MESSAGE
| DATE | 2005-01-12 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Subject: [hangout] More wonderful BS from Columbia University
|
Why does the Financial Times Print such obviously bias bullshit
This is the same author under investigation at Columbia for harrasing
Jewish students.
Ruben
News in-depth
A Palestinian map out of history's dead ends
By Rashid Khalidi
Published: January 11 2005 02:00 | Last updated: January 11 2005 02:00
It was only thanks to strong Palestinian desire for democracy, their
good organisation and the presence of 800 foreign observers that any
kind of Palestinian elections were possible.
ADVERTISEMENT
The very idea of "elections" implies the ability to move about freely
and vote in a peaceful atmosphere. These conditions did not apply in
Sunday's election for the presidency of the Palestinian Authority, won
by Mahmoud Abbas, popularly known as Abu Mazen. Throughout the West
Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, the iron grip of the Israeli
military occupation is in its 38th year. Normal elections are impossible
in circumstances where Israeli military permission is necessary simply
to travel from town to town. In the recent first phase of Palestinian
municipal elections, several candidates were arrested while some
presidential candidates were roughed up or detained by Israeli troops.
There is little reason to believe that the election for the presidency
of the Palestinian Authority (or the ongoing municipal and planned
legislative elections) will substantially change the existence of 3.6m
Palestinians in the occupied territories. This includes Israel's
continued occupation of East Jerusalem and most of the West Bank; its
continued control over the Gaza Strip (to be exercised from without if
Israel withdraws) and the relentless expansion of illegal West Bank
settlements and the vast network of fortifications, walls and bypass
roads that hem in the shrinking islands of land left to the
Palestinians. All the signs are that Abu Mazen will be free to negotiate
with Ariel Sharon's government some terms of Israel's continued external
control of Gaza Strip and its occupation and settlement of the West Bank
and East Jerusalem. However, control, occupation and settlement per se
are non-negotiable. In other words, we are not on the brink of peace,
nor of Palestinian statehood in any meaningful sense.
The electoral process will, however, have a positive impact, though one
largely restricted to Palestinian internal affairs. It has already
opened a debate among Palestinians about their national goals and
strategies. This debate has been frozen for more than 15 years, first as
the Palestinian Liberation Organisation led the Palestinians into the
dead end of Oslo, and thereafter as the violence of the Israeli defence
forces and attacks by militant Palestinian factions led to the dead end
of the second intifada.
Elections will furthermore begin the overdue process of renewing
Palestinian leadership, replacing the older generation of PLO former
exiles who dominate Palestinian politics with younger West Bank and
Gaza-based leaders. It may bring Hamas and other militant groups into
the political system, possibly to share power, reducing their incentive
for armed action - although resistance in some form will continue as
long as occupation remains. Finally, the Palestinians may be able to
further the sorely needed establishment of a rule of law, accountability
and stable government that Oslo and the old PLO leadership failed to
produce. It is impossible to create sovereign institutions under
occupation. But institutions can be created, vulnerable though they may
be to the same destruction by Israel that has taken place since 2000.
And while the occupation can be blamed for many things, it cannot be
blamed for Palestinian corruption, cronyism and other ills introduced by
the PLO.
These potential positives can only play out if powerful external actors
do not sabotage them. For the Palestinians to have truly free municipal
and parliamentary elections, there must be at least a partial Israeli
withdrawal and a binding ceasefire. Even if Palestinian armed factions
can agree, Israel - which has in the past refused a formal ceasefire, or
to restrain its death squads and military incursions - must relent. Its
refusal to do so was the main reason for Mr Abbas's failure as prime
minister in 2003. If he is not to fail again spectacularly within a few
months, final status negotiations must be rapidly initiated to deal with
the real issues: final borders, sovereignty, settlements, Jerusalem,
refugees, water. A profoundly ill-conceived American-Israeli veto has
kept these issues from the negotiating table for most of the past 15
years (the abortive Camp David negotiations and their Taba sequel were
the sole exception).
The US cannot just smile benevolently as Israel evacuates the tiny
sliver of the occupied territories represented by the Gaza Strip and
demand that Palestinians accept Mr Sharon's vision of the continued
occupation and settlement of much of the West Bank. If this is where Mr
Sharon and Mr Bush intend to try to take the Palestinians, this current
bout of optimism will be short-lived. There is an opportunity, but
seizing it would require a new approach by Israel and America. Failing
such a shift, we can look forward to the final burial of the two-state
solution and the establishment of permanent Israeli control within a
single, conflict-ridden entity encompassing the entirety of the land
between the Jordan and the Mediterranean.
The writer is professor of Arab studies at the Middle East Institute,
Columbia University
____________________________
NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
Fair Use -
because it's either fair use or useless....
NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
|
|
