Palestinian President Abbas ready to seek peace pact on his own

[Thorgal]

The U.N. voting to revoke that historic resolution (which would be vetoed of course) would do much more to delegitimize the U.N. than Israel. The UN's rabid and irrational anti-Israel bias is already well known and documented. It is not surprising that enemies of Israel's very existence would favor such an exercise in blatant hatred against the Jew of nations.

UN resolution 181 was a plan, not an international law.

UN can send troops in occupied territories and delegitimize the illegal Israeli settlers in the West Bank by a new UN resolution.

Nothing new for Israel : the list is long with previous resolutions.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_UN_resolutions_concerning_Israel_and_Palestine

In the worst case for Israel, Hamas can be legetimized as an occupied resistance instead of a random terrorist group.

[Morch]

Personally, I don't know why he plays along with the Israeli pretence of "peace". Israel doesn't want peace - it wants land. It has never wanted peace, despite what a few of the apologists on here like to pretend from time to time. But they, like western leaders, like many Jews, like me, know the truth. Israel aims to steal as much Palestinian land as possible before the world wakes up and puts a halt to its ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

Today Israel announced the theft of another 400 hectares of Palestinian land (4 sq km). Oh, and if the Palestinian owners don't like it, the wonderful law-abiding democratic state of Israel will allow them to appeal to the Military Appeals Committee.

Those who continue to make excuses for Israel's actions, who try to hide its duplicity and murderous intent, share responsibility. Those who try to censor open discussion of Israel's perfidy, and those who try to flood discussions to divert them also share this responsibility.

Israel never wanted peace, you claim. If so, how did the PA become a reality in the first place?

If Israel's aim was always an increase of territory, how was this policy served by accepting the PA and handing over even

limited control to the Palestinians? Ongoing "ethnic cleansing" of Palestinians? Care to explain what is meant by that and

how Abbas can even contemplate dealing with a country supposedly doing this? Does Abbas own opinion reflects any of

what you describe? Or is his a rather milder view of the situation? (verbally, at least, not pretending to know what's on his

mind).

How about applying the same differentiation your posts repeatedly allude to between various elements of Palestinians?

A bit ridiculous of you to go on at length about the so-called pro-peace elements in the West Bank (such as Barghouty),

and insisting that they are a serious factor despite representing a miniscule portion of Palestinian public, while reference

to Israel is almost always made under the biased assumption that right wing views are the only ones existing (which, as

been demonstrated often on these topics, if far from true).

The Israeli government's latest move regarding the land in the West Bank is indeed lamentable (and lame, as well). This

will do absolutely no good at all, rather fuels the fires and makes the situation worse (plus kicking Abbas where it hurts,

and without any real gain). We have no argument about that. Where we differ is when this policy is attributed to Israel as

a whole, disregarding criticism by Israeli opposition and public (granted, not all the public, obviously).

From a cynical political point of view, this might be actually coming at a good time for Abbas, as it illustrates his claim and

gives boosted urgency to his initiative.

[dexterm]

Yes, time for Palestinians to by pass negotiations via USA...they are not honest brokers. Either their politicians are gutless or hamstrung by AIPAC or both. US hypocrisy in defending human rights is only matched by Israel’s chutzpah.

And clearly Netanyahu is not interested in peace

...says he needs to negotiate with all Palestinians. He gets a unity government, then he tries to undermine it.

... PA agrees to recognize the State of Israel within 67 borders, Netanyahu insists Palestinians recognize the Jewish State of Israel as a precondition

... continues to expand colonies in the West Bank, even though he knows that is a major obstacle to a peace agreement.

I think Abbas should continue on the present track approaching the international community directly calling for a new debate on Resolutions 181 and 242 in particular, and boycotts and sanctions against Israel.

On the domestic front I think he should urge restraint from Palestinians in the West Bank when dealing with the daily humiliations, beatings and murders of “the most moral army in the world”

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.577295 reprinted > http://www.fatehfrc.plo.ps/en/index.php?p=main&id=9376

Don’t give Israel an excuse for further ethnic cleansing. The PA should issue all Palestinians with iPhones to flood the social media with images of Israel’s daily brutality. Let the world know when the IDF shoot the mentally disabled who unknowingly walk too near their fence, or target Palestinians for assassination. http://www.btselem.org/press_releases/20140304_shooting_near_gaza_fence

Rockets and stones can never defeat Israel. Those weapons are obsolete. The new weapons are the smartphone, Facebook, Twitter ....

IMHO it’s time for an indefinite ceasefire and passive resistance to shame Israel. Time for a cyber war to gain the hearts and minds of young voters.

Edited September 2, 2014 by dexterm

[Seastallion]

Personally, I don't know why he plays along with the Israeli pretence of "peace". Israel doesn't want peace - it wants land. It has never wanted peace, despite what a few of the apologists on here like to pretend from time to time. But they, like western leaders, like many Jews, like me, know the truth. Israel aims to steal as much Palestinian land as possible before the world wakes up and puts a halt to its ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

Today Israel announced the theft of another 400 hectares of Palestinian land (4 sq km). Oh, and if the Palestinian owners don't like it, the wonderful law-abiding democratic state of Israel will allow them to appeal to the Military Appeals Committee.

Those who continue to make excuses for Israel's actions, who try to hide its duplicity and murderous intent, share responsibility. Those who try to censor open discussion of Israel's perfidy, and those who try to flood discussions to divert them also share this responsibility.

Israel never wanted peace, you claim. If so, how did the PA become a reality in the first place?

If Israel's aim was always an increase of territory, how was this policy served by accepting the PA and handing over even

limited control to the Palestinians? Ongoing "ethnic cleansing" of Palestinians? Care to explain what is meant by that and

how Abbas can even contemplate dealing with a country supposedly doing this? Does Abbas own opinion reflects any of

what you describe? Or is his a rather milder view of the situation? (verbally, at least, not pretending to know what's on his

mind).

How about applying the same differentiation your posts repeatedly allude to between various elements of Palestinians?

A bit ridiculous of you to go on at length about the so-called pro-peace elements in the West Bank (such as Barghouty),

and insisting that they are a serious factor despite representing a miniscule portion of Palestinian public, while reference

to Israel is almost always made under the biased assumption that right wing views are the only ones existing (which, as

been demonstrated often on these topics, if far from true).

The Israeli government's latest move regarding the land in the West Bank is indeed lamentable (and lame, as well). This

will do absolutely no good at all, rather fuels the fires and makes the situation worse (plus kicking Abbas where it hurts,

and without any real gain). We have no argument about that. Where we differ is when this policy is attributed to Israel as

a whole, disregarding criticism by Israeli opposition and public (granted, not all the public, obviously).

From a cynical political point of view, this might be actually coming at a good time for Abbas, as it illustrates his claim and

gives boosted urgency to his initiative.

We are talking about a situation that has gone on for 60 (more actually) years. If from time to time Israel had a more moderate government that would, eg, recognise the PA, that is natural, but it is not representative of Israel over the longer period. If we look at documented and undisputed quotes from leaders over the period from 1947 to today, it is clear that Israel wants all.

Any thinking and realistic person will know that whatever Israel do, they are not stupid enough to cross an invisible boundary that will obligate her allies to reject her goals openly with action. Recent weeks have seen Israel pushing the envelope, hard. They may have pushed it too far now. The ignorant masses, the voting public of Western societies are waking up to the mega crime of Israel. I predict a flooding of the social media with all sorts of new Pro Israeli propaganda....but it may be too late, thankfully.

[Morch]

Hamas and the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas have reportedly agreed on a three-stage plan that would create an independent Palestinian state, first of all calling on the US to come up with defined borders that Israel would agree with.

According to the Saudi daily Asharq Al-Awsat the agreement was reached between Abbas and Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal in Doha. According to the initiative, the US serving as a mediator in negotiations will be given a four month deadline to reach an agreement with Israel and demarcate the map.

http://rt.com/news/183984-palestine-recognition-plan-hamas/

Good to see the prospects of a Unity Government moving ahead. The key part of Abbas' plan is cornering Israel into demarcating a map. If/when they refuse to do it, that's when he goes to the UN General Assembly and/or the International Criminal Court.

It's almost as if you can feel the ire emanating from Tel Aviv.

I really think that Abbas has a chance of finally getting this done. In the words of MLK, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice".

The Palestinian unity effort is not an act of brotherly love, more a cynical play of domestic politics. If Hamas was not under economic hardship it would not go along with any of it, and in the same way, the PA (or rather, Fatah) would not have hold enough leverage to force Hamas into the Unity government.

The so-called Unity government is anything but, although the name sounds promising. In essence, it is a government made out of temporary technocrats, which accepted a mandate to sort domestic issues in preparation for a general elections that are due to be carried out next year, hopefully. That does not mean that all past issues are bygones, of course, and each side will do its best to belittle and disrupt the other side as the struggle for support of the Palestinian public goes on. Abbas's plan non withstanding there were some harsh words and allegations traded before, during and after the Gaza Strip fighting, which seem to suggest rifts are not fully bridged.

Hamas's stand regarding Israel's right to exist is unchanged, as does his official view that the armed struggle is not done with. Hamas going along with the Unity government, without publicly denouncing the armed struggle are not quite the same thing (even without considering repeated Hamas leadership announcements during and after the fighting). A public saying of some sort to this effect is usually a part of how things work.

If Abbas goes through with this (and in my opinion, an even bet if it would actually get there), it is safe to say that the Israeli government will indeed decline to respond in a cooperative manner. Even not being a supporter of Netanyahu or Israeli right wing political thinking, I can understand the reasoning behind this specific refusal. Dropping right wing ideological arguments, even a center-left wing Israeli government would have trouble accepting it under current conditions. As the Unity government is basically a temporary construct, Palestinian election possibly in the horizon and Hamas unchanged in its stance, it remains unclear who Abbas actually represents and how much of the Palestinian public stands behind him on this matter.

Will international world opinion (which will almost undoubtedly support the Palestinian position on this, regardless of flaws) be enough to press Israel into concessions or convince the international community to stage active unprecedented intervention? Personally, I doubt it - especially considering other events in the region. According to some sources, Abbas intends to return control over the West Bank over to Israel in case of move/talks failure. This threat was used in the past and never utilized, in part because Abbas and other leaders are not that keen on letting go of their own perks, not sure things are different this time around.

As for getting further international recognition - de-facto, the Palestinians are already there. Most of the countries acknowledge them one way or another. Joining the ICC is less of a milestone on this front as is getting full membership on the UN. Both are not something done overnight and rarely under such conditions, but conceivable they could be carried through (barring a US veto on UNSC - interesting to see how the USA will act if put on the spot).

Point is what comes next? . Lets say Palestinian Unity government effort holds, Israeli government plays its part and refuses to talk, Palestine gets UN membership (with or without handing control over the West Bank to Israel, not sure how these two propositions go along together, though). How do things change for the Palestinians? Would Israel then cave in and agree to all Palestinian demands? Would the Fatah be able to remain in control of the West Bank in case Israel refuses to negotiate?

Could be wrong, but a lot of the actions and words evident after such rounds of hostilities are rather the same. Most seem to be posturing and aimed for the home crowd. Abbas needs to remain relevant, and this initiative serves - if somehow all goes as planned, he wins. If, more realistically, either Israel or Hamas shoots the initiative down, he still comes out ahead. People should not underestimate the level which domestic politics dominate foreign and security policy when it comes to both Israel and the Palestinians.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.613550

http://news.yahoo.com/palestinian-leader-hamas-caused-prolonged-war-142407698.html

[Morch]

Abbas should request a new UN resolution and request to revoke UN resolution 181.

UN resolution 181 never brought peace in the region.

Furthermore he should claim for justice at the ICC.

Was there any illusion that resolution 181 will bring peace between the sides? I do not believe the Brits were that naive. Not aware of a precedent for the UN revoking a status of a country, nor is it very likely that this will be it. Resolution 181 was accepted when a foreign power had military control of the area, which is hardly the case now. Even without obvious vetoes (I daresay not only the USA on this one), who will be interested in carrying it through? (Especially with things in the Middle East being what they are).

Mind that even if revoking resolution 181 would be a realistic option, it does not necessarily mean Palestinians getting much more than a resolution which states the 1967 lines as borders. Overall, it is a good move if Abbas was interested solely in aggravating the Israeli public in general (as opposed to other moves, which will be more irksome for right wing supporters), less so if there is any intention of actually solving things.

Joining the ICC is one thing, bringing things before the ICC another - again has to do with level of further animosity one intends on generating, and one's ultimate purpose. I suspect that a lot of Abass's moves are trolling, but doubt it is done just for the sake of it.

[Morch]

The U.N. voting to revoke that historic resolution (which would be vetoed of course) would do much more to delegitimize the U.N. than Israel. The UN's rabid and irrational anti-Israel bias is already well known and documented. It is not surprising that enemies of Israel's very existence would favor such an exercise in blatant hatred against the Jew of nations.

UN resolution 181 was a plan, not an international law.

UN can send troops in occupied territories and delegitimize the illegal Israeli settlers in the West Bank by a new UN resolution.

Nothing new for Israel : the list is long with previous resolutions.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_UN_resolutions_concerning_Israel_and_Palestine

In the worst case for Israel, Hamas can be legetimized as an occupied resistance instead of a random terrorist group.

The UN does not normally send troops to directly interfere in combat zones or where parties are not agreed on the UN troop presence. With the current UN peacekeeping force situation in the Israel-Syria border, it is doubtful there would be an aweful lot of willing and acceptable candidates, even if sides were agreed on this matter.

I guess some anti-Israel posters imagine a direct confrontation between UN troops and the IDF, but this is a highly unlikely situation.

Not sure how do the illegal settlements in the West Bank can be further de-legitimized with no one (other than the Israeli right wing) seeing them as legitimate.

As for Hamas being turned globally overnight from terrorist organization into freedom fighting resistance, also not very likely: With the way IS and AQ are going on in the region, international support for this sort of thing might not be overwhelming. Another distinct option under total breakdown of the PA is internal fighting amongst the Palestinians, not something new to them. If things ever come down to such dramatic climax as a revocation of resolution 181, the Palestinians would be better off (from an international support point of view) adopting a non-violence approach, rather than going for a local brand of the regional Islamic movements.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies deleted.

[Jingthing]

This poll sheds light on the internal Palestinian political weakness that Abbas faces in trying to lead in this way:

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Hamas-Haniyeh-would-trounce-Abbas-if-elections-held-today-Palestinian-poll-says-374297

According to Shikaki's poll, if the race were a three-way contest between Haniyeh, Abbas, and jailed Tanzim leader Marwan Barghouti, Haniyeh would still emerge as the winner with 48 percent. Barghouti garners 29 percent support, whereas Abbas finishes a distant third with just 19 percent.

...

When asked about their views of the two-state solution, 51 percent of Palestinians said they were opposed, while 49 percent said they supported it.

A majority – 53 percent – said it supported armed struggle against Israel, while just 20 percent said nonviolence was the best way to achieve statehood.

Edited September 3, 2014 by Jingthing

[Thorgal]

This poll sheds light on the internal Palestinian political weakness that Abbas faces in trying to lead in this way:

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Hamas-Haniyeh-would-trounce-Abbas-if-elections-held-today-Palestinian-poll-says-374297

According to Shikaki's poll, if the race were a three-way contest between Haniyeh, Abbas, and jailed Tanzim leader Marwan Barghouti, Haniyeh would still emerge as the winner with 48 percent. Barghouti garners 29 percent support, whereas Abbas finishes a distant third with just 19 percent.

...

When asked about their views of the two-state solution, 51 percent of Palestinians said they were opposed, while 49 percent said they supported it.

A majority – 53 percent – said it supported armed struggle against Israel, while just 20 percent said nonviolence was the best way to achieve statehood.

Poll of only 1270 Palestinians : how many % do they represent from the total Palestinian population who may vote ?

A Jewish newspaper describes the weakness of Abbas...

[boomerangutang]

(post edited for brevity)

Israel knows that after this 50-day war :

3. Hamas is more popular

Hamas looks less popular now, than it was before the recent conflict. Regardless, whatever its popularity (with Palestinians, Gazans), a large portion is probably due to strong-arm tactics of supporters. In Gaza, dissenting opinion is sometimes dealt with by a bullet to the skull. That's rather compelling. If I was stuck in Gaza, and a bunch of tough guys bullied me in to saying I support Hamas, I'd probably say 'yes' - rather than get beat up, or worse.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts deleted also a post with the post inside the quote box. Replies also deleted.

[Morch]

This poll sheds light on the internal Palestinian political weakness that Abbas faces in trying to lead in this way:

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Hamas-Haniyeh-would-trounce-Abbas-if-elections-held-today-Palestinian-poll-says-374297

According to Shikaki's poll, if the race were a three-way contest between Haniyeh, Abbas, and jailed Tanzim leader Marwan Barghouti, Haniyeh would still emerge as the winner with 48 percent. Barghouti garners 29 percent support, whereas Abbas finishes a distant third with just 19 percent.

...

When asked about their views of the two-state solution, 51 percent of Palestinians said they were opposed, while 49 percent said they supported it.

A majority – 53 percent – said it supported armed struggle against Israel, while just 20 percent said nonviolence was the best way to achieve statehood.

Poll of only 1270 Palestinians : how many % do they represent from the total Palestinian population who may vote ?

A Jewish newspaper describes the weakness of Abbas...

Polls are a generally acceptable ways of gauging public opinion, provided their methodology is sound.

Unless you are suggesting otherwise and got specific information, not sure what you're on about. Daresay you did not raise similar objections when polls more favorable to your own views were quoted.

The poll itself was carried out by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, and the story was reported by other media outlets.

http://www.pcpsr.org/en/node/489

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/02/us-mideast-gaza-poll-idUSKBN0GX14820140902

[Thorgal]

This poll sheds light on the internal Palestinian political weakness that Abbas faces in trying to lead in this way:

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Hamas-Haniyeh-would-trounce-Abbas-if-elections-held-today-Palestinian-poll-says-374297

According to Shikaki's poll, if the race were a three-way contest between Haniyeh, Abbas, and jailed Tanzim leader Marwan Barghouti, Haniyeh would still emerge as the winner with 48 percent. Barghouti garners 29 percent support, whereas Abbas finishes a distant third with just 19 percent.

...

When asked about their views of the two-state solution, 51 percent of Palestinians said they were opposed, while 49 percent said they supported it.

A majority – 53 percent – said it supported armed struggle against Israel, while just 20 percent said nonviolence was the best way to achieve statehood.

Poll of only 1270 Palestinians : how many % do they represent from the total Palestinian population who may vote ?

A Jewish newspaper describes the weakness of Abbas...

Polls are a generally acceptable ways of gauging public opinion, provided their methodology is sound.

Unless you are suggesting otherwise and got specific information, not sure what you're on about. Daresay you did not raise

similar objections when polls more favorable to your own views were quoted.

The poll itself was carried out by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, and the story was reported by other

media outlets.

Typically, news in short supply, and the news media publish fabricated and frivolous articles. Just like this one.

Again, how many % do these 1270 Palestinians represent from the total Palestinian population who may vote ?

Something like 0,5 % ?

Please point me where I didn't raise similar objections when polls more favorable to my own views were quoted.

Edited September 4, 2014 by Thorgal

[Morch]

This poll sheds light on the internal Palestinian political weakness that Abbas faces in trying to lead in this way:

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Hamas-Haniyeh-would-trounce-Abbas-if-elections-held-today-Palestinian-poll-says-374297

Poll of only 1270 Palestinians : how many % do they represent from the total Palestinian population who may vote ?

A Jewish newspaper describes the weakness of Abbas...

Polls are a generally acceptable ways of gauging public opinion, provided their methodology is sound.

Unless you are suggesting otherwise and got specific information, not sure what you're on about. Daresay you did not raise

similar objections when polls more favorable to your own views were quoted.

The poll itself was carried out by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, and the story was reported by other

media outlets.

Typically, news in short supply, and the news media publish fabricated and frivolous articles. Just like this one.

Again, how many % do these 1270 Palestinians represent from the total Palestinian population who may vote ?

Something like 0,5 % ?

Please point me where I didn't raise similar objections when polls more favorable to my own views were quoted.

News are not in short supply, and the reports are not "fabricated" - it is your claims which are frivolous.

The report is about a poll, and a poll is sample of the population, not a referendum. The methodology is quite standard, and generally accepted - or are your issues with polls a general proposition?

It would be impossible to show a post your did not post, rather, would you kindly post a similar rebuttal of yours to a post which quotes a favorable poll?

[Jingthing]

It is common knowledge and NOT NEWS that Abbas is politically weak among his own people. This poll is just a reflection/confirmation/evidence of something generally already known.

[Seastallion]

It is common knowledge and NOT NEWS that Abbas is politically weak among his own people. This poll is just a reflection/confirmation/evidence of something generally already known.

Ok, he's politically weak. Do you think he's the best option to go forward? If so, how can he be bolstered? If Israel wants peace, (and lets put aside that you have conceded that Netanyahu probably doesn't, lets just discuss theoretically the notion that Israel wants peace), If Abbas is the leader that will come to the table, why is Israel not supporting him?

[Ulysses G.]

If Abbas is the leader that will come to the table, why is Israel not supporting him?

Israel does support Abbas over Hamas, but that does not mean that they support every idea that he has. There are plenty of reasons not to trust him, including trying to get around treaties that the Palestinians have signed compelling both sides to deal with each other, instead of calling for an international conference or UN resolution.

The 1995 Interim Agreement states that Neither side shall initiate or take any step that will change the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip pending the outcome of the Permanent Status negotiations.

Edited September 4, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[Morch]

It is common knowledge and NOT NEWS that Abbas is politically weak among his own people. This poll is just a reflection/confirmation/evidence of something generally already known.

Ok, he's politically weak. Do you think he's the best option to go forward? If so, how can he be bolstered? If Israel wants peace, (and lets put aside that you have conceded that Netanyahu probably doesn't, lets just discuss theoretically the notion that Israel wants peace), If Abbas is the leader that will come to the table, why is Israel not supporting him?

If you accept that Israel is not Netanyahu, then things will be clearer (the move was denounced even by coalition partners, but being spineless as they are, probably won't go much beyond that unless provoked otherwise). Netanyahu and the right wing in Israel do not seem to be into making peace which involves meaningful compromises. Marginally preferring Abbas to the Hamas does not change that. Besides, as I tried to explain in many a post - the notion that Israeli governments run along well laid plans is a myth. This is especially true when concerning Netanyahu, and more so when domestic politics are involved.

During the fighting, the right wing stance (that is - coalition partners which are even more right wing than Netanyahu) was to call for IDF operation to intensify, while criticizing Netanyahu for not accepting their demands. This new move can be seen as either initiated by Netanyahu in order to bolster his right-wing image, or as an attempt by rival right-wing elements to secure gains, at a time when Netanyahu can ill afford to counter them. Bottom line, both amount to the same thing.

The poll itself contains many more items, and as many post-fighting polls, it does not bode well for chances of peace. It may be worthwhile to read all the result and see how messy things are (linked in previous post).

Abbas's standing and support were weak for years. He's simply not a very charismatic leader, his reign is still plagued with the same corruption issues as Arafat's (though to a lesser degree), and he has very little to offer Palestinians while the Israeli side is led by right-wing oriented governments. In my opinion, it is not that he is the best leader around or anything of the sort, just that the others would probably be worse. Israel can take actions that may bolster his support some, but whether this support will suffice for transforming him into a leader capable of pushing through hard and unpopular compromises is far from certain.

That said, there is little to choose from, if the aim is to advance chances for peace. As the premise is that current government in Israel is not keen on this, it will probably wobble along the same line - talk about the need to empower Abbas, even take a move which will help him some, only to be undone by something as stupid as the latest one.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies deleted.

Please stay on topic.

[Jingthing]

OK, we've established a correct consensus that Abbas is politically weak and a politically weak leader is going to have a great challenge pushing any kind of historic "peace" initiative if he doesn't have anywhere near majority support from his own people.

On that theme, who is stronger now?

Hamas of course.

Is the peaceful method more popular than the violence method?

Apparently not.

To wit:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/09/03/heres-what-really-happened-in-the-gaza-war-according-to-the-israelis/

What happens next?

The intelligence officer said it was clear — and he had the videotape from drones to prove it — that Hamas and the other factions fired their rockets from, and sometimes within, the courtyards of mosques, hospitals, cemeteries and schools.

According to the most recent polls, Hamas and its “military approach” aremore popular than ever among Palestinians.

The intelligence chief said Hamas is pragmatic but will not relinquish power in the Gaza Strip. “I think they want to govern in Judea and Samaria,” he said, using the Hebrew terms for the West Bank.

http://www.pcpsr.org/en/special-gaza-war-poll

Special Gaza War Poll

2 September 2014​

Gaza War ends with a victory for Hamas leading to a great increase in its popularity and the popularity of its approach of armed resistance: for the first time since 2006, Hamas wins parliamentary and presidential elections if they were to take place today while West Bankers support transferring Hamas’ approach to the West Bank

[Jingthing]

In keeping with the theme that the Abbas "plan" will be going nowhere ... the U.S. has definitely rejected it.

Surprise? No.

Abbas dispatched Erekat and General Intelligence Chief Majed Faraj to Washington to present the political initiative to Kerry and other US officials.

However, the official said that Washington has rejected Abbas's initiative, saying it was opposed to any unilateral move that could negatively impact the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/PA-says-US-rejected-Abbass-peace-plan-374491

[Seastallion]

OK, we've established a correct consensus that Abbas is politically weak and a politically weak leader is going to have a great challenge pushing any kind of historic "peace" initiative if he doesn't have anywhere near majority support from his own people.

On that theme, who is stronger now?

Hamas of course.

Is the peaceful method more popular than the violence method?

Apparently not.

We have established that the leadership of Israel doesn't want peace. So a weak PA (that is at least willing to come to the table) is moot. Israel will not talk.

[Seastallion]

In keeping with the theme that the Abbas "plan" will be going nowhere ... the U.S. has definitely rejected it.

Surprise? No.

Abbas dispatched Erekat and General Intelligence Chief Majed Faraj to Washington to present the political initiative to Kerry and other US officials.

However, the official said that Washington has rejected Abbas's initiative, saying it was opposed to any unilateral move that could negatively impact the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/PA-says-US-rejected-Abbass-peace-plan-374491

The way I read that is the US rejects it only on the grounds that it is unilateral. The US knows if Israel won't talk, then no peace plan is any use.

Or another way to read it is that the quote you made is not about a peace plan that was rejected......" to present the political initiative to Kerry " and "unilateral move that could negatively impact the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. "

[Ulysses G.]

OK, we've established a correct consensus that Abbas is politically weak and a politically weak leader is going to have a great challenge pushing any kind of historic "peace" initiative if he doesn't have anywhere near majority support from his own people.

On that theme, who is stronger now?

Hamas of course.

Is the peaceful method more popular than the violence method?

Apparently not.

We have established that the leadership of Israel doesn't want peace.

You mean that is what you would like to think.

Washington has rejected Abbas's initiative, because Abbas is trying to get around treaties that the Palestinians have signed compelling both sides to deal with each other, instead of calling for an international conference or UN resolution. The 1995 Interim Agreement states that neither side shall initiate or take any step that will change the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip pending the outcome of the Permanent Status negotiations.

[hard124get]

What I really don't get is that I don't hear from the Palestinian People. I do not believe that Hamas is the voice of the people.

If you took a poll I wonder what the people of Palestine would say . Fight with Israel or make peace. So far we have only heard from the leader and I do not think

this is the desires of the people.

Does a mother want her child in the front lines NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

We don't hear from the people of Palestine, because the Zionist-owned media will not allow the truth to come out.

[Ulysses G.]

What I really don't get is that I don't hear from the Palestinian People. I do not believe that Hamas is the voice of the people.

If you took a poll I wonder what the people of Palestine would say . Fight with Israel or make peace. So far we have only heard from the leader and I do not think

this is the desires of the people.

Does a mother want her child in the front lines NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

We don't hear from the people of Palestine, because the Zionist-owned media will not allow the truth to come out.

At least that is what the lunatic fridge like to pretend. Unfortunately, Hamas is the voice of the Palestinian people and polls show it.

Edited September 5, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[boomerangutang]

OK, we've established a correct consensus that Abbas is politically weak and a politically weak leader is going to have a great challenge pushing any kind of historic "peace" initiative if he doesn't have anywhere near majority support from his own people.

On that theme, who is stronger now? Hamas of course.

Is the peaceful method more popular than the violence method?

Apparently not.

We have established that the leadership of Israel doesn't want peace. So a weak PA (that is at least willing to come to the table) is moot. Israel will not talk.

If you have a weapon and you corner a man, he's going to get either more stalwart or start pleading for mercy. Neither side in the Israeli/Gaza conflict is pleading for mercy, though Palestinians were forced to accept a cease-fire because their people and buildings were getting destroyed daily. Currently, Israel is in a position of strength (militarily at least. Morally; up to debate). Israeli leadership is willing to talk, but not make big concessions - other than perhaps doing some prisoner releases. Neither will Palestinians make any meaningful concessions (main request: stop missiles being launched over the wall), so stalemate will continue. Another 65 years? Who knows.

[Thorgal]

Abbas is weak ?

If he wants to rebuild his country, he needs permission from Israel...

It's outragous that a country who just demolished 25000 houses is demanding that their construction industry benefit from rebuilding them at the expense of the international community.

http://www.euractiv.com/sections/development-aid-under-fire/eu-source-gaza-reconstruction-aid-made-israel-308169

Edited September 5, 2014 by Thorgal

[Scott]

Off-topic post deleted.