Well, it appears that the PA has become negotiations addicted. Who can blame them? The rush of sitting in a room with an adversary doing good things for your people, your nation, indeed the world. Who could resist?
The addiction appears, however, to have gotten out of hand and self-proclaimed "Chief Palestinian Negotiator", Saeb Erekat needs to go into negotiations rehab. Silly Saeb actually believes that the Palestinians will one day attain their freedom through negotiations. I guess he seems to be blind to the fact that the Palestinians have been negotiating with Israel for almost 15 years! He conveniently ignores the fact that settlements have tripled during that period, that there are now more than 500 checkpoints in the West Bank and that the Israelis have now put into place a Bantustan-like regime that would make apartheid South Africa blush! Poor Saeb - his addiction has made incapable of looking at the big picture. His refrain is no longer, "end the occupation" but "let's negotiate!"
Saeb's and the rest of the PA's addiction reached new heights earlier this week following Kosovo's declaration of independence. Yasser Abed Rabbo, a casual user of negotiations announced that, "Kosovo is not better than us. We deserve independence even before Kosovo." And with that, he announced that the PA was not getting enough negotiations to meet the needs of the addicted: "If things are not going in the direction of actually halting settlement activities, if things are not going in the direction of continuous and serious negotiations, then we should take the step and announce our independence unilaterally." Ooooohhhhhh....a move against negotiations? What about the addicts?
Saeb quickly displayed all of the signs of withdrawal: the shakes, the fits of rage, the demands for more....He was quick to act. Armed with memos by his "legal advisors" (who are equally addicted) he rushed to condemn the comments. (Note, they are never quick to condemn the killing of Palestinians but they were swift on this one). Saeb proclaimed, "we need negotiations, not independence!" Later in the day, Saeb calmed down (he had his fix later that evening when Olmert met Abbas) and stated, "We will pursue negotiations in order to reach a peace agreement in 2008 that includes settlement of all final status issues including Jerusalem." In short, he confirmed that the 15-year failed negotiations strategy would continue to be pursued. Palestinian journalists, intrigued by the thought that the PA was finally going to pursue a strategy to liberate the country by unilaterally declaring independence put the question to the new Chief Palestinian Negotiator, Ahmed Qureia (Abu Ala). Abu Ala, another addict berated Abed Rabbo and gleefully proclaimed in that "negotiations were serious." Could it be that the strategy was working? No. He added that, "no serious progress had been made." Hmmmm....
And if the negotiations fail to yield an agreement in 2008? Well, there is always 2009 and 2010 and who can really resist negotiations in European capitals in the springtime.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Who wants to be free? Not the PA
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Seriously, just declare independace and sent troops to the border, let those who want to leave do so.
if not through negotiations, then through what means? Please explain
Rocketing civilians, of course! The proven method of gaining freedom.
If it doesn't work in 2008, there's always 2009 or 2010.
Wait...how is that better than what the PA is doing, again?
Yasser Arafat is a living (sorry, dead) proof of how pointless negotiating peace with the Israel is. His Partner Rabin was assassinated by a fellow Israeli.
Ironic, Abbas who was imposed on Arafat is compromising everything Arafat lived (and died) for. That won't get him a Nobel peace prize. But would (hopefully) sustain him in office.
haha, brilliant D
Well, it appears that the PA has become negotiations addicted.
Well, Diana, you are "activism" addicted, so you are co-dependent on these negotiations. What would you do with your life if Palestinians did have an autonomous state? You'd probably try to find some way to screw it up so that you could get back to your happy existence of ranting 24/7 about Israel and the Jews, right?
I know. I know. It's just a completely BASELESS assumption I make about you. So sorry. But, you see, I grew up during the golden age of activism here in the US. I remember watching 99% of the hippies "grow up" and move on with their lives. And I still see the 1% who didn't, living on welfare up there in Berkeley and San Francisco, protesting the fact that the sun come sup in the morning and anything else they can possibly find to make themselves feel socially relevant. That could be you, in 30 years.
Yasser Arafat is a living (sorry, dead) proof of how pointless negotiating peace with the Israel is.
Yeah, because Arafat really tried hard to negotiate peace, and if it could possibly be done, he'd have succeeded.
But the real question is: what do you believe is going to work? There's nothing else you can point to that has worked. So it has to be something new.
That suggests that maybe the Palestinians should stop the violence.
Violence seemed to work just fine for South Africa and jewish zionists in british mandate palestine. Violence worked for the american forefathers.
To look at people would you label George Washington a terrorist? Menachim Begin? Nelson Mandela?
Violence seemed to work just fine for...
Violence only works with rational people.
People who know whether they have a realistic chance of winning...
People who know when they have in fact already lost, and continuing to fight is just causing needless suffering...
You know. Normal people.
Continuing to fight is not a choice for the Palestinians, it has came down to a very basic quest of survival.
Ever since Rabine was assassinated (by an Israeli). The Israelis kept electing war-hawks prime ministers. Ever since, killing more Palestinians was good publicity for an Israeli PM candidate.
What reason got to do with all that?
Continuing to fight is not a choice for the Palestinians, it has came down to a very basic quest of survival.
Another stupid claim that flies in the face of reality.
Violence has not advanced the Palestinian cause one inch. What is the Israeli response to Palestinian violence? Do they relax restrictions on the Palestinians, or do they increase them?
Is Palestinian misery reduced after Israel is attacked?
Was the border wall put up because Palestinians weren't being violent enough?
What in the world inspired you to make that stupid, stupid claim, b-cell?
Violence seemed to work just fine for South Africa
Negotiation has worked to settle differences around the world, too. It just hasn't worked for the Palestinians, so it can't possibly work for the Palestinians. That's b-cell's argument, to which I was responding. Violence is the same: it hasn't worked for the Palestinians, so it can't possibly work.
The Irish kept fighting the English for centuries. Only recently it started to pay off.
Peace negotionans did not work for the Palestinians, because you can't negotiate with someone who refuses to recognize you. Recognition can only be gained after a long struggle.
The Irish kept fighting the English for centuries. Only recently it started to pay off.
When the Irish laid down their arms and negotiated. Those who continued violence, the so-called "Real IRA", had no role in achieving anything.
Peace negotionans did not work for the Palestinians, because you can't negotiate with someone who refuses to recognize you.
That's a weird bit of turnabout. It's the Palestinians (and, in particular, HAMAS) that refuses to recognize Israel.
Post a Comment