussein of Hijaj to revolt against the Ottoman sultan caliph in Istanbul and deputed spy T E Lawrence to help out with promises of independence.

But the war’s end did not bring freedom as promised; because by secret Sykes-Picot agreement, London and Paris arbitrarily divided the sultan’s Arab domains and their warring populations of Shias, Sunnis, Alawite Muslims, Druses, and Christians. The French took most of greater Syria, dividing it into Syria and Christian-dominated Lebanon. The British kept Palestine, Iraq and the rest of Arabia.

When Sharif Hussein’s son Emir Feisel arrived in Damascus to claim Syria as promised , the French chased him out. So the British installed him on the Iraqi throne. Feisel’s brother Emir Abdullah was granted a new Emirate of Trans-Jordan, east of the River Jordan, created out of wastelands vaguely claimed by Syrians, Saudis and Iraqis.

By the 1917 Balfour Declaration, Britain had also promised a homeland for Jews in Palestine. Under the Versailles conference in 1920, Britain was made the mandatory power for Palestine, which appointed Samuel Butler, a liberal Jew, as the first high commissioner to facilitate Jewish immigration and their settlement. So the European Jews began migrating to Palestine, and the trickle became a flood with the rise of anti-Semitic policies in Nazi Germany and elsewhere in Europe. From then on started fights, pogroms and battles between Palestinian Arabs and Jewish immigrants. After World War II, the State of Israel was carved out of British Palestine by the United Nations in 1948, but it was not recognized by the Arabs. The United States recognized Israel but not Palestine. In the ensuing first 1948 Arab-Israeli war, which the Arabs lost, Israel expanded its area, while Jordan in collusion with Israel annexed the West Bank and Egypt took over Gaza.

As if the Palestinians were then just another Arab people up for grabs.

After the rise of Arab nationalism in the early 1950s led by Colonel Gamal Nasser of Egypt, socialists and nationalists, mostly military officers, took over the decaying medieval kingdoms of Yemen, Syria, Iraq and Libya , much to the consternation of Western oil companies. The Anglo-French attempt in collusion with Israel to cut Nasser down to size in the 1956 Suez war, opposed by the US and USSR, was an abject failure. Also a sign that the time of London and Paris was passed .

But in the six-day preemptive war of 1967, Israel captured the West Bank from Jordan and Gaza from Egypt and occupied Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula and Syria’s Golan Heights. Thus were laid the foundations for Arab-Israeli problems of the region. The core UN Resolution 242 requires that Israel vacate lands it occupied after the June 1967 war.

From its very inception, almost all its neighbors coveted Jordan. But astute King Hussein (who ruled from 1953-99) not only survived a dozen assassination attempts, he also fended off conspiracies against his land. When Hussein died in 1999 of cancer, the kingdom had become a keystone of equilibrium in the region and a modern flourishing state, despite lacking oil or other resources.

Palestinians make up 60 percent of Jordan’s population (some Israeli leaders say that in Jordan Palestinians already have their own state). Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) militants and Palestinian army officers conspired against King Hussein (King Abdullah, his grandfather, was assassinated by a Palestinian in 1951), so, he expelled Arafat-led PLO to Beirut in early 1971. The Hashemite Kings rely on tribal Jordanians for security and armed forces and have Chechens as their praetorian guards.

Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir, who became prime ministers of Israel later had fought savage guerrilla battles against the British and the Arab Palestinians to create the State of Israel, were no different from leaders of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and others. The British were unable to handle the turbulent situation and handed over the hot potato to the (UNO), which in 1947 put forward a plan to partition Palestine into Arab and Jewish states.

Since then there have been three regional wars between Israel and the Arabs (1948, 1967 and 1973) and two Palestinian uprisings (intifadas) against Israeli occupation. It was either an Arab wish to control if not destroys the State of Israel or an Israeli attempt to extend its boundaries ( to biblical frontiers ) further into Arab lands. But after every war and uprising more Palestinians came under Israeli control or left their homeland and the refugees now number into millions. After each war Israel gained more territory. In 1948 it extended the Jewish areas under the partition plan to its present internationally recognized borders (but the Arabs of Israel do not have full and equal rights as citizens).

From these areas a large number of Palestinian refugees fled or were forced to flee the Jewish state in 1948. After the wars in 1948 and 1967, Israel began an illegal program of building new settlements in the Occupied Territories, which has continued all along and never really ceased.

The 1973 Yom Kippur war initiated by Egypt made Israel feel vulnerable and not that invincible ( For the first time Israel threatened to nuke Cairo unless– .Since then Israel’s nukes run into many hundreds ,the only nuclear armed power in the region.) Only a US military hardware air bridge and other help turned the tide for the Israelis. But Egypt gained little while oil-rich Gulf States became obscenely wealthy with fourfold increase in crude prices, with neo-rich Gulfis lording over in Cairo .
Egyptian President Anwar Sadat made a peace deal with Israel in 1978 at Camp David after his startling 1977 visit and address to the Israeli Knesset (Parliament ). Sadat was later assassinated for this act of treason by his own Islamist group of soldiers. But Egypt got its territory back from Israel, including oil wells in Sinai.

In 1982, when Sharon was defense minister, Israel invaded Lebanon and expelled Arafat and his guerrillas from there. It was then that massacres took place at the Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Chatilla, for which Sharon was blamed after an inquiry. Arafat and his PLO headquarters were shifted  to Tunis.

Jordan made peace with Israel after the Oslo Accords. In 1988 it gave up all its claims on the West Bank. But the Israeli conflict with other Arab states such as Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and others persists.

It is said that there can be no war against Israel without Egypt and no peace without Syria (with its armed forces in Lebanon till a few years ago and its support to Hezbollah). With Egypt neutralized, fears of a regional or wider conflagration receded but it stirred up Islamist terrorism, and hatred towards Israel’s Western backers, primarily the United States and its poodle UK .France joins up when Syria and Lebanon come up .The hate in the Muslim and Arab world reached very high levels after the illegal US-UK-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 and its brutal occupation since then. However all agree that great injustice has been done to the Palestinians, now under Israel control or as refugees spread elsewhere, with millions still living in refugee camps. When former US president Jimmy Carter compared the situation of the Palestinians to apartheid South Africa , he faced the wrath of Jewish community and neo-cons in US and elsewhere.

First Intifada

After its agreement with Egypt , Israel felt that it had resolved the problem of Palestinians under its occupation, which also provided cheap labor. It was then that Palestinians in the Occupied Territories, refusing to be enslaved, revolted. This erupted as Intifada in 1987 in the Gaza Strip and then spread to the West Bank. Later other organizations took over and claimed credit for this spontaneous outburst of anger against repression and thirst for freedom. Except for stone-throwing by children, it was generally free from violence from the side of the Palestinians. These pictures on TV screens around the world brought home the injustice being perpetrated on the Palestinians in their own land and angered the Muslim world in particular.

The 1987 Intifada was somewhat like Mahatma Gandhi’s non-violent movement against the British but in a Middle East setting. The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan used to screen on its TV channel Richard Attenborough’s film Gandhi on the anniversary of Intifada in November, which was easily received in the Occupied Territories, Israel, Syria and the neighborhood. Its implicit message was to keep the revolution (Intifada) non-violent and not let Israel divide the Palestinian people in their struggle. The horrendous results of use of violence with killings of Israelis by suicide bombers countered by carnage and destruction by Israeli military planes, helicopter gunships and missiles in the second Intifada from September 2000 was there for all to see.

Palestine and Gulf war, 1990-91

The US maneuvered Saddam Hussein into the 1991 war but without any strategic pre-planning. The West had supported Iraq’s long war against Khomeini’s Iran. US had granted loans to Baghdad worth billions of dollars. Amid high tension between Kuwait and Baghdad over common oil wells, two islands, and the return of a $10 billion loan, Iraq threatened Kuwait with war. A few days before the Iraqi invasion on August 2, 1990, US Ambassador April Glaspie told Saddam Hussein that his dispute with Kuwait was a bilateral Arab affair. This was never clearly refuted by the US and Ambassador Glaspie disappeared from view. Meanwhile, all attempts to find a peaceful solution to the Iraq-Kuwait row by Arab nations, led by King Hussein of Jordan and later joined by King Hassan of Morocco, were rebuffed by the US, as was Kuwait’s offer of indirect negotiations. Feelers for negotiations by the Saudis were drowned in Western cacophony. Saddam’s reported offer to the UN secretary general to withdraw from Kuwait, made just before the US led war, was brushed aside. Efforts by Mikhail Gorbachev, who had just unraveled the USSR, were treated with disdain.

Bush had attacked Iraq in 1991 without informing the UN secretary general, undermining the world body (the 2003 invasion was against UN will and its Charter.) For the countries of the region, the war resolved nothing. Instead, the US made Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and other allies pay through the nose, an estimated $100-$150 billion. Iraq was bombed into the Middle Ages. US and Iraq’s enemy Iran, was the major gainer. Before the war ,to guard his back, Saddam agreed to the old boundary with Iran in the Shatt-al Arab waterway, disagreement over which had led to the Iran-Iraq War.

US promises turned sour in the aftermath of the Gulf War. George Bush Sr., also encouraged Iraqis, especially Kurds in the north and Shias in the south, to revolt. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, most of which had large Shia populations, were horrified, as a Shia state in south Iraq would strengthen Iran. The prospect of independence for Iraqi Kurds worried Turkey, whose own Kurds were fighting for freedom. The hapless Iraqi Kurds, and the Shi’as paid a terrible price.

Turkish President Turgut Ozal, seduced by US hints of winning “lost” Kurdish areas of north Iraq, became an energetic supporter of the Bush coalition and almost opened another front in the war against Iraq, but was prevented by stiff opposition from his powerful military. But instead of getting oil-rich Mosul and Kirkuk, the economic sanctions against Iraq and closure of the Iraqi pipeline via Turkey cost Ankara $50 billion in lost trade. Unemployment rose as the sanctions halted the 5,000 trucks that used to roar to and from Iraq daily, aggravating the economic and social problems in Turkey’s Kurdish heartland of rebellion.

A Turkish deputy prime minister once ruefully told this writer, “Mr. Ambassador, you cannot trust the Americans, not even their written promises.” A sobering thought for those who support the US blindly.

Saudi Arabia was misled in 1991 by doctored evidence of Saddam’s intentions. The stationing of US troops on sacred Arabian soil after the war was resented by Arabs and Muslims all over the world. They also oppose oppressive pro-US Arab regimes and their siphoning off of oil wealth. After September 11, most Muslims saw the Arab-Israel conflict and US illegal invasion of Iraq as part of Crusade versus Jihad (In fact this is the word George Bush used after 11/9.)

But Palestinians and their cause suffered the most both after 1991 war on Iraq and the 2003 invasion .Saddam Hussein was a staunch supporter of PLO . Even when financially squeezed he sent money to families of Palestinian suicide bombers. After the liberation of Kuwait in 1991 ,many Palestinians lost jobs in Kuwait and other Gulf states. But their education , language and ethnic similarity almost makes them indispensable in the Gulf region.

Israel and Palestine

It is amazing that those who suffered so much in the Holocaust, an acme of western material civilization i.e. use of the last Jewish bone and for centuries earlier because of blind prejudice in Europe and elsewhere  are so capable of inflicting the same unspeakable horrors on the lives of others. What the Israelis are doing is indeed the action of “terrorists” who accuse Palestinians of “terror”. When a person has to turn himself or herself into a human bomb in order to fight for a cause, when children throw stones at tanks, these are acts of desperation from an oppressed people.

Israel is a powerful country, backed by the mighty power of the United States, both in money and in arms. Jews in US and neo-cons support Israel with Jewish AIPAC blackmailing US leaders and lawmakers by threatening to defeat them at polls by their financial and media clout .The world recognizes the plight of the Palestinians, and understands it, but is unable do much about such incredibly inhumane deeds and events.

Israeli solutions!

Since the occupation of Palestinian territories after the 1967 war, the major policy debate in Israeli military and political elites has been about how to keep maximum land (and water and other resources) with minimum Palestinian population. Annexation of heavily populated Palestinian land, with high birthrates, would create a “demographic problem” and reduced Jewish majority. So two solutions were considered. Massive emigration from Russia was encouraged and organized in the early 1990s. The Labor Party’s Alon plan consisted of annexation of 35-40 percent of the Occupied Territories, and either Jordanian rule or some form of autonomy for the remaining land to which the Palestinian population would be consigned.

It was a compromise since it was inconceivable to repeat the “solution” of the 1948 independence war, when much of the land was obtained “Arab-free”, after mass expulsion of the Palestinians (nearly 700,000 were forced to flee). But in keeping with late Sharon’s character, the second solution became the mission i.e. how to get more land by finding a more acceptable and sophisticated “1948-style” solution, i.e. squeeze out as many Palestinians as possible. “Jordan is Palestine” was the phrase Sharon and other leaders had repeated in the 1980s.

The 1993 Oslo Accords were along the lines of the Alon plan to which Arafat had agreed. In the past, the Palestinians had always opposed such plans, which would take away too much of their land. Arafat had agreed only because he was getting old and losing his grip on the Palestinian society. There was opposition to his dictatorial one-man rule and open corruption in his organization. Funds meant for the PLO were distributed among close associates (some of them look too well fed and content) , which was talked about openly. This is a problem with all revolutionary organizations when they acquire levers of power.

Only an apparent “smashing victory” could have kept Arafat in power. So behind the back of the Palestinian negotiating team headed by Haider Abd al-Shafi, Arafat accepted an agreement that left all Israeli settlements intact, even in the Gaza Strip, where Israeli settlers occupied one-third of the land, while a million Palestinians are crowded in the rest. But as time went by, Israel extended the “Arab-free” areas by new settlements and connecting roads etc in the Occupied Territories to about 50 percent of their land. Labor circles began to talk about the “Alon Plus” plan, namely even more land to Israel. That would have still allowed some kind of self-rule in the remaining 50 percent of land under Palestinians, but like Bantustans in South Africa. Palestinians would be left with less than 20 percent of 1945 Palestine under the British mandate. This is what Sharon dreamt to break the unity of Palestine nationalism.

At the time of Oslo Accords, the majority of Israelis were tired of war. They thought fights over land and water resources were over. Haunted by the memory of the Holocaust, most Israelis believed that the 1948 War of Independence, with its horrible consequences for the Palestinians, was necessary to establish a state for the Jews. But now both sides with their states could live normally and peace-fully. Most people on both the sides believed that what they were witnessing were just “interim agreements” and that eventually the occupation would somehow end, and the settlements would be dismantled. Two-thirds of Jewish Israelis supported the Oslo agreements in the polls. It was obvious there was no stomach for any new wars over land and water.

But the ideology of war over land never died out in the army, or in the circles of politically influential generals, whose careers moved from the military to the government. From the start of the Oslo process, the maximalists objected to giving even that much land and rights to the Palestinians. This was most visible in military circles, whose most vocal spokesman was then chief of staff Ehud Barak, who objected to the Oslo agreements from the start. Another beacon of opposition was, of course, late Ariel Sharon. In 1999, the army got back to power through the politicized generals – first Barak, and then Sharon.

So the maximalist generals-turned-rulers decided to correct what they view as the grave mistakes of Oslo. In their eyes, Sharon’s alternative of fighting the Palestinians to the bitter end and imposing new regional order may have failed in Lebanon in 1982 because of the weakness of the soft Israeli society, but given the new war philosophy established through US military operations in Iraq, Kosovo, and, later, Afghanistan, the political generals believed that with Israel’s massive air superiority, it might still be possible to execute that vision. However, in order to get there, it was first necessary to convince the Israeli society that, in fact, the Palestinians were not willing to live in peace, and was still threatening Israel’s very existence. Sharon alone could not have possibly achieved that, but Barak did succeed with his generous offer- fraud. There was no real offer on the table. It was a media-assisted creation like the belief created in the US population that Iraqis were responsible for September 11.

”The Israeli press is as obedient as elsewhere, and it recycles faithfully the military and governmental messages. But part of the reason it is more revealing is its lack of inhibition. Things that would look outrageous in the world are considered natural daily routine.” Tanya Reinhart

Earlier the world was made to believe that Israel was willing to withdraw even from the occupied Syrian Golan Heights. In the polls, 60 percent of the Israelis, hoping for peace, had enthusiastically supported dismantling all settlements in the Golan Heights. But the end of this round of peace negotiations ended in the same way as with Palestinians. It was made out that Syrian leader Hafiz al-Assad did not comprehend and had let the opportunity slip. Israelis then became convinced that it was the rejectionist Assad who was unwilling to get his territories back and make peace with Israel. Assad was a cool and wise statesman and was not fooled. Those close to the military now say that Hezbollah, Syria and Iran tried to trap Israel in a “strategic ambush” and that Israel had to evade that ambush by setting one of its own, i.e. another war like the 1967 preemptive war. And they are encouraging hawks in the US administration in that direction. The US and UK have shown the way in Iraq by their war on Iraqis to disarm Saddam Hussein of weapons of mass destruction.

Why did Barak permit Sharon a provocative visit to Temple Mount/Haram to ignite the boiling frustrations accumulated in the Palestinian society? The massive security forces used rubber bullets against unarmed demonstrators. When the visit triggered more demonstrations the next day, Barak escalated the shootings and ordered Israeli forces and tanks into densely populated Palestinian areas. By all indications, the escalation of Palestinian protest into armed clashes could have been prevented had the Israeli response been more restrained. Even in the face of armed resistance, Israel’s reaction had been grossly out of proportion, as stated by the General Assembly of the UN, which condemned Israel’s “excessive use of force” on October 26, 2000.

The first Palestinian terrorist attack on Israeli civilians inside Israel took place on November 2, 2000, a month after Israel used its full military machine against Palestinians including helicopters, tanks and missiles. So it was not defense against terrorism as claimed by Israel. It would appear that another plan to destroy the Palestinian infrastructure and to discredit Arafat, i.e. that he had never given up the “option of violence”, was ready in October 2000 and are contained in a manuscript known as the “White Book”.

Late Professor Tanya Reinhart suggests in her book Israel/Palestine that despite the horrors of the past two years, there was still another alternative. “Israel should withdraw immediately from the territories occupied in 1967. The bulk of Israeli settlers (150,000 of them) are concentrated in the big settlement blocks in the center of the West Bank. These areas cannot be evacuated overnight. But the rest of the land (about 90-96 percent of the West Bank and the whole of the Gaza Strip) can be evacuated immediately. Many of the residents of the isolated Israeli settlements that are scattered in these areas are speaking openly in the Israeli media about their wish to leave. It is only necessary to offer them reasonable compensation for their property. The rest … are a negligible minority that will have to accept the will of the majority.”

That would leave only six to 10 percent of territories under occupation with large settlement blocks. This, along with the issues of Jerusalem and the right of return, could be left for negotiations, after the Palestinian society begins to recover, settle on the land that the Israelis evacuate, construct political institutions and develop its economy. According to a Dahaf poll of May 6 solicited by Peace Now, 59 percent supported a unilateral withdrawal of the Israeli army from most of the Occupied Territories, and dismantling most of the settlements. Only this can renew the peace process.

Unfortunately, in the evolutionary ladder of governance, societies have moved up from the tribal model when the warrior chief, sometimes the head priest too, was the ruler. Security of the tribe and wars was their major preoccupation. Israel is the first Jewish state in history after two millennia. It is barely 50 years old. Based on its history of persecution leading to the Holocaust, inputs of messianic religious fervor, labor (kibbutz) ideals and other ideas brought by its ruling elite, mostly from the European states, the warrior-king construct dominates Israel’s state philosophy and the political system, situated as it is among almost implacably hostile Arabs (tribes). “The hundreds of ex-generals who man most of the key posts in [the Israeli] government and society are not only a group of veterans sharing common memories. The partnership goes much deeper. Dozens of years of service in the regular army form a certain outlook on life, a political world view, ways of thinking and even language.”

Unfortunately, policies and plans of Israel’s political generals have now become intertwined into the views of US neo-conservatives. In the name of the fight against terrorism, more terror is being rained by Israel, where stability, security and peace remain elusive.

Gaza Strip: A Veritable Concentration Camp

The Gaza Strip or Gaza is one of the territorial units of Occupied territories .It is 41 km long and 6 to 12 Km wide , with a total area of 360 sq kms , borders Egypt on the southwest and Israel on the south, east and north. Its population of about 1.6 million , mostly Sunni Muslims are descendants of or refugees form exodus to Gaza in 1948 following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War .Its boundaries were confirmed by the Israel-Egypt Armistice Agreement of   24 February 1949. The Gaza Strip remained under Egypt and administered through the Palestine Government and then directly from 1959 until 1967, when Israel occupied it following the Six day war  .Following the Oslo Accords  between Israel and the PLO in 1993, the Palestine Authority was set up as an interim administrative body but with Israel maintaining control of Gaza ‘s airspace .In 2005 Israel unilaterally disengaged from Gaza. Since July 2007, following the first ever freest elections ( which US led West had insisted on and won by Hamas and a after a battle with PA , Hamas is the effective government in the Gaza Strip.

Israeli occupation (1967–2005)After the June 1967 Six day war, Israel occupied the Gaza Strip and created in all  21 settlements covering 20% of area .Gaza also served its security concerns. The March 1979 Israel -Egypt Peace Treaty provided for the withdrawal by Israel of its armed forces and civilians from the Sinai Peninsula with the Egyptians agreeing to keep the Sinai Peninsula demilitarized. Cairo renounced all territorial claims on it . Until 1994 the Israeli military was responsible for the maintenance of civil facilities and services. After the Oslo Accords in May 1994, a phased transfer of governmental authority to the Palestinians took place except for the settlements blocs and military areas. The Palestinian Authority, led by Arafat chose Gaza City as its first provincial headquarters. After the second peace agreement in September 1995, the Palestinian Authority took over most of West Bank towns  .It also established an elected 88-member Palestinian National Council (PNC) . .

The Palestinian Authority rule under Arafat suffered from serious mismanagement and corruption scandals.

The 2nd Intifada of September 2000 provoked by Israeli over reaction and provocation led to waves of protests, civil unrest and bombings against Israeli military and civilians, many by suicide bombers, and the beginning of rockets and bombings of Israeli border areas by Palestinian guerrillas from Gaza Strip, especially from Hamas and Islamic Jihad volunteers. Tel Aviv began a unilateral disengagement from the Gaza Strip from 15 August 2005, which was completed on 12 September 2005. Under the plan, all Israeli Settlements in the Gaza Strip (and four in the West Bank) and the joint Industrial Zone were dismantled .In all 9,000 Israeli settlers left Gaza and military bases and Philadelphi route separating Gaza with Egypt were evacuated . On 12 September 2005 Israel formally declared an end to Israeli military occupation of the Gaza Strip.

While Egypt patrolled its side of the border, Israel maintained its control over the crossings in and out of Gaza. The Rafah crossing between Egypt and Gaza was monitored by the Israeli army through special surveillance cameras. Official documents such as passports, I.D. cards, export and import papers etc had to be approved by the Israeli army.

The UN, Human Rights Watch and many other international bodies and NGOs  consider Israel to be the occupying power of the Gaza Strip since Tel Aviv still controls Gaza’s airspace and territorial waters, and does not allow the movement of goods in or out of Gaza by air or sea (only by land). Egypt has alternately restricted or allowed goods and people to cross that terrestrial border. Israel lies that Gaza is no longer occupied

After Israel withdrawal in 2005, PA Chairman Mahmud Abbas stated, “the legal status of the areas slated for evacuation has not changed.” Its attorney Gregory Khalil said “Israel still controls every person, every good, and literally every drop of water to enter or leave the Gaza Strip. Its troops may not be there… but it still restricts the ability for the Palestinian authority to exercise control.” Richard Falk, UN Special Rapporteur said that the international humanitarian law applied to Israel “in regard to the obligations of an Occupying Power and in the requirements of the laws of war.” In 2009 Christopher Gunness, spokesperson for the UNRWA described Israel an occupying power.

Palestinian Authority control (1994–2007) In accordance with the Oslo Accords PA took over the administrative authority of the Gaza Strip (other than the settlement blocs and military areas) in 1994. After the Israeli withdrawal of settlers and military from the Gaza Strip on 12 September 2005, the Palestinian Authority had complete administrative authority in the Gaza Strip.

In the Palestinian parliamentary elections held on January 25, 2006, Hamas won 42.9 % of the total vote and 74 out of 132 total seats (56%). When Hamas assumed power the next month, the Israeli government and its supporters and the EU refused to recognize its right to govern as PA. Direct aid to the Palestinian government there was cut off, the resulting political disorder and economic stagnation led to many Palestinians emigrating from the Gaza Strip.

In January 2007, fighting erupted between Hamas and Fatah. By end of January 2007, a truce was negotiated between Fatah and Hamas. But clashes continued with both factions attacking vehicles and facilities of the other side. In response to constant attacks by rocket fire from the Gaza Strip, Israel launched an air strike which destroyed a building used by Hamas. In the 2006-2007 fighting more than 600 Palestinians were killed in factional fighting between Hamas and Fatah. In the aftermath of the fighting violent acts killed 54 Palestinians, while hundreds were tortured.

K Gajendra Singh, Indian ambassador (retired), served as ambassador to Turkey and Azerbaijan from August 1992 to April 1996. Prior to that, he served terms as ambassador to Jordan, Romania and Senegal. He is currently chairman of the Foundation for Indo-Turkic Studies.

Read More Posts…..

Take Action: Tell U.S. Not to Veto Palestine’s Membership in UN Security Council

 

Hamas: They Are Not Bad, They’re Just Drawn That Way

Palestinians Right of Return is not Debatable: UN Resolution 194 In Force and Enforceable

Palestine: Arduous odyssey of statehood

Education and Behavior In Israel and Palestine

In A Blink Of An Eye


Posted on July 20, 2011   by Marivel Guzman


The world is changing rapidly and most of us were taken by surprise, as if we were swallowed by a black hole and come from the side of reality and started to behave in ways never thought we could.
For years we were the passive spectators of a never ending show full of horror spiced with wars and conflicts that we were feed in the TV sets, for years we took the Evening NEWS as a the source of information, tuning the channel just to change the faces and the spiciness of the narrative, never we imagine that all the events since the most insignificant to the  most important were all scripted in some government office and shaped and colorized to feed the various audiences; believe or not categorized by skin color, social status and income cap.

The religious denominations and educational institutions  were also part of this Global Truman Show, where the Latino,  black, and low classes sectors were given different flavors to their commercials and invitational educational advertisement options, cleverly planting the seeds of apathy for political and social interest, and more importantly emphasizing in army careers and short college degrees.
Don’t get surprise to find out that even your local grocery market was full of low or high quality products depending in which side of the block you were in.

Remember we are lead by a Elitist Group based in Capitalists Ideas where supply and demand rule the world. And in this world managed by ‘Marketing Groups’ ‘Insurance Companies’ ‘Lobbyist Groups’ is just understandable that Profit is the motto to the Global Enterprise of Capitalism, and War is a very profitable business so their marketing groups and strategists start early their job, starting with our youth.

Why will the governments which are the front offices and Public Relations desks of the Multi National Corporations will be interested in investing in education?;  if War  render more dividends to the pockets of their investors ?,
When have you seen that Any Government will invest billions of dollars in Education?
Will never happen, because an educated country is difficult to manage, so the governments are  forced to under fund education and give not billions but trillions of dollars to the War Complex Machine.
They feed patriotism in the tender minds of our youth so when they are ripe with fake nationalism and they  become easy pray for the War Industry, they are lured with college grants and other incentives to join the killer machine of the war. Their reality it is blur, with no visible options, and on the other side the army recruiters show them the benefits of the army.

No until recently that our population was drugged with the TV propaganda, giving no attention to what was happenning to their neighbors, too busy surviving. But in a blink of an eye, millions of people have awaken to our reality and more and more every day feel the urgency to awaken others.
We want to teach our children first,  what feeds the war, and let it be clear, is not the necessity to defend nobody’s country, but to feed that insatiable monster with money, and our children become the soldiers or free workers for their empire.
Our taxes pay for the soldiers salaries and the War Complex Enterprise gets the profits of the War. The Department of Defense is the front office of the Enterprise. The Congress is the back up assistance of the Enterprise where the “requests” of the Enterprise are fill, they called BILLS. Nothing but an stamped paper that over ruled our rights as a citizens given to us by our Constitution.

“I have traveled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in the country, such high moral values, people of such caliber, that I do not think we would conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self esteem, their native culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation.” Thomas Babington Macaulay 1838

Muslims are not to be blamed for mismanaging India’s economy from 1200 AD onwards. On the contrary, they allowed it to prosper. They took their share and kept away from the intricacies of trade, commerce, finance and ownership. Prosperity was all around. The British inherited a strong and prosperous nation.

Never forget these Statements

Peace is the enemy # 1 of Profits

An Educated Society is an Intelligent Society

Hunger is the best weapon to keep the population at bay. Designed exclusively to entertain the masses in its survival.

War is the worse weapon ever created against humanity, with the solely purpose to create Profits and Division.

And Never Ever Think for a moment that PEACE is Opposite to WAR.

Be The Opinion Maker of your Own Reality, Think Before You Make A choice.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Syria Being Victim of a Conspiracy to weaken the Popular Movement


Article by The Truth About Syria
Posted and by Marivel Guzman

Syria is being exposed to a foreign conspiracy, in which some Arab mass media have played a role through deliberate incitement and bias,’ said Ghassan Bin Jeddo
To read the associated article follow the link:
Syria News
The veteran Arab journalist who resigned from Al-Jazeera Satellite TV in protest against its unbalanced media coverage.

Bin Jeddo added, in an interview with the Syrian Al-Dunia Satellite TV, that the aim of the said failing conspiracy was to dismember Syria, weaken its national project and distance it from resistance forces in the region.
The veteran journalist held the so-called opposition in Syria and those who support them responsible for the spilled Syrian blood, asserting that real opposition should never use weapons and violence against the citizens.
Bin Jeddo highly appreciated President Bashar al-Assad’s ongoing reforms which disappointed the conspirators who wanted to interfere in Syria’s internal affairs. Bin Jeddo asserted that his relation with Al-Jazeera is finished because he reached to the point that he couldn’t find himself neither morally, politically nor professionally, asserting that some Satellite TV Channels committed mistakes against Syria not by coincidence, but rather were based on real political decisions to target and harm Syria.

The Veteran Arab Journalist blasted the strategies adopted by some Satellite TV Channels when, for example, quoted eye-witnesses who weren’t present in Syria to eyewitness for the events and who resorted to fabrications and lies.
Head of Al Jazeera TV Station Office in Beirut Ghassan Bin Jeddo resigned from his post a few days ago, as “Al Jazeera has abandoned professionalism and objectivity, turning from a media source into an operation room that incites and mobilizes,” Lebanese As-Safir newspaper reported on Saturday.

Bin Jeddo confirmed this step in an interview with Al Manar website. He pointed out that “the reasons published in As-Safir behind the resignation are true, however they are not the full reasons”, adding that various other issues urged him to take this step that he will talk about its details later.

The Lebanese daily has quoted reliable sources saying that the unprofessional inciting attitude that Al jazeera is adopting at this historic phase in the region is unacceptable.The sources indicated to As-Safir the ethical base of Bin Jeddo’s resignation, as he cannot accept the station’s full coverage to the situation in Libya, Yemen, and Syria, while completely blacking out the crisis in Bahrain.
As for the policy Al jazeera is following on the Syrian situation, the sources clarified that this case is a matter of morals and principles for Bin Jeddo.

As-Safir pointed out that former Al Jazeera journalist supports the Syrian people’s demands; however, he recognizes the important national role that Syria plays in the region.

************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

The Popular Movements that spread blood and violence in the Middle East and in the Northern of Africa in the last few months have given us a new direction in our World Politics of Control. We seen that dictators supported for decades by the Imperialist Powers of the US and the Club of the UN were puppets with guns, but the Real Power reside not in the castles that house these characters or the elaborated and richly adorned mansions of the puppets, the REAL POWER is in the People.

We saw the POPULAR MOVEMENT raising up from a REVOLTS to a Real REVOLUTION, from the people to the people. The armies of stooges (soldiers, police forces) were overwhelmed by the fierce resolve of the people that tired of oppression, repression, control and starvation broke the silence and took to the streets not minding any more for their security. Once the Fear was contemplated as a control tool and overcome, the next stage was easy, the joy of the Unity that was felt in the streets spread from neighborhoods to Cities to Countries.

We all the makers of the stories, the writers, the photographers, the witnesses and victims of the Revolutions did not needed the CORPORATE MEDIA to give us the NEWS, we saw the stories developed on front of us and we all share it as a personal message, as a comment, as an article, it did not matter the media we used we knew we were Sharing the Truth.
Some of the Revolts, Uprisings and Revolutions that we witnessed were manipulated by the Evil tentacles of the Central Governments of the Regions that took part in the making of these changing times.

Lies in a Wire

Images aired Danmark’s Radio, and allegedly documenting tortured Syrian demonstrators were false.
The images are from Iraq, and are several years old. Danmark’s Radio’s news program the 9 o’clock evening news May 16, aired ‘shocking images’ of Syrian demonstrators, who were being tortured by Syrian Government militias.

Danish state TV admits anti Syrian propaganda based on false images of torture

We heard rumors of paid mafia, mercenaries from Africa, Islamic Jidadists, we were not sure of none of them, only the actors were sure of their role, but something that we were sure was of the Propaganda machine that we know is well used to shape ideas, to twist truths, to instill terror, to label humans, the Corporate Media that has always played a central role in Any story that you see coming from the Box, and now an insider of one of the leading Arab News Outlets tells the world the machinations and lies spread in his own network, but seems that we still have honest writers even if they work inside the propaganda machine.

Chief Editor Thomas Falbe, who is responsible for the section for international news of Denmark’s Radio’s TV-Avisen [the 18:30 and 21:00 news]:

Regrettably the images were wrong. They are not from Syria, they are from Iraq. This is a regrettable mistake, says Thomas Falbe. The mistake will be rectified in the 21:00 hours news tonight

How DR could believe that these old pictures from Iraq were pictures from Syria?

Thomas Falbe: ‘We did what we could to verify the footage and received them from a source we trust’.

According to Thomas Falbe the mistake will have no consequences for anybody.

How an Editor in Chief of a Public Network can say so shamelessly that publishing lies has not consequences, I search the news and compare Quotes, accusations, reversals, publications and I make an opinion of the diverse sources that I research, but Sadly for the world, majority of People read the first News that is serve in their Box and they make their opinion based on that, and as I just pointed out in this article two big networks exposed on the same topic, Syria, caught red handed but what about the countless others news that are Spread as the Truth, and no one care to explore the other side of the story? We the public had been deceived for many years regarding many issues that matters to us. Take this two examples that were exposed at time, and next time that you want to make a point and argue, and maybe writing a blog about it, do not use the first article that you read, do not take the first conversation as truth, please there are many options in this modern times to find the Truth.

Head of Al Jazeera TV Station Office in Beirut Ghassan Bin Jeddo resigned from his post a few days ago, as “Al Jazeera has abandoned professionalism and objectivity, turning from a media source into an operation room that incites and mobilizes,”

At the end of the story even the most credible and best articulated story needs to be filter by you, at the end you are the Opinion MakerOpinion Maker, never believe one source, research deep in the Web. Now days you have better chances to capture the True Story in the blogers mind, and the facebook spaces, we do not serve interest of any kind. We do it for Truth Justice and to achieve peace on Earth. Akashma

We have seen the power of the media shaping our realities, like artisans their Propaganda Machine craft the lies so well with the truth that sometimes you can not really see the story behind. We have had for more than 63 years how the written word and the images on TV gave you the Wrong Idea of Palestine. Only now that we have the social networks and armies of bloggers writing, sharing us the truth is that we know that we were lied, that Palestinians are not “Islamist Terrorists” , Palestinians, Syrians, Egyptians or any other human being that has been struggling for justice are just that Humans that humanity was obscure by the Propaganda machine of the TV News.

Now that we know, we have the obligation to help us all, we have the responsibility to the others the ones that still can not see, we all need to give them guidance, good sources, information leading to the truth. My human fellows we can do it if like Vittorio Arrigoni says in his writings Stay Human.

The honest writers that strive to achieve peace in this world, that uncover the lies, they have to make sacrifices, like Vittorio Arrigoni that he needed to see for himself the crude reality of Gaza, how other way he could have giving us the horrors that Israel inflict in the Population of Gaza, only becoming witness and victim gave Vik the tools to give us the truth. Stay Human was his motto, is the only way to see the truth, to feel the pain of others, if we keep our humanity intact.
Other writers like Bin Jeddo that was forced to give up a well paid job to maintain his integrity as a writer and in the way exposing Aljazeera TV News that for so long was trying to stay afloat to be different from the rest, but at the end succumbed to the money that support the web of journalists, reporters around the world. It is hard to maintain the neutrality when the hand that pays your salary has interest vested in the ‘OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY”, we all try to stay neutral give you unbiased news, but it is our Opinion, be your own Opinion Maker and help us all to shape a better world.

Peace
Love be with you and around you
Akashma

Lies that Stick, Struggles that Sell. The Media Broke Out the Silence


Posted on March 29, 2011 by Marivel Guzman

Palestine Youth Broke the Silence! Not after the Tunisia Revolution and certainly not after the Egyptian Revolution.

“Palestinian youth have been inspired by uprisings in Arab countries, Pushing for a Palestinian Tahrir” Aljazeera Channel

I don’t think so, [Aljazeera] Palestinian youth have plenty of inspiration to uprise in their own merit. I think 63 years are few generations of struggles, pains, death, suppression and oppression being from their own leadership, but mostly from Israel IDF soldiers. The Palestinian Youth of today have suffered more than other youth around the world, and I don’t think that the inspiration born out of Tunisia or Egypt.

Palestinian youth have been resisting their own internal struggles they have been in the walls of facebook, youtube, myspace and other networks for years, in these days you taking notice of them is different because it seems that you the ‘Big Networks’, the ‘Big Media’ never have paid attention to their cries.
That you the Streamedia are writing about them it is a different story, and you did it because it sound juicy for your ratings.

The Struggles of Palestine

When the Youth Of Gaza Broke Out Manifesto first made the light to the streammedia, it was the first time that the manifesto was in the wires  and it was not the first time the youth of Gaza broke the silence (GYBO). They have been braking the silence in their struggle with Israel with the world, they have been dying in front of your cameras and they have been called the perpetrators, they have been fighting with bare hands  and rocks against tanks and you the media have been calling them the terrorists, they have been incarcerated and tortured and you have been silenced.

You the media is the one that broke the silence on January when the activists in the worldwide in a bold move sided with them and we all push for their voices to be heard. When you saw that they were making waves then you took advantage of their light and you decided that the story was good enough to be written about it.

They did not inspire out of Jasmin Revolution or the Tahrir Square, NO! Sandy Tolan, you picked up that title because it is catchy and sounds good and will be grab in the crawler of the web.

Now there are conflicts with the two main political parties in Palestine, from one side we have the Palestinian Authority closure of more than 300 NGOs in West Bank, charities that Hamas over the years has financed and sponsored, and they [Hamas] were doing the right thing in the Occupied Territories, but the egos got lose and the PA could not accept Hamas’victory without inflicting low punches, without seeing that the only losers are the Palestinians. Since 1982 Hamas is the organization that has been in charge of most of the health and social life of Palestine.

The United Nations Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator in the occupied Palestinian Territory, Maxwell Gaylard, today voiced his concern about the forced closure on 30 November by the local authorities in Gaza of all Gaza-based offices of the non-governmental organization Sharek Youth Forum.

“I am very concerned about the recent forced closing of Sharek Youth Forum in Gaza. Sharek is an important NGO partner of the United Nations in its work on behalf of children and the youth in Gaza”, Mr. Gaylard said.

Mr. Gaylard noted that “Sharek’s work forms part of the many important activities carried out by civil society organizations in the occupied Palestinian Territory promoting development and the protection of human rights.“

He stated that freedom of association and freedom of expression are fundamental rights protected by international law as well as the Palestinian Basic Law and expressed his hope that Sharek would be permitted to continue its work in Gaza without further delay or undue hindrance.

Statement by Maxwell Gaylard,
United Nations Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator in the occupied Palestinian Territory
On the Closure of Sharek Youth Forum in the Gaza Strip

Jerusalem, 7 December 2010

Since 2007 the Fatah-dominated government in the West Bank has also closed more than 300 Hamas and Islamic-linked charities and NGOs.

Jared Malsin

I don’t see the UN raising the flag for the 300 Charities closed down in West Bank by the PA, not that Sharek Youth Forum be less important, but my note is in the context of marking the double standards used to emphasize the wrongs of one political party vs the other one, Hamas over their favorite Fatah.
The PA that is being cracking down on the resistance in the West Bank pleasing and serving the interest of Israel. Maybe the goal is toward “The Peace Talks” but we all know that Israel does not recognized Abbas as a “Peace Partner.”
Seriously speaking Israel does not know the meaning of peace.

And let’s mention also the continuous arrests of peaceful protesters in West Bank and Jerusalem, but not from the PA but from IDF forces that without mercy use lethal force to stop the demonstrators from expressing their opposition to the illegal Wall, the closure of Shuhada Street in Hebron, the demolitions of homes in East Jerusalem, the dispossession of homes, the illegal arrests of Palestinians and other very serious issues that the UN keep ignoring, even the murder of internationals is not a serious topic for our “Peace Keepers in New York Headquarters.”

Where is the Big Media in these important events that take place inside Palestine? Why don’t you Brake the Silence and exposed Israel Once and for all?..Will be the day that we will be celebrating Earth Day.

The next excerpts was taken from an article published by Aljazeera, I bring it to you because it has some good information, I do not agree with the way they portray the youth of Palestine taking the merit of their struggles, but now they are taking their time to give you a taste of the occupation with the “Big Media flavor”. Even thought in their article I see the youth of West Bank is not Numb as the great majority of the population, they [youth] see the situation from their young minds from different perspective.

“If you look at our social situation, people in Ramallah don’t care, mostly speaking,” says Dina Shilleh, a 27-year-old piano teacher who returned with her parents from Serbia during the heady early days of Oslo. “If they can go out, they have their car, they have their house, they can dress nicely, that’s kind of what it’s about. There’s a lot that’s been sedated. Because in the end you want to live. It’s like, hey, how long do you want to keep fighting? My grandparents fought, my parents fought. Am I gonna do it? My kids? It would have to be something that would really spark the people to get out of this numbness.”

I personally have experienced the disinterest from some Palestinians here in California and in Ramallah, they simply don’t care, they can come to the US, they work, eat and entertain themselves as long as they are not taking the heat from the IDF they care less for Gaza or for the struggles of Shuhada Street residents or East Jerusalem.

It is disappointing but also I see they are tired of fighting, they lived the occupation in their worse times, what can we do to wake up their dreams of freedom again?
Aljazeera Article published March, 05, 2011

“Palestinian youth have been inspired by uprisings in Arab countries, Pushing for a Palestinian Tahrir”Sandy Tolan on her article of March 05, 2011, Aljazeera Channel

On a cool January evening at the height of Tunisia’s Jasmine Revolution, Najwan Berekdar and a few friends were sitting at a smoky café in Ramallah, puffing on water pipes and strategising. “We were talking about what’s happening in Tunisia, and we decided, maybe this is the momentum – we should use it,” Berekdar remembers weeks later from her office at Sharek, a youth-oriented Palestinian NGO. “We were, like, five people. We were sitting with our laptops and we said, ‘Okay, let’s make an event.’ We wanted something to encourage people to go out.”

Within days, masses of Egyptians began filling Tahrir Square, and 27-year-old Berekdar, her friends and like-minded Palestinian youths were even more inspired. “We wanted to send this message that it is time for us to do something. And obviously we can do it. Look at other people. If they managed to do it, we can do it.”

The demonstrations these Palestinian youths helped organized were quickly banned, sometimes with clubs, by a Palestinian Authority (PA) with deep historic and political ties to the Tunisian and Egyptian dictatorships. But then other groups began forming their own demonstrations. And Berekdar and her friends, through email loops and a face-to-face “thinking group” of about 20 academics and intellectuals, organized new protests. “We were suppressed by the PA a second time and a third time,” she says. Soon Palestinian authorities began to investigate the group.

“One of our group members was called by the police, and by the intelligence, and by – I don’t know, we have four security forces, I think,” Berekdar says. (Actually, there are five.) “They stayed at his home until one in the morning.” The mukhabarat assumed the young man was the ringleader, Berekdar recalls with amusement. They pressed him for details of the hierarchy of what is in fact a loose, ever-shifting coalition that only recently got a name: Hirak Shebab, or Youth Movement. It is an informal, mostly leaderless group – a concept the centralised PA does not seem to grasp.

As Berekdar spoke, at 1:30 on a recent afternoon, an email came in from a friend. About the demonstration that day at 6:00: Should they do it at Manara Square in the centre of Ramallah or outside the Muqata, the PA headquarters? Berekdar was not sure. Scarcely four hours before the event, she seemed unhurried, and confident of Hirak Shebab’s ability to get sufficient numbers to show up at the last minute.

Berekdar is trying to involve young people, both unaffiliated and from different Palestinian parties, including Hamas. She estimates that so far about 2,000 people connect with the group’s message pushing for democracy and fundamental change. “It’s about changing the whole discourse of the Palestinians,” she says. “It is time for us to start doing something. Because obviously the political leadership is not doing anything.”

The ‘pulse of Palestine’

In the revolutionary spirit spreading across the Middle East, Palestinian youth groups have become a small but important catalyst in a building wave of discontent with PA repression and complicity in a failed “peace process” backed by the US. The groups’ actions are sparked not only by events in the region, but by the US veto of the UN Security Council’s condemnation of Israeli settlements. A widening circle of Palestinian groups are calling for an end to negotiations with Israel, an end to the political division between the West Bank and Gaza and wholesale reform of the PA and the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO). Some advocate dissolving the PA completely.

“Fatah and Hamas have failed Palestinian society,” says Nader Said, a Palestinian pollster and political analyst. Youth, he says, “represent the pulse and conscience of Palestine”. In Gaza, Said says, young people “are the ones who have demonstrated in the middle of the shooting, covering their faces with paper bags,” so that security forces would refrain from possibly shooting a brother or cousin. “They are the soul of the Palestinians,” but by themselves, “they’re not strong enough to carry the emancipation agenda.”

Yet the message is resonating well beyond the youth groups. As Palestinians under a 43-year occupation watch their Arab neighbours fight for democracy, pressure increases on the PA to reform itself – or at least, to appear to do so. Faced with the threat of the US veto, the PA sought to burnish its resistance credentials by refusing to yield to American pressure to call off the Security Council vote. And Salam Fayyad, the prime minister, recently sent a message to Palestinian youth via Facebook, asking for input as he forms a new Palestinian cabinet. Within hours, he received hundreds of replies – some supportive, some sceptical.

“Now suddenly they’re this nationalistic body that’s clinging to Palestinian rights?” scoffed Diana Buttu, a Palestinian lawyer and former PA negotiator, in a recent interview. “They’ve put their finger to the wind, and realised that the wind has changed. Right now you don’t want to be seen as the one nation that’s clinging to the United States. So they had to do something.”

But others say the pressure from emerging Arab democracies, and what one insider called the “betrayal” by the US, may force the PA to turn inward, and thus make the kind of core changes it has long resisted.

“We do not want an authority that is a buffer between the people and the occupation,” says Qais Abu Leila, a member of the Palestinian Legislative Council and a founder of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine. “We need a Palestinian Authority that is part of the people and a continuation of the struggle against occupation.” Abu Leila believes the shifting political landscape may force the PA to confront its increasingly undemocratic, authoritarian character.

“We are now facing the danger of the emergence of more or less police regimes” in Gaza and the West Bank. Under the PA, he says, “gradually the democratic checks and balances of government are fading away”.

‘A quiet colonisation’

Fundamental change within the PA, if it happened, would likely include a reassessment of its security cooperation with Israel. Some coordination of visas and safe passages, and movement of Palestinian police between West Bank towns, would continue, reformers say. More draconian measures seen as collaboration with Israel’s occupation could be suspended. These include the extralegal arrest and detention of hundreds of Palestinians, and incidents of torture, documented by Palestinian human rights groups, in the name of fighting terrorism and preventing a Hamas takeover in the West Bank. Human Rights Watch recently called on the US and EU to suspend aid to the PA “pending concrete steps to end a culture of impunity for security service abuses, including torture”.

But a Palestinian decision to suspend security cooperation would likely have huge financial consequences. In recent years the US has spent nearly half a billion dollars in training and “professionalising” key parts of a 25,000-strong Palestinian security apparatus under three-star American general Keith Dayton. The money flow would likely reduce to a trickle if basic principles of the arrangement were suspended. Some analysts believe the PA could survive possible cuts in US funding, especially if the EU stepped into the breach.

Others are sceptical. “The PA is a security subcontractor for Israel,” says Buttu. Despite the pressure the PA is facing, she does not foresee any change. “The whole aim is to allow Israel to have a very quiet occupation, a very quiet colonisation.”

“We alleviated the occupation from its responsibility,” agrees Ali Jarbawi, a longtime critic of the authority who recently joined the government as the Palestinian minister of planning. “And they [Israelis] are living happily ever after when you go to Dizengoff Street and sip wine with the yuppies at these sidewalk cafés. As if the West Bank does not exist. As if Gaza does not exist. As if the Palestinians do not exist.”

Jarbawi believes the two-year state-building plan the PA put in place in 2009, overseen by Fayyad, should be given a chance to work – but only until September 2011. Jarbawi insists there must be a limit to official Palestinian patience. “You can’t keep the negotiation track open forever, and keep the dependency on aid also open forever, so the world is paying for the continuation of the occupation. And at the same time they are building settlements on the ground, eating what’s supposed to become our state.”

Jerusalem: ‘The next Tahrir?’

After September, Jarbawi says, the Palestinian strategy could include an end run around the US, through an appeal to the other members of the “Quartet” – the EU, Russia and the UN – to recognise a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders. Already nine Latin American nations have stepped forward. “Brazil, through this letter, recognises the Palestinian state on the 1967 borders,” Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, the then Brazilian president, wrote to Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, in December.

Other options Jarbawi envisions include asking for an international presence in the West Bank, building a new, nonviolent intifada – “one million people walking down the streets, chanting for an end to occupation” – or even dissolving the very authority in which Jarbawi now works. “That has to remain a viable option,” he says.

Abu Leila believes dissolving the PA is unrealistic. But he insists the pressure for reform has become too great to ignore. “There is an almost universal recognition that there must be radical change in Palestine, and that it must start with ending the division” with Gaza, he says, echoing comments by Berekdar and many others. He calls this step essential “in order to face the occupation and a hostile policy adopted by the US. The PA could organise the Palestinian society in a way that could fuel the struggle against the Israeli occupation. This is a meaningful option.”

This may be starting to happen. In February, Tawfiq Tirawi, a member of the Central Committee of the PLO and until recently the PA security chief, called for “days of rage” protests against the American veto in the Security Council. “They consider themselves the masters of the world,” said the man who until recently helped coordinate security arrangements with Israel and the US. “They [the Americans] call for democracy and freedom. They say that they want this for all nations of the world, but when it comes to the Palestinian people, it just evaporates. The interest of our people is the most important thing. We will say no to the Americans if it is not in the interest of our people.”

Some Palestinians believe a nonviolent popular uprising is coming in Palestine – whether backed by the PA or not. “Resistance has always been a unifying force,” says Hani Masri of Badael, the Ramallah think-tank. “The youth, they are telling the leadership, either you will be changing or you will be changed.”

Masri and others are discussing mass mobilisations, including 50,000 to 100,000 Palestinians marching peacefully to Qalandia, the checkpoint between Jerusalem and Ramallah that now resembles an international border crossing. Beyond that, he asks, “why can’t we turn Jerusalem into the next Tahrir?”

Weekly protests in the Palestinian towns of Bili’in, Budrus and Nili’in have already received international attention as focal points of a nonviolent Palestinian resistance. But whether mass mobilisations will actually take place to confront the Israeli occupation is another matter.

High price of confrontation

“The big question today is whether the Palestinian society has the juice to create a real civil disobedience, refusing-the-occupation campaign,” says Gershon Baskin, the co-director of the Jerusalem-based Israel-Palestine Center for Research and Information, and a strong advocate of the two-state solution.

“There are 24,000 Palestinians working in settlements. Two Rami Levi supermarkets opened up in the West Bank, and many of the shoppers are Palestinian. If you’re going to wage a campaign to simply say we’re not cooperating any more with the occupation, then what that means is you’re not going to work in Israel any more, you’re not going to work in the Israeli settlements … You’re going to have confrontation with the occupation. And that has a very high price.”

Would Palestinians, so dependent on the foreign-funded jobs and services that Buttu calls “donor heroin,” be willing to forego the sharp reduction in aid that would surely accompany a new strategy of confrontation?

“In the short term we would really pay a heavy price economically,” Buttu agrees. “For one thing, you wouldn’t see people sitting around in nice cafés like this,” she says, smiling ironically while sitting in Ramallah’s Café de la Paix. But confronting the occupation “would definitely unite people who are not united now”.

“Something could spark it,” Baskin says. “Who would have predicted Tunisia, Egypt, Libya? But I don’t see Palestinian society having the energy today to do it. Israelis and Palestinians today feel much more comfortable pushing a ‘like’ button on their Facebook page than going out to the street.”

That may or may not be true. As major checkpoints have come down recently, the occupation has loosened around Ramallah, Nablus and Jenin, and relative freedom within a small portion of the West Bank has created a sense of limited breathing room. For some Palestinians, quality of life has gone up. Some say the “donor heroin” has created a sense of comfort, even complacency, in the small enclave inside the West Bank.

“If you look at our social situation, people in Ramallah don’t care, mostly speaking,” says Dina Shilleh, a 27-year-old piano teacher who returned with her parents from Serbia during the heady early days of Oslo. “If they can go out, they have their car, they have their house, they can dress nicely, that’s kind of what it’s about. There’s a lot that’s been sedated. Because in the end you want to live. It’s like, hey, how long do you want to keep fighting? My grandparents fought, my parents fought. Am I gonna do it? My kids? It would have to be something that would really spark the people to get out of this numbness.”

And yet, when Hirak Shebab organised demonstrations at Manara Square recently, Dina answered the call. “We need a new leadership,” she says, recalling her chants against the occupation and in favour of democracy.

“We need a new idea.”
At the end the story that is told is not the real story, you are the Opinion Maker at the end. Make your judgement, make your call for justice and peace. It is up to you the Readers of the Events that cover our world that will make an opinion and act upon it.

 

 

%d bloggers like this: