Ibish: "Against a One-State Solution"

Hussein Ibish writes in a guest commentary for Informed Comment

Last Thursday on Informed Comment, Juan Cole uttered a powerful cris de coeur about prospects for a two-state agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, echoing warnings by chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat that if Israeli colonization continues, Palestinians may switch to demanding equal rights in a single state. Such pessimism is not only justified, it is requisite given the difficulties facing the prospects for peace, and can only be intensified by a similarly despairing announcement by Pres. Abbas that, because of Israel's refusal move seriously towards peace, he would not seek another term in office.

Erekat's statement, while unusual, is hardly unprecedented from senior Palestinian and PLO figures. Similar "threats" to abandon the quest to end the occupation in favor of a single-state agenda have been issued several times in the past as I describe in my new book, What's Wrong with the One-State Agenda? In 2008, former Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei and other leading Palestinians, including the "Palestine Strategy Study Group," expressed similar views.

In contrast with the one-state rhetoric among pro-Palestinian activists in the West, which generally holds Palestinian independence to be both unachievable and undesirable, Palestinians in the occupied territories who raise this specter generally do so as a tactic designed to compel greater seriousness by Israel on negotiations and warn about the consequences of a failure to achieve a two-state agreement. Erekat's comments clearly reflected this. In his speech Abbas declared that he was personally fed up but that everything in his experience indicated that a two-state agreement is possible.

These two versions of one-state rhetoric may one day merge into a unified agenda, but for now they remain distinct phenomena, most clearly divided by their ultimate goal: Palestinian leaders still seek independence and an end to the occupation, aims that are angrily rejected as insufficient and even outrageous by many diasporic one-state advocates.

Under the present circumstances it seems most probable that if the strategy of the secular-nationalist forces in Palestine were to collapse or be abandoned, the main beneficiaries would not be one-state advocates. The real political contest among Palestinians is between the nationalists and the Islamists, and the declining fortunes of either almost axiomatically advances the interests of the other.

Even if Palestinians were somehow to abandon their long-standing national aim of independence, avoid their national movement becoming entirely dominated by Islamists, and adopt the goal of equal rights in a post-nationalist state, it is very hard to imagine that this would leave them in an improved strategic position.

A noted one-state advocate has accused me of suggesting an interview with the Atlantic website that "the one-state solution is bad because Jews don't want it." This is to misread not only my analysis but the fundamental political reality, which is extremely simple: a one-state solution will be impossible as long as an overwhelming or even a solid majority of Jewish Israelis don't want it. The added irony is that most one-state advocates have not only done nothing to try to create a message that can appeal to mainstream Israelis, they have crafted one that encourages the greatest possible fear and suspicion.

In reality, it's almost impossible to imagine a one-state "solution," although it's certainly possible to envisage a one-state outcome. The distinction is crucial: the second formulation recognizes the incredible amount of brutality, violence and mutual exhaustion that would be required for both parties to surrender their cherished national agendas to some formula for post-nationalist power-sharing in relatively equal numbers. Consider the violence of the past 60 years, without any real dent in the nationalist fervor of either party, and then try to imagine what would be required to actually get them to abandon these ideals.

One should be under no illusions that the final abandonment of a two-state agenda will give way to a campaign of nonviolent resistance, boycotts and sanctions that will somehow succeed in bringing Israel to its knees. The alternative to an agenda of negotiations is crystal clear: increasing conflict, violence and occupation that is increasingly dominated by religious fanatics on both sides. The religious right is well-positioned in both societies, ready to lead a battle to the death between bearded fanatics over holy places and the will of God.

We face a simple choice: either a slow, gradual and, yes, painful, inching towards a two-state agreement, or war, conflict and occupation into the foreseeable future, very possibly leading to a catastrophe. Despairing, giving up and walking away is too irresponsible for anyone with the best interests of Palestinians, Israelis and Americans at heart. This is an existentialist crisis we are facing, like Beckett's suicidal unnnamable: we can't go on, we'll go on.

Cries of despair are intellectually and morally justified and, perhaps, necessary, but the only rational policy for all responsible parties is to avoid calamity and continue to somehow try to find a way to make the only plausible peaceful solution work.

Hussein Ibish is a Senior Fellow for the American Task Force on Palestine and blogs at www. ibishblog. com.

End/ (Not Continued)

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Baradei says Inspectors found 'Nothing;' But Israeli Attack Plans not Tabled

Outgoing head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Muhammad Elbaradei, said that UN inspectors this week discovered "nothing to be worried about" at a new nuclear enrichment facility that is being built in a mountain near Qom. He added, "The idea was to use it as a bunker under the mountain to protect things. It's a hole in a mountain."

Nevertheless, Rupert Murdoch's Sky News is reporting that Israel is actively making plans to attack Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities. Here is the Sky News video:



France 24 reports on Iran's nuclear enrichment efforts:



End/ (Not Continued)

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Mahmoud Abbas Threatens to Step Down in Light of Ongoing Israeli Colonization of West Bank

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas says he wants to stand down and he declines to run in the upcoming Palestine Authority elections. The decision came in the wake of the US failure to convince the Israelis to halt colonization of the West Bank and Arab East Jerusalem. It also followed a series of embarrassing flip-flops by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who praised hard line right wing PM Netanyahu for his efforts in favor of the peace process. Even for a diplomatic statement, this tack is is a little embarrassing in its obsequiousness toward Netanyahu, who has undermined the peace process at every turn and rejects out of hand the US demand that he freeze settlements. Reactions of Arab allies of the US were sharp.

The USG Open Source Center paraphrase an article in al-Ray (Jordan) reacting to the Obama administration letting Netanyahu off the hook with regard to settling Jews in East Jerusalem (which often means expelling Palestinians from their homes):

'Amman Al-Ra'y in Arabic, a Jordanian daily of widest circulation; partially owned by the government, publishes an article by columnist and former Jordanian information minister Salih al-Qallab on page 48, in which Al-Qallab first quotes the statements made by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Morocco about the partial freeze of settlement activity [i.e. not frozen in Jerusalem.] Al-Qallab says that the Americans should understand that "no Palestinian official, either now or in the future, can enter into any negotiations while Jerusalem is excluded from these negotiations, especially since it is no longer possible to repeat the previous formulas of negotiation. The aim this time is the final-status issues, which have been delayed for more than 15 years and cannot be delayed now for a single emoment." Al-Qallab adds: "What the Americans do not know while dealing with this extremely sensitive issue is that Palestine, for the Arabs and Muslims, is Jerusalem, and that Jerusalem is the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. This is what makes Mahmud Abbas adopt this hard-line stand." '

Aljazeera English reports on Israeli confiscation of Palestinians' homes. The evictions are carried out with the full cooperation and encouragement of the Israeli government.



Aljazeera English reports on Mahmoud Abbas's refusal to run for the presidency of the Palestine Authority

in 2010.

Aljazeera English points out that the stance of Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration, that the Palestinians had to negotiate with the Israelis while the Israelis were stealing their land, lead Abbas to step down.



The USG Open Source Center translated remarks of chief PLO negotiator Saeb Erekat, Abbas's colleague:

' Erekat Critical of Clinton's Remarks on Settlements, Rejects US Guarantees
"Erekat Says: President Abbas Does Not Cling to Power, has Options -- Ma'an headline
Ma'an News Agency
Friday, November 6, 2009
Document Type: OSC Translated Text

Bethlehem, 5 November (Ma'an)-- Dr Saeb Erekat, head of the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department, has warnedthat the entire peace process is at a critical juncture and that the Palestineside is not short of options. He emphasized that there will be no negotiationswithout a cessation of settlement construction.

On statements that President Mahmud Abbas will not run for presidential elections, Erekat said: "The issueis not Abu-Mazin (Mahmud Abbas). The President is an ordinary citizen. The President makes every effort to achieve the hopes of his people. However, underthe present circumstances, if Israel continues its settlement activity and theUnited States does not compel Israel to stop settlement construction and resume the negotiations where they left off, the President does not cling to power. The president has options. Perhaps a moment will come when he speaks frankly to the people and questions the usefulness of elections and other things."

At a press conference at the premises of the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department in Al-Birah today, Erekat stressed that there are no compromise solutions when it comes to settlements. He considered US Secretary of State Hillary's backpedaling on her statement praising Israel for making "unprecedented" concessions on settlement construction as "not enough."

Erekat said: "If the US administration cannot compel Israel to stop settlements for natural growth in Jerusalem, the commitment to the establishment of a Palestinian state within 24 months remains mere talk." He stressed that the US administration must declare Israel the obstructionist side if it does not commit to the road map obligations. He pointed out that the negotiations did not start this year,but reached a very advanced stage in December 2008 between Abbas and Olmert. He added: "We demand that the negotiations resume where they left off." He continued: "The US administration calls for the restart of the negotiations because it knows it cannot obtain a commitment from Netanyahu that the negotiations will resume where they left off."

Erekat expressed surprise by Netanyahu's statement that a cessation of settlement construction is a new Palestinian condition, saying this shows Netanyahu's disregard for the roadmap.

Erekat explained that Netanyahu's plan to build 3,000 new settlement housing units, the exclusion of Jerusalem (from a settlement freeze), and the continuation of public buildings and infrastructure projects, means for those who say that Netanyahu's stance is"unprecedented" that in 2010 and 2011 the size of settlements will be more than in 2008 and 2009 because the size of settlements in Jerusalem is 37 percent of the size of settlements in the rest of the West Bank.

Erekat said: "Exclusion of Jerusalem (from a settlement freeze) means the continuing political pillaging of Jerusalem and the continuing settlement construction in it to achieve Netanyahu's goal of increasing the number of settlers in East Jerusalem to 28,000 by 2011." He pointed out there is an Israeli plan to reduce the number of Arabs in Jerusalem, who now constitute 32 percent of the number of the population in Jerusalem, to 12 percent by 2020. He also pointed out that a temporary freeze on settlement construction, a la Netanyahu, willincrease the number of settlements by 2.8 percent and will increase the number of settlement housing units in the West Bank and Jerusalem by 28 percent.

Erekat held the Israeli government responsible for the non-resumption of negotiations, even if tries to twist facts, as usual.

Erekat called on the Arabs who want US guarantees (before Israel and the PA resume negotiations) "not to search for a fig leaf because we do not need a fig leaf. The US administration offered us guarantees in which it says that settlements are illegal and that itrejects the annexation of Jerusalem. In spite of the moral importance of these guarantees, from the practical point of view they are not cashable. We want the US administration to compel the Israeli government to implement its obligations because the Palestinian side has implemented its obligations." . . .

On elections, Erekat emphasized that the Palestinians have other options. He pointed out that Israel is obstructing the peace process and HAMAS is opposing elections. Hecalled on HAMAS and all those who stand behind it to side with the interests of the Palestinian people and to sign the reconciliation paper without conditions.He said: "We are not short of options. If the two-state option is excluded, there is the option of a one-state, as happened in South Africa. The situation in the West Bank is worse than it was in South Africa."

(Description of Source: Bethlehem Ma'an News Agency in Arabic -- Website of independent, leading Palestinian news agency; funded by the Dutch and Danish Foreign Ministries; URL: http://www.maannews.net/)

End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Right Wing & Settler Press in Israel Denounce Peace Process, Goldstone

The USG Open Source Center translates or paraphrases statements from the right wing and settler Israeli press

Highlights: Review of Israeli Right-Wing, Settlement Commentaries 16 Oct-3 Nov 09
The following are highlights of reports in right-wing and settlement news websites carried by the Israeli media between 16 October and 3 November.
Israel -- OSC Summary
Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Posters advertising an event in memory of ultra-nationalist rabbi Meir Kahane have appeared throughout Jeursalem recently. (Jerusalem Post photo, caption) Peace Process Is 'Final Solution' Perpetrated by Knesset 'Judenrat' Cartoon by Ronny Gordon, posted on Arutz Sheva on 31 Oct, shows Clinton searching for the peace process, while the peace dove lies liefelessly nearby.

In an 800-word commentary entitled "A Judenrat, Right-Wing or Left-Wing, Is Still the Judenrat!" published 17 October on the Kahana Hay website, Y Rosen writes: "War is being waged in the information arena. They are trying to impose a suicidal path on the Jews, to talk them into an organized march into the gas chambers of the 'peace process.' It is noteworthy that the Israeli Government (regardless of whether right-wing or left-wing) has adopted all the functions of the Judenrat on this issue and is openly pursuing a defeatist course. The construction of yet another, 23d Arab state on the territory of 0.1% of the territory of the Middle East has only one purpose: the Final Solution. Therefore, everyone who is talking about more concessions, who sits at the negotiation table with terrorists, or who panders to Muslim expansion is the enemy! The only thing that should be discussed is an exchange of refugees, specifically: the removal of Arabs and their descendents from the territory of Israel, where they suffer and blow themselves up, to the 22 Arab states! The conflict will be forever resolved!" "If you want to remain among the living, form your own forces of self-rule! Do not lend support to the Judenrat and understand: They are your enemies! The most dangerous wolves are wolves in sheep's clothing. The most dangerous SS officers are the ones who escaped to Israel with the documents of their victims and are sitting in the Knesset! By participating in elections, you are legitimizing the system of lawlessness in the country!" "No mandate for the Judenrat! Boycott the villains!" (Kahana Hay in Russian -- Website of Rabbi Me'ir Kahane's followers; URL: http://kahane-hi.info)
Cont'd (click below or on "comments")


World 'Hatred' of Israel Promoted by Leaders' Willingness To Make Sacrifices for Peace Gary Cooperberg's 21 October commentary, entitled "Why do the Nations Hate Israel?" argues: "The Jewish people is physical proof of the existence of G-d. It is this very fact which causes so many to hate us." "When the leaders of Israel seek to make Israel like all of the other nations and insist that we are not a product of Divine intervention, they only encourage those who wish Israel would just disappear. No other country in the world ever compromised on its very existence. No other country in the world would as much as suggest building a new county upon its own soil, especially for enemies who seek its destruction. Our leaders have fallen into a trap of their own making by engaging in a so-called 'peace process' which, in fact, is a process of self destruction."

"Yet, despite our hapless leaders, and despite the overwhelming number of enemies who actively seek our destruction, the Jewish State continues not merely to exist, but to grow and thrive! This too is clear proof of Divine intervention. There is simply no other explanation. Yet most choose not to see. They prefer to continue their denial of our Creator. As such their hatred for the Jewish State grows and is encouraged by the willingness of our leaders to 'make sacrifices for peace.'

"No power on Earth can destroy Israel. Those who seek her destruction will themselves be destroyed. The only genuine peace process is the one leading to Biblical Redemption which the rebirth of the Jewish nation upon her ancient soil clearly portends. Those who stand against logic by standing with the tiny Jewish State for Biblical, not political, reasons will survive. Those who don't won't. The Exile is coming to an end. It cannot co-exist with Redemption. Jews have an opportunity to express their faith in G-d by coming home now. No one knows how long that opportunity will last before the choice is taken away and either they will escape from an unwelcome Exile, or perish within it." (Hebron A Voice From Hebron in English -- Website operated by Qiryat Arba Yeshiva spokesman Gary Cooperberg, representing right-wing settler views; URL: http://www.projectshofar.org)

Judaism-Based Policies To Be Israel's 'Lifeline' Moshe Feiglin's commentary, entitled "The Land of Israel in Exchange for Goldstone," posted on the Jewish Leadership' s website on 22 October, says: There is something positive that is coming out of the Goldstone debacle. The State of Israel has its back to the wall and is being forced to re-think its basic assumptions. The 'normalcy' idea is officially bankrupt. The commentators and pundits are still attempting to blame the IDF or Israel's diplomatic efforts. 'We should have cooperated with Goldstone,' they say. But here and there, we already see individual journalists, like Ari Shavit in Ha'aretz, who at least understand that the problem is not tactical, but rather the essential negation of Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state.
"Understandably, the solutions that they suggest are the very same 'political processes' that have brought us to this crisis. Their horizons are as broad as an ant's. But as the crisis continues, wider and wider circles in Israeli society will begin to listen to the voices outside the media bubble. Policies that base their justice on Judaism will become Israel's lifeline." (Ginot Shomron Jewish Leadership in Hebrew -- Website of Jewish Leadership movement, led by Likud member Moshe Feiglin; URL: http://he.manhigut.org) Israel 'on Brink of Annihilation,' Can Win by Losing Hope in 'Earthly Friends'

Cartoon by Roni Gordon, posted on Arutz Sheva on 24 October, shows the HAMAS bull goring PA leader Abbas.

Samson Blinded

features a commentary entitled "Iran or Armageddon?" on 24 October, asserting: "In the past decades, history has continually repeated the same story with Jews, as if to teach us a lesson. First, we had a carbon copy of Exodus: the Promised Land lay open and European Jews refused to leave for it. Just as 4/5 refused to leave Egypt and perished, a similar proportion died in Europe. Only the Hebrews hardened by decades of roaming the Sinai desert entered the land; the Israeli pioneers were likewise different from the Exile type of Jews. Like in Egypt, our murderers and oppressors were ultimately ravaged. Both times, we were a step from total annihilation: The first time it was the Pharaoh's order to kill male babies, and later the standoff between the Egyptian army and the Jewish crowd at the Reed Sea shore; the next time it was the Holocaust.

"Two years after the slaughter, Jews still refused to build a Jewish state, relying rather on socialist idolatry; and they were slapped with the 1947--1948 war of survival. In 1967, the entire nation again appeared in danger of annihilation: it had been conveniently gathered from all corners of the earth so that Syrians and Egyptians could easily eliminate it. In both wars, Jews won only after they lost hope in any earthly friends: the US arms embargo in 1947 and arm-twisting in 1967 assured their annihilation.

"Now here comes Ahmadinejad, eerily similar to his German counterpart: a clown, a charismatic leader, a gifted speaker, completely irrational, and openly professing his genocidal aims. The world wonders what he has in mind, refusing to listen to his clear words. Iran strives for regional dominance, perhaps world dominance, as it builds Shiite beachheads even in the Far East and Africa. Iran symbolically picked up where the Germans left off: at creating a nuclear bomb.

"Again, Jews are on the brink of annihilation with the whole world against us: no one supports our strike on Iran. We can win this round by losing all hope in our earthly friends." (Samson Blinded in English -- Website operated by "Obadiah Shoher," pen name for a USSR-born "veteran politician" calling for action against Arabs and the Israeli left and citing Rabbi Kahana as a model; URL: http://samsonblinded.org) Obama 'Unaffected by Demonic Evil,' Believes He Can Make Ahmadinezhad 'Mirror Image of His Own Amorphous Self' Prof Paul Eidelberg 26 October commentary, entitled "Mirror-Imaging: What Does Obama See in Ahmadinezhad?" expounds on Iran President Ahmadinezhad's actions and sums up: "This is the Ahmadinejad that was allowed entry in the United States to address the United Nations--a venue for diseased and decadent minds. Ahmadinejad is one of the most admired leaders of Islamdom. He is the patron of Hezbollah and Hamas. An obtuse judge in South Africa -- I have other names for him -- did not know that Israel's war in Gaza, and previously in Lebanon, was actually a war that Israel alone has waged against of Iran.
"To conclude this discussion of Ahmadinejad, I must link him to Barack Obama. Year after year, Obama heard his preacher say 'God damn America.' This did not offend him. Nor was he offended by Ahmadinejad's imprecation "Death to America." Alas, Americans have elected a president who does not love America or its Founding Fathers, who is fond of disparaging America abroad, who tries to befriend America's enemies, above all Ahmadinejad. Obama's hatred of America has been confirmed by newly released writings of his from Columbia University. But this is not all.

"As I pointed out at the beginning of the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama has been tainted by the university-bred doctrine of moral relativism. Hence he is intellectually and emotionally unaffected by demonic evil. Moreover, by denying objective moral standards, relativists readily succumb to egoism or arrogance -- the arrogance of ignorance. This is why Obama believes he can make Ahmadinejad, a necrophiliac, a mirror image of his own amorphous self!" (Jerusalem Foundation for Constitutional Democracy in English -- Website of right-wing group led by Professor Paul Eidelberg, promoting a constitution based on Jewish principles, electoral and judicial reforms, and a free-market economy; URL: http://www.foundation1.org)

Temple Mount, Not Goldstone Will Restore Israel's Legitimacy Moshe Feiglin's 29 October commentary, entitled "From the Temple Mount to Goldstone and Back," asks: "From where do we draw our moral justification? What is the point that, in its absence, our right to exist as a sovereign nation in our Land comes into question? 'He who rules the Mount rules the Land,' wrote the poet of rebuke and faith, Uri Tzvi Greenberg. When the State of Israel descended from the Temple Mount and gave it to the Moslem wakf immediately after its liberation, it charted the course to Goldstone."

"The encouraging part of this story is that those who understand the source of the problem also know how to deal with the Goldstone Report. A commission of inquiry will not restore Israel's moral justification. But a house of worship for Jews on the Temple Mount will." 'Entire Army' Filling 'Whims' of 'Leftist Politicians,' Do 'Work of the Enemy' A 29 October commentary by Rabbi Sholom Dov Volpo of SOS, entitled "Cut Off the Army Away From Politics? Now You Remembered?" charges: "After the two dear soldiers were sentenced to 20 days of detention (for protesting the Gaza disengagement at a military ceremony), the Chief of Staff announced that this matter would not be tolerated, that 'the army must disconnect from politics.' But the ears of the glorious commander apparently do not hear what he himself was talking about. An entire army is mobilized to fill the whims of a few leftist politicians. Instead of protecting the people of Israel and country, they do the work of the enemy, and expel Jews from the inheritance of their fathers." (Zefat Our Land of Israel in Hebrew -- Website of right-wing Habad group acting against territorial concessions, led by prominent rabbis and affiliated with National Union party; URL: http://www.sos-israel.com)

Palestinian State Without Final Status Accord To Augment Region's Instability Dr Aaron Lerner's "weekly commentary," entitled "Palestinian State Without Final Status Agreement Recipe For Disaster," disseminated on 29 October, maintains: "Who would gain from the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state before an agreement is reached on final status issues? President Shimon Peres claims that this will somehow promote peace and stability, but he doesn't offer much substance to his argument beyond a 'best case assumption' that things will be so good for the Palestinians when they have a sovereign state that they will bend over backwards to behave themselves.

"This is a pretty insulting take on the will and determination of the Palestinians to achieve their aspirations. It doesn't require much imagination to come up with a Palestinian plan of action to exploit Palestinian sovereignty to facilitate increasing security and other pressures against the Jewish State. And this with most of the world 'understanding' if not downright accepting and even applauding the argument that the Palestinians had every right to continue with their 'struggle against the occupation' given that final borders and other key issues had yet to be agreed upon.

"Israel's enemies would come to the aid of sovereign Palestine on a scale magnitudes greater than current clandestine operations. Israel's friends would counsel the Jewish State to show more 'flexibility' and accept various Palestinian demands, in order to bring peace, arguing that 'after going so far and making so much progress' (aka concessions) it would be irresponsible for Israel to jeopardize this by taking a 'hard line.'

"All this while Israeli security operations would be subject to even greater international review, criticism and even sanctions as they are carried out within sovereign Palestine. And let's not forget that a sovereign state is a sovereign state even if it should violate the conditions under which it was formed.

"When Mr. Peres makes this proposal he shows himself to be more an anarchist than a diplomat. And the last thing we need in this region is to add to its instability." (Kfar Saba Independent Media Review & Analysis -- Website of Dr Aaron Lerner, right-leaning analyst of Arab-Israeli relations; URL: http://www.imra.org.il) MK: Foreign Workers Should Be Deported To Preserve State's Jewish Character A 30 October commentary by MK Ya'aqov Katz, the National Union Party leader, published in Arutz Sheva Online under the title "Deporting Illegals," says: "The status of the children of the foreign workers who have swamped Israel's shores legally and illegally is only one aspect of a complex, growing problem exacerbated by the infiltration of fleeing refugees and illegal transients who find their way to our already beleaguered country. This problem is reaching crisis proportions and therefore was the subject of a heated meeting last week at the Knesset Committee that was created to deal with the issue."

"Behind the battle to keep foreign workers and their children here are left wing groups who wish to turn Israel into a 'land of all its citizens,' that is, not specifically a Jewish homeland. The high fertility rate of National Religious and Haredi families has galvanized them into action. We who see Israel as the land of the Jewish People must act as well. This does not in any way negate the natural, humanitarian values of our people, but is simply a way to ensure that this country, earned with blood and tears, continues to be what it was created to be." UNESCO Acting as 'Arab League' An unattributed 31 October commentary on the website of One Jerusalem, entitled "United Nations Agency Boosts Arab Claims to Jerusalem," charges: "If one needed any more proof that UNESCO is an Arab League you can just read the statement that Jerusalem was chosen to highlight the Palestinian cause.

"UNESCO, which is charged with preserving historic sites should be protesting the Muslim campaign to rid the Temple Mount of archaeological evidence that Solomon's Temple existed. Their destruction of precious materials on the Temple Mount is greater than the Taliban destroying the Buddhas in Afghanistan. But while the world condemned the Taliban destruction the world is silent when the Muslims destroy Jewish and Christian History." (One Jerusalem in English -- Website of right-wing Israeli-US group seeking to keep Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty, funded by donations; URL: http://www.onejerusalem.org http://www.onejerusalem.org )



For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Erekat Sees One-State Solution if Settlements are not Halted

Saeb Erekat, chief of the Palestine Liberation Organization Steering Committee, said Wednesday that Palestine Authority president Mahmoud Abbas should be frank with the Palestinian people and admit to them that there is no possibility of a two-state solution given continued Israeli colonization of the West Bank.

It is morally and ethically unconscionable to leave millions of Palestinians in a condition of statelessness, in which they have no rights (Warren Burger defined citizenship as the 'right to have rights' as my colleague Margaret "Peggy" Sommers pointed out in her new book). Therefore, if there isn't going to be a 2-state solution, there will have to be a one-state solution, in which Israel gives citizenship to the Palestinians. (As it is, 20% of Israelis are Palestinian Arabs and that proportion will grow to 33% by 2030 if they are not expelled by sometime Moldavian night club bouncer and now foreign minister of Israel, Avigdor Lieberman.)

Aljazeera English has a video interview with Saree Makdisi on Erekat's statement:



The Israeli colonies in the West Bank are actively encouraged by the Israeli government. Haaretz reported last winter on a hitherto secret database on the settlements kept by the Israeli government:

' An analysis of the data reveals that, in the vast majority of the settlements - about 75 percent - construction, sometimes on a large scale, has been carried out without the appropriate permits or contrary to the permits that were issued. The database also shows that, in more than 30 settlements, extensive construction of buildings and infrastructure (roads, schools, synagogues, yeshivas and even police
stations) has been carried out on private lands belonging to Palestinian West Bank residents. . .

the settlements in which massive construction has taken place on private Palestinian lands. Entire neighborhoods built without permits or on private lands are inseparable parts of the settlements. The sense of dissonance only intensifies when you find that municipal offices, police and fire stations were also built upon and currently operate on lands that belong to Palestinians. '

The USG Open Source Center translated some of what Erekat said in an interview with Al-Hayat published on Sunday:

' Erekat: Difficult Meeting

In his turn, Erekat has stressed to Al-Hayah that the meeting with Clinton was "frank and difficult." Erekat added that Abbas insisted that if the US Administration wanted to resume the peace process, then it would have to compel Israel to halt the settlements, including the natural growth, and to start the negotiations from where they stopped in 2008. Erekat added: "It is very clear that the US side has only achieved from Israel stances that reject its commitment to halt the settlements, and hence the US Administration, as chairman of the International Quartet, has to reveal the side that refuses and hinders the launch of the peace process, namely Israel."

Erekat continued: "If the US Administration cannot compel Israel to halt the construction of settlements, who will believe that it will be able to compel Israel to withdraw to the borders of 4 June 1967, to withdraw from Eastern Jerusalem, and to resolve the issue of the refugees according to the UN resolutions, with Resolution No. 194 at their forefront?"

Erekat stressed that Abbas, in his meeting with Clinton, reiterated his rejection of "the Palestinian state with interim borders," and also rejected Netanyahu's proposals of constructing 3,000 housing units in the settlements, and excluding Jerusalem from any agreement on the settlements; he said "this is rejected chapter and verse."

Erekat attributed the difficulty in yesterday's meeting between Abbas and Clinton to the Israeli stances rejecting the implementation of its commitments stipulated by the "Road Map." Erekat stressed that the US Administration would have to reveal the side that hinders the resumption of the negotiations.

In reply to a question by Al-Hayah about whether Clinton exerted yesterday any pressure on Abbas, Erekat said: The issue has nothing to do with pressure, but with interests. He pointed out that President Obama, in his meeting with Abbas in May 2009, described the establishment of an independent Palestinian State within 24 months as "US higher interest."

Erekat added: "The United States has 230,000 soldiers in the region. If it thinks that it can solve the problems through the use of Marines and through wars, then it is completely mistaken." Erekat stressed: This region needs to drain the quagmire of the Israeli occupation as an introduction to security and stability. He continued: "Here, we are talking about a system of interests. We have shown all possible preparations to fulfill all our commitments, but the Israeli side has not yet recognized its commitments." '

I think the whole thing is over with. I can't see a viable Palestinian state in the West Bank as it is now configured, and I can't imagine the Netanyahu government halting settlements.


End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Protests on Anniversary of Embassy Hostage-Taking; Khamenei Complains about Obama's Negotiating Style

The Khamenei regime in Iran commemorated the taking of US embassy personnel hostage on Wednesday, with thousands of its supporters taking to the streets. But according tot he BBC, dissidents who dispute the legitimacy of last June's presidential election staged counter-rallies. The Iranian Revolutionary Guards stepped in to disperse these protests, using tear gas. Some reports say that the authorities even fired on the protesters and eyewitnesses report seeing people covered with blood..

I received this message on Facebook re: Nov. 3: "9:20Am Tehran time --huge crowds of people in TEHRAN- SHIRAZ-ISFAHAN ......coming out on the streets ---BREAKING NEWS---ANTI ISLAMIC REP. DEMONSTRATION-------martial LAW-rev. guards on streets now"

The reports are that the protests are not limited to Tehran, then, but broke out in other cities-- Shiraz, Isfahan, Rasht, etc.

AP is saying that 2,000 students confronted security forces outside Tehran University.

The protesters are being very clever, in tying their rallies to the anti-US hostage-taking of 1980-81. That break with the international world system, led by the US, is the foundation of the Khomeinist republic, which rejects American hegemony. The dissidents are rallying in honor of the same moment, but are resisting neo-authoritarianism, implicitly likening the government of Khamenei to that of the shah. While Khamenei may have bragging rights on his anti-imperial record, his regime is not less internally repressive than that of the shah. The dissidents are cleverly refocusing the debate on the domestic sphere rather than the international, where the regime has more popularity.

The Guardian has an hour-by-hour account of the events, with video and twitter maps.

This is a video of students protesting in the northern city of Rasht



Meanwhile, here are some excerpts from the USG Open Source Center translation of Khamenei's remarks on the anniversary of the hostage-taking (a move he supported at the time).

Iranian Supreme Leader Speaks on Eve of Anniversary of US Embassy Siege
Address by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamene'i at a meeting with students and pupils ahead of Iran's Pupil's Day, marking the anniversary of the seizure of the American embassy in Tehran on 4 November 1979 -- recorded
Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran Radio 1
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Document Type: OSC Translated Text


(Khamene'i) In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.

I would like to welcome all you young ones, students, pupils and families of martyrs. The day of 13 Aban (4 November) has been officially named as the day to fight Global Arrogance. . .


The first issue to be addressed by your sense of discernment is what is this issue of Global Arrogance that one needs to combat? Global Arrogance means that there is a certain power in the world, or there are powers in this world, which look at themselves and find that they have financial and armed capabilities and propaganda means. In this way, they permit themselves to interfere in a proprietorial way in the domestic affairs of other countries and nations. This is what Arrogance means; the spirit of hegemony.

This, in our country and before the Revolution, manifested itself in quite an obvious way. In other words, in this vast country America had sunk its claws into the body of this nation which has such a rich history and a great past and had done so in a most (Globally) Arrogant fashion. It interfered in the fundamental affairs of the country at that time.
The reason for this was that the rulers of the country were corrupt. They had no popular base and they wanted a base of support, so they looked to America to provide them with that support.

America, of course, does not give anything for free to anyone. Providing support to the rulers carried with it the cost that the Americans would interfere in our affairs.

In the concluding years of the Pahlavi Dynasty things were even uglier than that. It was no longer a question of going to America (to receive instructions); the ambassadors of Great Britain or America used to go to the Shah's palace. Act in this way (they used to say) on the issue of oil, act in that way in international relations, act in such and such a way with your nation, act in this way with the combatants. This is the way they used to issue commands to the Shah.

And the Shah accepted this. Of course, when the head of a nation is so weak and hopeless and so subservient to the will of others, then you can rest assured what that situation really means. This was the situation of our country and this is what Arrogance means.

America is a Globally Arrogant power in the real sense of the word. this is not something that just concerns us, rather it is something that pertains to the whole world.

It is a matter that relates to the world of Islam. The Americans have an Arrogant approach towards everyone in the world. . .

The Japanese have not been able to dismantle US bases on their soil despite their technological advances. They have military bases there and they tyrannize the people. The newspapers have reported, as have news agencies, that rape and other violations occur there. In South Korea there are still (American) military bases. In Iraq the American objective is to build bases there and to settle there for 50 or 100 years.

In Afghanistan, a country from where if they manage to install their bases, they can have control over countries of South West Asia as well as Russia and China and India and Iran -- there they are making concerted efforts to build bases. Such is the meaning of Arrogance.

Through uprooting the puppet regime of Pahlavi, the nation of Iran expelled America from this country. Of course, the Americans could, after the Revolution, have come to their senses and accepted that this nation is such a powerful one. . .

Their embassy became a center of conspiracy. It became a nest of spies. It became a center for suspicious contacts aimed at compromising this person or that in order to bring down the Islamic Republic.

A US [Secretary of Defence] once said what has always been in the heart of the Americans; he said we must eradicate the Iranian nation. Do you see now; eradicating the Iranian nation.

They said they want to eradicate the nation of Iran, not the government of Iran and not the Islamic Republic. It understood quite well that the Islamic Republic means the nation the whole nation of Iran; this was their method. Whatever they could do to advance this policy they did so. . .

Well, the very new US president has said nice thing. He has given us many verbal and written messages, and said: "Let's turn the page and create a new situation. Let's cooperate with each other in resolving world problems." Well, we said that we do not want to prejudge. We said that we will wait and see how they act. They have said that they want to create a change. Let us wait and see this change. On 1 Farvardin (21 March 09) in Mashhad I said that if they extend to us an iron fist covered with a velvet glove, we will not shake it. I gave this warning there.

Eight months have passed since then. During this time, what we have witnessed is completely the opposite of what they have been saying and claiming. On the face of things they say let us negotiate. But alongside this they threaten us and say that if these negotiations do not reach a desirable result, they will do this and that. Do you call this negotiation? This is like the relationship between a wolf and a lamb which as the late Imam (Khomeyni) said we do not want such relations. (They say) Let us discuss around the negotiating table on such and such issue, for example the nuclear issue; however the precondition is that the negotiation should lead to such and such results. For example, the country should stop its nuclear activities. If it does not reach that result then they threaten that they will do such and such.

. . . When they speak Arrogantly to a nation and use threats to force issues -- saying, if you do not do such and such a thing, this or will would happen -- then this results in our nation responding, and saying we shall resist.

What the Islamic Republic wants is not beyond its logical rights. The Islamic Republic seeks its independence, freedom, national interests and advancement in science and technology. These are the rights of this nation. If anyone assaults these rights, the Iranian nation will confront them wholeheartedly and will bring them to their knees.
(Chants of: "God is great", "Khamene'i is the leader" and other indistinct slogans)

The day that America abandons its arrogant policies, the day that it stops its irrational interference in the affairs of other nations and behaves like any other government, then it will be a government similar to others. However, as long as the Americans have a covetous approach, intending to get back to Iran, renewing the past, changing history and turning the time back in order to dominate our country, they will not be able to force our nation to retreat. Let them know this.

They should not pin their hopes on agitation and what happened after the (12-June presidential) election. The Islamic Republic is more powerful and much more deep-rooted than those (incidents).

The Islamic Republic has seen much more difficult incidents and has managed to overcome them all. . .

(Description of Source: Tehran Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran Radio 1 in Persian -- state-run radio)

End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Mueller on the Zazi Case: "This is It?"

John Mueller, Author of Atomic Obsession: Nuclear Alarmism from Hiroshima to Al-Qaeda, writes a guest op-ed for IC:

"Since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001," notes the New York Times with considerable understatement, "senior government officials have announced dozens of terrorism cases that on close examination seemed to diminish as legitimate threats."

Terrorism analysts and officials triumphantly claimed that the case of Najibullah Zazi, arrested last September, is different. They call it the "most serious" terrorism plot uncovered in the United States since 2001 and one that elevates the domestic terrorism threat to a "new magnitude." Bruce Riedel, an Obama terrorism adviser, proclaimed on the Lehrer NewsHour on October 16 that the plot was evidence that "al-Qaeda was trying to carry out another mass-casualty attack in the United States" like 9/11 and that the group continues to pose a threat to the country that is "existential."

This, then, was the big one.

However, assuming all the information put out by the government about the Zazi plot is accurate, our existence is unlikely to be expunged anytime soon.

Recalls his step-uncle affectionately, Zazi is "a dumb kid, believe me." A high school dropout, Zazi mostly worked as doughnut peddler in Lower Manhattan, barely making a living. Somewhere along the line, it is alleged, he took it into his head to set off a bomb and traveled to Pakistan where he received explosives training from al-Qaeda and copied nine pages of chemical bombmaking instructions onto his laptop. FBI Director Robert Mueller asserted in testimony on September 30 that this training gave Zazi the "capability" to set off a bomb.

That, however, seems to be a substantial overstatement--not unlike the Director's 2003 testimony assuring us that, although his agency had yet to identify an al-Qaeda cell in the U.S., such unidentified entities nonetheless presented "the greatest threat," had "developed a support infrastructure" in the country, and were able and intended to inflict "significant casualties in the US with little warning."

An overstatement because, upon returning to the United States, Zazi allegedly spent the better part of a year trying to concoct the bomb he had supposedly learned how to make. In the process, he, or some confederates, purchased bomb materials using stolen credit cards, a bone-headed maneuver guaranteeing that red flags would go up about the sale and that surveillance videos in the stores would be maintained rather than routinely erased.

However, even with the material at hand, Zazi still apparently couldn't figure it out, and he frantically contacted an unidentified person for help several times. Each of these communications was "more urgent in tone than the last," according to court documents.

Clearly, if Zazi was able eventually to bring his alleged aspirations to fruition, he could have done some damage, though, given his capacities, the person most in existential danger was surely the lapsed doughnut peddler himself.

But if this is as "serious" as terrorism is likely to get in the United States, one might be led to wondering if our anxieties about terrorism--the key, or even sole, reason for extending the war in Afghanistan according to President Obama and his special envoy to the area, Richard Holbrooke--are not a bit overwrought.

In testimony in 2007, Director Mueller, who, despite his earlier bravado, has yet to uncover a true al-Qaeda sleeper cell, suggested that "We believe al-Qaeda is still seeking to infiltrate operatives into the U.S. from overseas." But even that may not be true. Since 9/11, well over a billion foreigners have been admitted to the United States legally even as many others have entered illegally. Even if border security was so good that 90 percent of al-Qaeda's operatives were turned away or deterred from trying to enter, some should have made it in--and some of those, it seems reasonable to suggest, would have been picked up by law enforcement by now.

It follows that any terrorism problem within the United States principally derives from homegrown people like Zazi, often isolated from each other, who fantasize about performing dire deeds. Penn State’s Michael Kenney has interviewed dozens of officials and intelligence agents and analyzed court documents, and finds homegrown Islamic militants to be operationally unsophisticated, short on know-how, prone to make mistakes, poor at planning, and severely hampered by a limited capacity to learn. Another study documents the difficulties of network coordination that continually threaten operational unity, trust, cohesion, and the ability to act collectively. And the popular notion these characters have the capacity to steal or put together an atomic bomb seems, to put it mildly, as fanciful as some of the terrorists' schemes.

By contrast, the image projected by the Department of Homeland Security continues to be of an enemy that is "relentless, patient, opportunistic, and flexible," shows "an understanding of the potential consequence of carefully planned attacks on economic transportation, and symbolic targets," seriously threatens "national security," and could inflict "mass casualties, weaken the economy, and damage public morale and confidence." That description may fit some terrorists--the 9/11 hijackers among them. But not the vast majority, including the hapless Zazi.


Author Bio

John Mueller, author of Atomic Obsession: Nuclear Alarmism from Hiroshima to Al-Qaeda, which has just been published by Oxford University Press, is professor of political science at Ohio State University. His previous books include Overblown: How Politicians and the Terrorism Industry Inflate National Security Threats and Why We Believe Them, The Remnants of War, Retreat from Doomsday, Astaire Dancing, and War, Presidents and Public Opinion.


End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.