Saving
President Abbas
By Uri Avnery
25 June, 2007
Gush
Shalom
Ehud Olmert is the opposite of
Midas, King of Phrygia. Everything the king touched turned into gold,
according to Greek legend. Everything Olmert touches turns into lead.
And that is no legend.
Now he is touching Mahmoud Abbas. He lauds him to high heaven. He promises
to "strengthen" him. He is about to meet him.
If I might offer some advice
to Abbas, I would call out to him: Run! Run for your precious life!
One touch of Olmert's hand will seal your fate!
CAN ABBAS be saved? I don't
know. Some of my Palestinian friends are in despair.
They grew up in Fatah, and
Fatah is their home. They are secularists. They are nationalists. They
definitely do not want a fanatical Islamic regime in their homeland.
But in the present conflict,
their heart is with Hamas. Their mind is split. And that is not surprising.
They hear the words of President
Bush, of Olmert and of the whole babbling choir of Israeli politicians
and pundits. And they draw the inescapable conclusion: the Americans
and the Israelis are working hard to turn Abbas into an agent of the
occupation and the Fatah movement into a militia of the occupier.
Every word now emanating
from Washington and Jerusalem confirms this suspicion. Every word widens
the gap between the Palestinian street and the Palestinian Authority
in the West Bank. The new "Emergency Government" in Ramallah
is headed by a person who received 2% of the votes at the last elections,
when the list of Abbas himself was soundly beaten by Hamas, not only
in Gaza but in the West Bank, too.
No "easing the restrictions"
and no "economic steps" will help. Not the return of the Palestinian
tax money that was embezzled by the Israeli government. Not the flow
of European and American aid. As early as 80 years ago, Vladimir Jabotinsky,
the most extreme Zionist, made fun of the Zionist leaders who tried
to buy off the Palestinian people by offering economic inducements.
A people cannot be bought.
IF ABBAS can be saved at
all, it is in one way only: by the immediate start of rapid and practical
negotiations for achieving a peace settlement, with the declared aim
of setting up a Palestinian state in all the occupied territories, with
East Jerusalem as its capital. Nothing less.
But that is exactly what
the government of Israel is not prepared to do. Not Olmert. Not Tzipi
Livni. Not Ehud Barak.
If they had been ready to
do this, they or their predecessors would have done so long ago. Barak
could have arranged it with Yasser Arafat at Camp David. Ariel Sharon
could have agreed it with Abbas, after Abbas was elected president with
a huge majority. Olmert could have settled it with Abbas after Sharon
left the scene. He could have done it with the unity Government that
was set up under Saudi auspices.
They didn't. Not because
they were fools and not because they were weak. They did not do it simply
because their aim was the exact opposite: annexation of a large part
of the West Bank and the enlargement of the settlements. That's why
they did everything to weaken Abbas, who was designated by the Americans
as the "partner for peace". In the eyes of Sharon and his
successors, Abbas was more dangerous than Hamas, which was defined by
the Americans as a "terrorist organization".
IT IS impossible to understand
the latest developments without going back to the "separation plan".
This week, some sensational
disclosures were published in Israel. They confirm the suspicions that
we had from the start: that the "separation" was nothing but
a ploy, part of a program with a hidden agenda.
Sharon had a master plan
with three main elements: (a) turning the Gaza Strip into a separate
and isolated entity, led by Hamas, (b) turning the West Bank into an
archipelago of isolated cantons led by Fatah, and (c) leaving both territories
under the domination of the Israeli military.
This would explain Sharon's
insistence on a "unilateral" withdrawal. On the face of it,
it seems illogical. Why not speak in advance with the Palestinian Authority?
Why not ensure the orderly transfer of power to Mahmoud Abbas? Why not
transfer to the Authority all the settlements intact, with their buildings
and greenhouses? Why not open wide all the border crossings? Indeed,
why not enable the Palestinians to open the Gaza airport and build the
Gaza sea port?
If the aim had been to achieve
a peace settlement, all this would have happened. But since the complete
opposite was done, it can be assumed that Sharon wanted things to work
out roughly as they did: the collapse of the Authority in Gaza, the
take-over of the Strip by Hamas, the split between the Gaza Strip and
the West Bank.
For this end, he cut Gaza
off from any land, sea and air contact with the world, kept the border
passages closed almost continuously and turned Gaza into the "largest
prison in the world". The supply of food, medicines, water and
electricity is completely dependent on the goodwill of Israel, as is
the operation of the border crossing to Egypt (with the help of a European
monitoring unit controlled by the Israeli army), all imports and exports,
and even the registration of inhabitants.
IT MUST be clear: this is
not a new policy. The cutting off of the Gaza strip from the West Bank
has for many years been a military and political objective of Israeli
governments.
Article IV of the 1993 Oslo
Declaration of Principles states unequivocally: "The two sides
view the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as a single territorial unit,
whose integrity will be preserved during the interim period." Without
this, Arafat would not have accepted the agreement.
Later on, Shimon Peres invented
the slogan "Gaza First". The Palestinians adamantly refused.
In the end, the Israeli government gave in and in 1994 signed the "Agreement
Concerning the Gaza Strip and the Jericho Area". The foothold thus
given to the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank was to ensure the
unity of the two territories.
In the same agreement, Israel
undertook to open a "safe passage" between the Strip and the
West Bank. And not only one, but four, which were marked on a map appended
to the agreement. Immediately afterwards, road signs with the Arab inscription
"to Gaza" were set up along West Bank roads.
But during the 13 years that
have passed since then, the passage has not been opened even for one
day. When Ehud Barak settled his frame in the Prime Minister's chair,
he fantasized about building the world's longest bridge between the
Gaza strip and the West Bank (about 40 km). Like many others of Barak's
brilliant flashes, this one died before birth and the passage remained
hermetically closed.
The Israeli government has
undertaken again and again to fulfill this commitment, and recently
gave Condoleezza Rice personally a specific and detailed pledge. Nothing
happened.
Why? Why did our government
take the risk of a manifest, clear-cut, unambiguous and continuous violation
of such an important obligation? Why did they go so far as to spit in
the eye of a friend like the good Condoleezza?
There is only one possible
answer: the cutting off of the Gaza Strip from the West Bank is a major
strategic aim of the government and the army, an important step in the
historic effort to break the Palestinian resistance to occupation and
annexation.
This week, it seemed that
this aim had been achieved.
The official operation to
"strengthen" Abbas is a part of this design. In Jerusalem,
some feel that their dreams are coming true: the West Bank separated
from the Gaza strip, divided into several enclaves cut off from each
other and from the world, much like the Bantustans in South Africa in
bygone times. Ramallah as the capital of Palestine, designed to make
the Palestinians forget about Jerusalem. Abbas receiving arms and reinforcements
in order to destroy Hamas in the West Bank. The Israeli army dominating
the areas between the towns, and operating at will in the towns, too.
The settlements growing without hindrance, the Jordan valley completely
cut off from the rest of the West Bank, the Wall continuing to extend
and gobble up more Palestinian land, and the Government's promise to
dismantle the settlement "outposts" remaining a long forgotten
joke.
President Bush is satisfied
with "the spread of democracy" in the Palestinian areas, and
the US military subsidy to Israel is growing from year to year.
FROM THE point of view of
Olmert, that is an ideal situation. Will it hold?
The answer is an unqualified
NO!
Like all the actions of Bush
and Olmert, as well as of their predecessors, it is based on contempt
for the Arabs. This contempt has proven itself many times as a recipe
for disaster.
The Israeli media, which
have turned themselves into propaganda organs for Mahmoud Abbas and
Mohammed Dahlan, are already gleefully describing how the hungry inhabitants
of Gaza will look with green envy at the well-fed, flourishing inhabitants
of the West Bank. They are going to rebel against the Hamas leadership,
so that a Quisling in the service of Israel can be installed there.
The people in the West Bank, growing fat on European and American aid
money, will be happy to be rid of Gaza and its troubles.
That is pure fantasy. It
is much more probable that the anger of the Gaza people will turn against
the Israeli prison wardens who are starving them. And the people of
the West Bank will not forsake their compatriots languishing in Gaza.
No Palestinian will agree
to the separation of Gaza from the West Bank. A party that agreed to
that would be shunned by the Palestinian public, and a leadership that
accepted such a situation would be eliminated.
Israeli policy is torn between
two conflicting desires: on the one side, to prevent the events in the
Gaza Strip repeating themselves in the West Bank, where a Hamas takeover
would be immensely more dangerous, and on the other side, to prevent
Abbas from succeeding to such an extent that the Americans would oblige
Olmert to negotiate seriously with him. As usual, the government is
holding the stick by its two ends.
At present, all Olmert's
actions are endangering Abbas. His embrace is a bear's embrace, and
his kiss is the kiss of death.
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights
Comment
Policy
Digg
it! And spread the word!
Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands
of people more. You just Digg it, and it will appear in the home page
of Digg.com and thousands more will read it. Digg is nothing but an
vote, the article with most votes will go to the top of the page. So,
as you read just give a digg and help thousands more to read this article.