Abbas: Obama, Mitchell Useless, Settlements Not So Bad

In an interview with Saudi-owned newspaper Asharq Alawsat, Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas hints that he was making more headway with Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni than he is with Obama and Mitchell and that in reality, Obama insisting on a settlement freeze puts Abbas in an awkward position. He can't very well publicly say that a settlement freeze is not necessary in order to continue negotiations, but he tells Asharq Alawsat's journalists that in previous negotiations with Olmert, he was prepared to ignore the issue, at least temporarily.

And that's not all. This article is filled with fascinating tidbits about the insides of such a complicated negotiation. Here are some important parts and my take on them.

[Asharq Al-Awsat] Would it have been possible to reach an agreement with Olmert alone?
[President Abbas] I believe it would have been possible that I go up a little, and he comes down a little. It was possible to find a solution. He said that he would give me 100 percent.
[Asharq Al-Awsat] This is important and fundamental?
[President Abbas] He said 100 percent. He would take from this side, and I would take from that side. He presented maps to me. The maps included that he would take the settlements blocs (in the West Bank) in exchange for territories in the north, west, and south of the West Bank, in addition to territories to the east of Gaza.

So basically this is a territory swap he's talking about. Israel gets to keep the settlements they've built already and Palestine gets land that is not currently being used by anyone.

Wait. Not used by anyone? Don't we mean used by Palestinian residents of Israel? No.

[President Abbas] In a distant region (from the triangle region), because I explained from the beginning that I would not accept anyone (from the Palestinians of Israel). We were doing well. God is my witness, he was all right; he said to me: You will not find anyone other than me; and I said to him: But you will find someone other than me.

I guess Palestine has enough people. This brings a whole new angle to the argument about the Right of Return.

[President Abbas] Obama laid down the condition of halting the settlements completely. What could I say to him? Should I say this is too much? Moreover, halting the settlements is the second article of the Road Map, and it is something I want. At the end they blame me, and they say that the condition of halting the settlements was not on offer during the negotiations with Olmert. Bear in mind that at every meeting with Olmert the issue of the settlements was discussed.

And regarding Abbas' repeated threats to step down as president and his newest announcement that he will not seek re-election:

[Asharq Al-Awsat] Is not this decision tantamount to running away from the battle?
[President Abbas] Is the issue merely one of clinging to the chair? The chair does not matter to me.
[Asharq Al-Awsat] This is despite the fact that there is no alternative to you at this stage?
[President Abbas] It is wrong to say that there is no alternative. How can you say that there are 8 million Palestinians, but there is no alternative?
(Erekat [chief Palestinian negotiator with Israel]: I believe that the president did not say I do not want to be a candidate because he was scheming, maneuvering, or fed up).
[Asharq Al-Awsat] Or he might be sulking as he used to sulk in the past?
[President Abbas] No it is not sulking.

Hilarious. In what other situation would you find a journalist accusing a president of sulking during a private interview?

Moving along, Abbas says that Iran is standing in the way of a reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas (the former rules the West Bank and that latter is in charge of the Gaza strip).

[President Abbas] Brother, they saw the Egyptian document before we saw it, they agreed to it, and then we signed, but they refused to sign. Why, because there are regional sides that do not want this.
[Asharq Al-Awsat] What are these sides?
[President Abbas] Iran is the first one. This is indisputable.

And here Abbas idealizes a bit. I think the situations he refers to have improved in the past several years, but naturally he is overemphasizing his success at reform.

[Asharq Al-Awsat] What can a Palestinian State offer?
[President Abbas] It can offer a democratic state that has equality and transparency. I challenge anyone to say that there was a single case of corruption in the Palestinian Authority in the past two or three years. I mean a single case of corruption.
[Asharq Al-Awsat] Does this include political detentions?
[President Abbas] Or a single political detention.
[Asharq Al-Awsat] Does this mean that all the detentions are not political?
[President Abbas] The detentions are carried out in cases of weapons, security, money smuggling, or money laundering. I challenge anyone to prove otherwise.
[Asharq Al-Awsat] What about the issue of women?
[President Abbas] Women are equal to men. On every occasion we emphasize the need to advance women. The proof of this is that the Legislative Council has allocated a quota for women, whether the others like it or not; one of every three members of the Legislative Councils has to be a woman. This also applies to the local councils.

There is much too much in this interview for me to paraphrase everything, so I urge you to read the whole thing if you have an interest.

Lola Does Livni

I'm getting a little bit excited about Tzipi Livni. So far she's doing well at creatively and compassionately pursuing peace while not upsetting certain right-wingers who have stalemated peace efforts in the past. She is still in the process of setting up her government so her attitude might not be permanent, but we can hope.

In Haaretz today:

"I do not believe in far-reaching proposals and an attempt to expedite matters, especially in light of the political situation," Livni, the prime minister-designate, told [French Foreign Minister] Kouchner on Sunday.

She was referring to Olmert's peace plan that offers Israeli withdrawal from East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, small areas of territory, the latter of which belongs to Syria.

About Palestinian disapproval of the offer:

Livni's explanation was a criticism of Olmert. "Abu Mazen [Abbas] in his present political situation cannot accept such an agreement," she said. "The political situation in Israel also does not allow it to be signed."

Livni also argued that blaming the Palestinians for refusing to accept Olmert's offer does no good. "We can say this is their fault - but what will that do?" she said. "We had the same thing after Camp David in 2000 and look where that got us."

Once upon a time I asked for a politician that is more concerned with actually accomplishing things than with being right. Could she be the one? The bigger person. The one to stop pointing fingers.

Olmert's Last Gasp

Haaretz announced today that Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is finally being indicted for corruption charges. Olmert has been under investigation for suspicion of bribery since early May of this year.

Last month, when the bribery investigation reached critical mass, Olmert agreed to step down as soon as an election for leadership of the Kadima party was held. The two front runners for the party are Tzipi Livni, a politician on par with Obama in that she has great potential but has not been tested, and Shaul Mofaz, a man Palestinian leaders said would "derail the peace process."

Two weeks ago, Livni agreed to release 200 Palestinian prisoners in a show of good faith to faciliate peace negotiations.

And today, in one of his last gasp efforts to leave a meaningful legacy, Olmert proposed to prepare for the eventual evacuation of Israeli settlers from the West Bank.

He wasn't saying they should actually evacuate. He's just saying they should be prepared. An ounce of prevention or what have you.

But Mofaz made his opposition to the proposal known right away:

"The bill weakens the position of Israel in all future negotiations and I will not lend my hand to it," said Mofaz, a frontrunner in this month's Kadima leadership battle.

Note that Olmert suggested that the government should prepare for the evacuation of settlers living east of the security fence, not settlers living east of the green line, otherwise known as the pre-1967 border.

Nevertheless, suggesting that Israelis be evacuated from anywhere in the West Bank is not an advisable action for any Israeli politician whose retirement isn't already imminent. The last Israeli politician who made formal land concessions to the Palestinians was assasinated.

Israel's Leadership Under Hot Debate

With Israeli Prime Minister Olmert stepping down amid numerous accusations of bribery, Kadima party leadership is now being debated. Olmert vowed that he would resign as soon as a new leader of his party was chosen. The winner of that primary will then be named Prime Minister.

One of the frontrunners for party leadership is Shaul Mofaz, a native of Iran, who recently denounced his home country as "the root of all evil" and hinted at the ever-present option of attacking Iran to stop its nuclear enrichment.

He then pledged to oversee peace talks with the Palestinians personally and vowed he would produce actual results.

In Haaretz:

"I have more years of experience than others. I will give the negotiations with the Palestinians utmost priority. I will do my best to advance them and to achieve results, and that's a promise. I will put all of my weight behind it and will deal with it personally," he said.

"They know me, after all," Mofaz continued, "Abu Mazen [Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas], [Palestinian Authority Prime Minister] Salam Fayyad and [PA chief negotiator] Saeb Erekat. They'll say that everything I promised, I delivered. True, I don't go easy in negotiations, I'm not a man of words - I'm a man of actions and I promise to bring results. It won't happen in two days and maybe not in a year, but there will be results."

Then he continued to blather on in a very convincing fashion about why the peace talks are important.

"For years I experienced the hardship of war, the suffering of battles and the loss of friends, subordinates and commanders .... Kadima under my leadership will continue the path of previous prime ministers who worked to bring peace and security for Israel," Mofaz said.

But then the Palestinian Authority issued a statement about Mofaz's candidacy that makes me think he doesn't know what he's talking about. Just maybe.

In a Haaretz article titled, "PA: Mofaz as head of Kadima would be disaster for peace":

A victory by Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz in next month's Kadima Party leadership race would be a disaster for the peace process, senior Palestinian Authority officials say.

The officials said that an American-Palestinian plan for the continuation of the process is contingent on Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni winning the primary. A Mofaz victory, in contrast, would send the talks into a deep freeze, given his hawkish views.

But in a dangled carrot, the newspaper does reveal an opportunity for Israel and the PA to help each other:

The Saudi newspaper Al-Watan reported Tuesday that a list of the Palestinians Abbas wants released, which also includes many others of the longest-serving prisoners, was given to Livni during her meetings in Washington with the head of the PA negotiating team, Ahmed Qureia. Qureia told Livni that the release of these prisoners would play an important role in bolstering the PA's status among the general Palestinian public.

I think it was Sun Tzu or some other Chinese genius who said that you cannot win without helping your opponent save face. And here Israel has an opportunity to do just that. The question is whether the cries of the right wing warhawks will drown out the logic speaking quietly from inside this option.

Obama Visits Israel, Say Scary Stuff

At the end of Obama's Israel visit, he said to Prime Minister Olmert:

Obama reportedly told Olmert that he is interested in meeting the Iranians in order to issue clear ultimatums. "If after that, they still show no willingness to change their nuclear policy, then any action against them would be legitimate," an Israeli source quoted him as saying.

Really? Any action?

Let's not forget that the US and Israel have nuclear weapons in numbers that make a girl swoon.

Earlier in Sderot, he said:

"A nuclear Iran would pose a grave threat and the world must prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon," Obama stated.

The Illinois senator also warned that a situation in which Iran had achieved this capability would be "game-changing."

"Not just in the Middle East, but around the world," he added. "Whatever remains of our Non-Proliferation Treaty would begin to disintegrate."

The Non-Proliferation Treaty was a document signed by 189 countries back in 1968. The treaty consists of three parts: non-proliferation, disarmament, and the right to peacefully use nuclear technology.

While Iran continues to claim they are using nuclear technology peacefully, with no evidence to the contrary, they are not in violation of the NPT.

The US however, by threatening to nuke Iran (remember, Obama said "any action"), is in violation of the portion of the NPT that states nuclear weapon states should not use or threaten to use those weapons on non-nuclear weapons states.

But this is not the first time this has happened. From Wiki:

The U.S. also had nuclear warheads targeted at North Korea, a non-NWS state, from 1959 until 1991.

Tug of War Continues over Abducted Soldier

New developments in the Hamas-Israel cease fire have hinted again at both sides' unwillingness to make a deal. Israel has, throughout the negotiations, insisted that the release of abducted soldier Gilad Shalit be part of a cease fire. Hamas' biggest request is the release of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners in exchange. Both sides have now conceded at least part of the other's request, but yet both sides still maintain the other is not willing to compromise.

Hamas yesterday released a letter from Shalit to his family in which he states he is being treated well but he wants the government to secure his return as soon as possible. Hamas released a statement today saying that Israel should, in turn, release some Palestinian prisoners as a show of good faith. Hamas leaders suggested releasing women prisoners or minors as a compromise and step toward a truce. Israel has not responded to that request.

Instead, Israel says:

A defense source involved in the efforts to gain Shalit's release said Tuesday that the letter Hamas delivered to Shalit's family, via the Carter Center in Ramallah, was not related to the attempts to conclude a truce, and its timing was coincidental. "The letter was delayed for some time for a variety for reasons," the source said.

He added that the talks with Hamas over a prisoner exchange are at an impasse because of the group's unwillingness to be flexible.

On the other side of the fence, Hamas has created a list of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners to be released as part of a cease-fire agreement. It has not confirmed that Shalit would be released in return. Israel has approved 70 names on that list, but Hamas has still not returned reassurances that Shalit will be traded for these prisoners. Israel has denied the release of the other prisoners on the list "because they were directly responsible for the murder of Israelis."

The sheer number of prisoners on the wish list brings up some questions and concerns. Firstly, what are the other 70 guilty of that they could all be released in exchange for one man? It brings to mind a statistic: 40% of the adult male Palestinian population has seen the inside of a prison. And by "adult" I mean post-pubescent, not the traditionally acceptable boundary of 18 years or older. This statistic makes it abundantly clear that Israel is a bit jail-happy. They don't need much of a reason to throw Arabs in jail, and keep them there. So their willingness to release 70 convicted criminals makes me wonder what exactly those criminals were convicted of. Perhaps throwing stones. Perhaps organizing a political movement. Perhaps associating with members of Hamas, Fatah, or Hezbollah. The bottom line is that, by Israel's own admission, they are not responsible for any deaths.

But as missiles continue to be fired into Israel from Gaza on a daily basis, the people responsible for Israeli deaths will be a government which does not take any and all steps necessary to secure a cease-fire.

But instead, Olmert and his cronies are trying to drum up support for a sweeping Gaza operation that will mean the deaths of far more Israeli soldiers and Palestinian civilians than have been killed by Hamas' rockets.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni met with the heads of the defense establishment Tuesday in preparation for today's diplomatic-security cabinet meeting. No details of their meeting were released, as Olmert and Barak said they would prefer to keep Israel's intentions secret from Hamas.

"We must not talk very much," Barak told the full cabinet Tuesday. "When the moment is right, we will take action. It is important that the cabinet listen well to what the army says can be achieved, and what cannot be achieved, via an operation in the Gaza Strip."

Israel has discussed a third option: resuming assassinations of Hamas' leaders, which would pressure the group to accept Israel's terms for the cease-fire.

Bush Getting Blue Balls over Iran

Iraq's president, Nouri al-Maliki, made another visit to Iran yesterday to discuss the two countries' relationship and ask for Iran's help in supplying electricity. Guess what else happened yesterday. Another suicide truck bomb blew up, this time on a US patrol base in eastern Iraq. Weird that al-Maliki's visits with Ahmadinejad keep coinciding with suicide truck bombs, the reported hallmark of al-Qaida.

A crackdown on Iraqi militias in March revealed "very, very significant amounts" of Iranian weaponry, which led Iraqi leaders to question Iran about what, exactly, its intentions are (source). However, this most recent meeting could mark a turning point in Iraq-Iran relations, with the possibility of Iran supplying electricity to the Southern Iraq city of Basra.

Despite these attacks of suspected Iranian origin being on Iraqi soil, it is the US that has been most hurt by the truck bombs and other militia attacks. And it has been the US that has been most vocal about Iran's guilt in supplying weapons to insurgents and creating nuclear weaponry. Nevermind that US intelligence reports disproved this suspicion a while ago.

And in light of Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Olmert's recent meetings, wherein they discuss the prospect of attacking Iran, it seems the US has a boner for Iran and will recruit whatever allies necessary, or whatever "evidence" necessary, to make that attack happen.

Unfortunately for Bush, his puppet Iraq is starting to make decisions for itself, which may leave him without key support in completing his conquest of the Middle East.

UPDATE:
NowPublic says:

But Peace and Freedom has learned independently that the nuclear research labs of Iran are so many and so disbursed that the Israeli Air Force would have difficulty "servicing the entire target list" we were told by an IAF officer.

There is speculation among military analysts that the United States would have to assist the IAF in any full-scale effort to neutralize Iran's nuclear infrastructure.

One specialist told us, "We foresee a scenario where Israel initiate action and the U.S. cleans up."

And by "clean up" they mean "reorganize the government and install leaders that pander to our interests." Which is a disaster in the making because, as the wife one Iraqi politician said back in 2005, “George Bush can say what he likes, but he cannot control the situation.”

Israel PM Wants his Mommy

Three people were injured today by the Qassam rockets that are fired daily from Gaza into neighboring areas of Israel. At the same time, residents of the areas being bombed gathered near the Sufa Gaza-Israel crossing to protest the shipments of food Gaza is receiving from the Israeli government. They insist the food shipments should stop as long as rocket fire continues. Protesters blocked the road to keep trucks full of food from passing and held signs that said, "DO NOT FEED TERROR."

In regards to that mythical, ever-elusive truce, Israel's Haaretz news says this:

The political-security cabinet was due to vote Sunday on whether to agree to an Egyptian-mediated cease-fire with Hamas in Gaza, but Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak canceled the meeting, citing the "vagueness" of Hamas' position. The cabinet meeting will be postponed until the following Sunday.

It's like when you have a test at school so you tell your mom you're sick and you don't want to go.

Israel Cannabalizes Itself

Photo by dlisbona.

First of all, I would like point my middle finger directly at Reuter's. Not that I'm surprised that they would print a grossly misleading headline, but well, ok...I am. I am surprised and disgusted. The top Reuter's online story today is headlined "Israel's Olmert admits taking cash but won't quit." I think we can all agree that means he admitted to taking a bribe. However, in the article, Reuter's quotes Olmert as saying, "I look each and every one of you in the eye and say, 'I never took bribes. I never took a penny for myself.'"

The Israeli media has been riding this wave for the last two weeks but for some reason the story broke internationally yesterday. On Israel's birthday. Weird.

Amir Oren, of Israel's Haaretz newspaper, writes an analysis of the media's handling of this event and breaks it down rather effectively. He writes:

The media midwifed the affair, kept it from dying and has turned itself into the arena for the coming rounds.

Read the rest of that analysis here.