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.

Yes We Did

San Francisco's Bush Street became Obama Street shortly before the 9am inauguration yesterday. This of course was not an official change and did not apply to every Bush Street sign, but as you can see, this one is very convincing.

"One thing is for certain: he caused you to ask me a question about him."

The internets are abuzz with the whole shoe throwing fiasco. In case you just got back from outer space or whatever, what happened was an Iraqi journalist threw his shoes at Bush during a press conference, and also called him a dog, which is the second worst insult in Arabic, #1 being, "your sister's pussy."

W ducked just in time, with an amused smile on his face, then ducked again when the second shoe was thrown. You can see the BBC's fancy slow-mo video of that here. The best part was when a reporter later asked him a question about the incident and he said, "I don't know what his cause is.[...]But one thing's for sure: he caused you to ask me a question about him."

The journalist, Muntadar al-Zeidi, has become an overnight hero in the Arab world, with comics already commemorating the incident. He was arrested after the incident, of course, and today thousands of Iraqis protested his incarceration and demanded his release, many saying that he did what world leaders were too afraid to do: stand up to Bush and denounce, among other things, the killing of 98,000 Iraqi civilians since 2003.

His shoes are still being held as evidence. He may never see them again.

Iraq Asserts Adolescent Independence

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has finally succeeded in getting president Bush to agree on setting a timetable for troop withdrawal.

The AP says:

The two leaders agreed that improvements in security should allow for the negotiations "to include a general time horizon for meeting aspirational goals, such as the resumption of Iraqi security control in their cities and provinces and the further reduction of U.S. combat forces from Iraq," the White House said.

Bush repeatedly has vetoed legislation approved by Congress setting deadlines for American troop cutbacks.

It's like when your teenage children keep pushing the limits in their natural drive to become independent.

And then there's a surprise move where they help each other save face:

Friday's White House statement was intentionally vague and did not specify what kind of timelines were envisioned. That allows Iraqi officials, who are facing elections in the fall, to argue they are not beholden to Washington or willing to tolerate a permanent military presence in Iraq. For Bush, it points the way toward a legal framework for keeping American troops in Iraq after a U.N. mandate expires on Dec. 31.

Bush ought to be proud.

But in the Middle East, al-Maliki is not exactly seen this way.

Al Jazeera says:

There's a rumor going around that Iraq's Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is feeling his oats, flexing his muscle, and displaying a newfound confidence that has allowed him to challenge the American occupation of Iraq. As a result -- so the story goes -- Maliki has suspended talks with the United States on a long-term security agreement, and has spoken out in favor of a timetable for withdrawing U.S. forces.

But that's mostly wrong. From the start of his reign as prime minister in 2006, Maliki has been a weak and ineffectual leader. His political base is exceedingly narrow, and his Dawa Party is virtually nonexistent as a political force in Iraq today.

It seems that standing up to Bush will not be enough to gain him respect in his own part of the world. He's dealing with pressure from all sides:

Both Maliki and ISCI want to maintain U.S. support for the army and police, which have grown astronomically, from 337,000 in 2007, to 556,000 in 2008. So they can't afford to alienate Washington. At the same time, Maliki and ISCI are responding to strong pressure from Iran, which wants the Americans out of Iraq, and from Iraqi nationalists, who feel the same way. (Of course, the nationalists also want Iran to get out of Iraq.) That is not a formula for political strength.

Phase III of Operation Sandbox Launched

Photo by photoluna25.

Iran's oil Minister Gholam Hossein Nozari spoke at the OPEC conference in Madrid today. He basically said that if attacked, Iran would respond fiercely and that such an attack would drive oil prices higher than anyone could imagine. But he also said:

Nozari, however, said Tehran would not cut oil deliveries and would continue supplying the market even if struck by Israel or the United States.

Um...is it just me or is he saying, "Go ahead and attack us, we'll be rich!" Or maybe he's saying, "Thousands and thousands of our people will die, but those of us who make the decisions can wipe our asses with gold."

AP's George Jahn says:

Tehran is under U.N., U.S. and European sanctions because it has defied U.N. Security Council demands to suspend its uranium enrichment program. But with oil supplies tight and prices at unprecedented levels, the energy industry remains tempted by the possibilities of investing in Iran, OPEC's second largest oil producer and No. 2 in terms of the world's natural gas reserves.

Is it possible that Bush, Olmert, and Ahmadinejad are all having a big threesome? If Iran could, as Nozari claims, continue to ship oil while at war, can you imagine the amount of money that bring in? I don't think we even have numbers that go that high. The energy industry powers the US government. It is so far fetched that the US would go to war just to get oil and make money?

Oh wait....

So, perhaps this indirect announcement is Phase III in a twelve step plan to justify another Middle East campaign.

I can imagine how this was planned:
(Scene: a dark room with lush surroundings, a group of men hold drinks and cigars)

Ahmadinejad: So I'll act like a real asshole. Say bad stuff about Jews and the US and freedom.

Bush's handlers: And we'll say, "Whoa, this guy is dangerous! We should keep an eye on him."

Ahmadinejad: And then I'll start messing around with nuclear power and be real suspicious about it.

Bush's handlers: Then we'll threaten military action.

Ahmadinejad: This will cause me to act even creepier.

Bush's handlers: But how to keep the investors from getting nervous....hmmm...

Ahmadinejad: I have an idea....

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.”

Bush likes War

Joschka Fischer, the former Foreign Minister of Germany, published an article Friday in which he outlined the events in the Middle East of late and made predictions for the near future. He wrote that Bush's recent visit to Jerusalem was less to congratulate Israel on its 60th birthday and more to give it the go ahead to attack Iran's nuclear facilities. Fischer writes:

Bush's central topic, including his speech to Israel's Knesset, was Iran. Bush had promised to bring the Middle East conflict closer to a resolution before the end of his term this year. But his final visit to Israel seemed to indicate that his objective was different: he seemed to be planning, together with Israel, to end the Iranian nuclear program - and to do so by military, rather than by diplomatic, means.

Fischer specifically highlighted that this military action is likely to take place before the end of the Bush administration because it is unclear what the next administration's strategy would be. Most likely, no matter who is elected they won't be as much of a warhawk as Bush.

And sixth, with the approaching end of the Bush presidency and uncertainty about his successor's policy, the window of opportunity for Israeli action is seen as potentially closing.

It's like when you know mommy won't let you have an ice cream so you ask daddy instead.

Is Bush high? Are we not already involved in another war? One that was also prompted by supposed weapons of mass destruction. He's like a little boy, going around blowing the tops off anthills with firecrackers. Further, and as I have mentioned before, Ahmadinejad is not stupid. If he were planning a covert attack on any country he would not give them warning beforehand. That tells me he is not about to attack Israel or the US or anyone else with the capability to fight back. He's going to goad whomever he likes into a fight, and then use their own momentum to push their faces in the dirt. And we are falling for it.

Bush Asks Nation to Suck It

When I was a little girl my grandmother would often take me shopping. But having short legs and an even shorter attention span, I would get cranky long before she was ready to quit shopping. So then my grandmother would pull a piece of candy from her purse and give it to me in exchange for me shutting up for a while. The problem with that was I would only shut up for as long as it took me to eat the candy. Then I wanted more candy.

This is what Bush's rebate plan feels like. $600? What exactly is that supposed to accomplish? Is it supposed to pay off the mortgage of the thousands upon thousands of families that are losing their homes to foreclosure?

No, it's just supposed to give you something to suck on for a while.

UPDATE:
While talking with Pauline and Jack about this, another penis euphemism was used in regard to this tax rebate:

That's recockulous. I mean, when you want to think of ways to dick over your nation...

And then I thought, maybe we're not the only ones who think this is a giant, lubeless fuck up the ass. Mark Morford at the Chron writes:

It's more like this: You've been continuously mugged and beaten and robbed blind for the past seven years straight, and as you lay there on the cold, hard economic ground, bleeding and gasping and wondering what the hell happened to your vacation time and your health care plan and your mortgage payment, your attackers scoff and leer and toss a couple of bloodstained nickels on your pulverized face and mutter, here sucker, have some bus fare, and then they cackle and stomp away with all your loot and dignity and hope, back to the White House from whence they came.

According to Jack, this is the inevitable result of giving away fake money.

Palestinian Children Denied Mail

First of all: Ghaith al-Omari. Could he be any uglier? Did anyone consider a phone interview? He's like a SNL parody of himself.

This unbearably long Charlie Rose clip is about Bush's visit to Palestine in which he gave a speech recognizing Palestine as a sovereign nation and urging Israel to do the same. Audio of that speech here but beware- it's partnered with propaganda images and music. Dennis Ross, author of "Statecraft" says in this video that Bush's Annapolis meeting was more stagecraft than statecraft. As the months slip away, it becomes more and more clear that this is the case.

Case in point: the United States Postal Service. They do not ship to Palestine. They do not even have Palestine in their computer system. If Bush and his administration was really interested in promoting the idea of Palestine as a sovereign nation, wouldn't they start by calling it one?

Private shipping companies have various ways of designating the Palestinian territories, such as FedEx, which ships to "Palestine Autonomous." DHL ships to "Israel, Israel (West Bank), and Israel (Gaza)". UPS, like its acronymic cousin, ships only to Israel. And it's not as if USPS is purely interested in condensing their list or keeping things simple. They ship to such obscure places like Anjouan (Comoros), Christmas Island (Kiribati), and Pitcairn Island which has a population of 50 (inbred descendants of the mutineers of the HMS Bounty). The USPS also recognizes antiquated names like Eire (Ireland), Hashemite Kingdom (Jordan), and Persia (Iran).

In conclusion, someone please give al-Omari a trim. Please.

The Telltale Inky Finger

Once again, several years after the fact, I've seen an interesting documentary about "current" events. My Country, My Country by Laura Poitras is part biopic about Dr. Riyadh, an Iraqi doctor turned political candidate, and part silent condemnation of American and UN policies.

The film follows Doctor Riyadh (a Sunni) and others over the course of the eight months during which the 2005 Iraqi elections were organized. I was at first struck by the obvious fact that there were no Iraqis present at these planning meetings or involved in the distribution of the ballots. This seemed to be a concern for the Americans, French, and Australians in charge of the process as their planning revolved around making the elections seem credible.

This is what people had to say about it:

“We are an occupied country with a puppet government. What do you expect?”

“This is a sham. The war has been over since last May.”

“George Bush can say what he likes, but he cannot control the situation.”

“The question is, the constitution will be drafted by this so-called democratically elected government. But what if this constitution opposes America's interests by, let’s say, 60%. What will America do?”

“They want the elections to look as Iraqi as possible.”

This last quote was in reference to the fact that mercenaries were used to secure the polling places as it was not seen as wise to have American uniforms visible in news broadcasts about the event.

Another major theme in the film was the condescension dripping from the tongues of leaders in uniform. One such professional was training a group of men for the Iraqi police force and his speech included the words, "“Your country is filled with history, and I want you to remember that.” Another officer briefed a room full of interpretor soldiers with a slide show that included a shot of the words "Fake you, USA" graffitied on a wall. He seemed to feel that what was most important to emphasize about this was that they had spelled it wrong, that they had meant to write "Fuck you, USA." However, in the same speech he cried over two of his interpretors that had been killed while on duty and I realized he was just as ill-equipped to deal with the situation as those he had just been mocking.

The voting method used was to dip the voter's finger into a cup of ink, after which they would mark the ballot with it. This resulted in voters being physically tagged for several days as having voted. 44 people were killed at polling sites. Dr. Riyadh's wife and children feared doubly as being the family of a Sunni candidate and for having voted. His wife said after returning home from the polling place, “I hid my finger on the way back. I was afraid people would know I voted.”

The immediate result of the election was that over 7 million Iraqis voted, 58% of the elligible voters. Dr. Riyadh's party, the Iraqi Islamic Party, received 21,000 votes. Only 2% of elligible Sunni's voted. You can read about the long-term results here.

Other aspects of the film are Kurdish feelings about Arabs, Sunni feelings about Shias, moderate's feelings about extremists and eveyone's feelings about the occupation.