|
Thursday, May 1, 2014
Eye on Iran: Iran Terror Network Prolific, US Report Says
Rashid Khalidi's False Narrative of Israeli History
|
Please take a moment to visit and log in at the subscriber area, and
submit your city & country location. We will use this information in
future to invite you to any events that we organize in your area.
Rashid Khalidi's False Narrative of Israeli History
by Andrew Harrod
FrontPage Magazine May 1, 2014 John Halaka's "Portraits of Denial and Despair" photo exhibit currently displayed in Jerusalem Fund hallways set a worrying ambience for Khalidi. Amidst photo captions damning an Israeli "settler colonial state," one photo montage shows Yasser Arafat's former press secretary, Raeda Taha. She grew up "in the shadow of a martyr," a caption declares, a "symbol of the national struggle," namely her pictured terrorist father Ali Taha, "killed in a hijacking operation he commanded." Khalidi discussed how the United States has "systematically failed" to achieve Israeli-Palestinian peace given "structural reasons." "Corrupt terms" such as "honest broker" expressed by Secretaries of State James Baker and Condoleezza Rice enabled America's "myth" as a "disinterested mediatory." Rather, "continuing complicity" and "virtually identity of views" with Israel since 1975 make America sometimes "more Israeli than the Israelis." "Ceaseless colonization" of East Jerusalem and the West Bank has actually "made this conflict worse" despite 1991 Madrid Conference American assurances of no "prejudicial" actions during peace negotiations. Secretary of State John Kerry's current negotiations continue America's "pusillanimous role" amidst "widespread skepticism." The Palestinian Authority's (PA) "position of weakness" faces Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's "uncompromising stand," including Israel's "brand new, never before revealed demand" for Jewish state recognition. Does this mean in Israel "everybody has to sing HaTikvah," the national anthem, Khalidi joked. Such biases "driven by domestic pressure" from the "Israel lobby" became "intense" during President Barack Obama's "humiliating retreat" from a supposedly longstanding policy on ultimate 1967-based Israeli borders. Israel, however, must otherwise "conform to American wishes," such as during the Iran nuclear agreement. Here the "United States did exactly how it pleased." Middle East arms deals also occur without Israeli consent, often involving Saudi Arabia's "stealth lobby" operating in conjunction with American oil interests. Yet "in fact no contradiction" exists between American relationships with Israel and Gulf monarchies that, like all Arab autocracies, ignore local popular support for the Palestinian cause. "Some of them…are on Israel's side," Khalidi judged. Israeli has meanwhile created a "bastardized one-state solution," entailing Palestinian statehood's "indefinite deferral" under the Oslo Accords' "historic mistake." Khalidi's one-state solution would recognize "two peoples," in contrast to some "Palestinian one-staters" who would tolerate merely a "few Jews." PA corruption in Ramallah's "boomtown" and "destructive" divisions with the equally corrupt Hamas-run Gaza, though, remain obstacles. The Palestinians' "entirely asymmetrical" conflict with a powerful, American-backed Israel belies a "rough equality" of "two victimized, tragic peoples." Stateless since 1918, Palestinians have undergone a "century-long odyssey." The 1947 United Nations partition plan foresaw a Jewish state, but "strangled in its cradle" a Palestinian state about which "no one gave a damn." As refugees, most Palestinians "no longer live in historic Palestine." The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanction (BDS) movement's "considerable economic impact" in Europe offered Khalidi a ray of hope. Israel's greatest threat "used to be Iran; now it is" BDS, an addition to "non-violent resistance" or "other means." BDS also disrupts Israel's "discursive hegemony" such thatNew York Times' "sclerotic coverage" of Israel no longer interests the youth. Thus "how can one not endorse the BDS movement?" Khalidi's bias contains numerous distortions. Israel's "ceaseless colonization" includes historically Jewish areas of Judea and Samaria such as Jerusalem's Jewish Quarter and Wailing Wall. This as well as Israeli security concerns ledPresident George W. Bush to recognize that Israel would retain certain territories won in 1967, an understanding that has largely restricted post-Oslo Accords settlement building to such territories. Obama's suggestion that Israel accept 1967 lines as a negotiation starting point, by contrast, was hardly uncontroversial. Khalidi hardly discussed, meanwhile, Israel's Gaza withdrawal, one of several Israeli peace moves, including Prime Minister Ehud Barak's 2000 two-state proposal, under Khalidi's Oslo Accords "historic mistake." Alternatively, recognizing Israel as a fundamentally "Jewish state" with some minorities is also hardly extraordinary. Bush so defined Israel in an understanding going back to the 1917 Balfour Declaration supporting a "national home for the Jewish people." Khalidi equally distorts history, beginning with an asserted Palestinian statelessness since 1918. No independent Palestine has ever existed within the territory now claimed by Palestinians, an area historically under other regimes such as the Ottoman Empire. Khalidi's assessment of the 1947 partition plan is particularly baffling. New-born Israel fought for survival against Arab states with no interest in an independent Palestine, as shown by subsequent Jordanian and Egyptian occupations. Khalidi's assertion that an "Israel lobby" controls American Israel policy does not comport with his concession of widespread American neglect of Israeli interests. Perhaps the United States (along with some Arab regimes) actually shares interests with an Israeli ally respecting the Palestinians? Who defines an "honest broker," anyway, the Palestinians or the Israelis? The former Palestine Liberation Organization spokesman Khalidi thus fully displayed ongoing Palestinian intransigence towards an Israel now over 60 years old. For Khalidi, Israeli colonialism has dispossessed a non-existent "historic Palestine" in the name of an illegitimate Jewish state. Hence Khalidi's rejection of any past peace proposal such as the Oslo Accords and acquiescence in Palestinian terrorism, such as that of a genocidal Hamas, whose past division with the PA Khalidi bemoaned. No wonder the "peace process" fails. This essay was written for Campus Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum. Andrew E. Harrod is a freelance researcher and writer who holds a PhD from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and a JD from George Washington University Law School. He is a fellow with the Lawfare Project, an organization combating the misuse of human rights law against Western societies. You may follow Harrod on twitter at @AEHarrod.
This
text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral
whole with complete and accurate information provided about its author, date,
place of publication, and original URL.
Related Items |
|||||
|
To subscribe to the CW list, go to http://www.campus-watch.org/list_subscribe.php |
|||||
The Fatah-Hamas Agreement
The Fatah-Hamas Agreement
by Richard Kemp
May 1, 2014 at 5:00 am
There is the criminal failure of the
international community, as both accomplice and accessory before the fact, to
make any meaningful effort to prevent endless salvoes of terrorist rocket
attacks against Israeli civilians for over nine years.
As we saw with the Iranian arms
shipment aboard the Klos-C last month, Iran's sponsorship of terrorism
continues unabated -- even as the international community is rehabilitating
its extremist regime.
Three hundred and thirty two drone attacks against Al Qaida and Taliban
targets on Pakistani territory since 2005 demonstrate U.S. President Barack
Obama's strong resolve against terrorists that threaten the United States.
Only last week, the latest wave of air strikes launched or enabled by his
government against Al Qaida networks in Yemen killed 55 suspected extremists,
possibly including master bomb-maker Ibrahim al-Asiri.Of course no one expects the U.S. to send drones in reply to the news that the Palestinian Authority [PA], upon which he has lavished billions of dollars and thousands of hours of diplomacy, was going into business with Hamas, which the United States has branded a terrorist organization. But one could hope for something more forceful from Washington than State Department spokesman Jen Psaki's weak and vacillating response in which she attempted to take the heat off Hamas and the PA by taking a gratuitous dig at Israel. "There have been unhelpful steps from both sides throughout this process," she said. If the US response was feeble, the EU's was treacherous. Like America and several other countries, the EU designates Hamas as a terrorist organization. Yet the spokesman for Catherine Ashton, EU foreign affairs head, actually welcomed the proposal to bring Hamas into the PA. Though shameful, this is far from surprising. It is part of a lengthy pattern of witting or unwitting EU encouragement of Middle Eastern terrorism. The EU has contributed its taxpayers' money to paying the salaries of convicted Palestinian terrorists via unconditional donations to the PA amounting to billions of dollars since 1994. Some of this money has also been spent on school textbooks, television programs and other PA propaganda that incite hatred and terrorism against Israel. Ashton and the EU have called repeatedly for an end to the Israeli-Egyptian security operation on land and sea around Gaza. The operation is designed to prevent predominantly Iranian-supplied munitions and materiel for terrorism from entering the Gaza Strip, and to stop Gaza terrorists and weapons moving to attack Israeli or Egyptian targets. At the same time, the EU, like the UN, has usually remained mute in the face of volley after volley of Iranian-supported rocket attacks from Gaza directed against the civilian population of Israel. These rockets are fired mainly by Hamas and their terrorist bedfellows, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Silence and inaction by such significant international bodies as the UN and the EU must, in these circumstances, add up to at least a degree of culpability. Robert Serry, the UN Special Coordinator for the Peace Process, seems to have swallowed Abbas's suggestion to him that reconciliation with Hamas will be on the basis of "recognition of Israel, non-violence and adherence to previous agreements." On that "understanding," the UN, like the EU, apparently welcomes and even supports the prospect of a terrorist group's incorporation into the PA. Were Hamas indeed to commit -- plausibly -- to such undertakings, then Israel could of course continue peace negotiations and cooperation with the PA on current terms. But other than Abbas's words to Serry, there is no indication of this and, in the real world, Hamas is not likely even to consider such conditions. Prime Minister Netanyahu therefore had no choice other than to suspend the peace process. This was his obligation to the Israeli people and to the international community. How could he possibly continue to negotiate with an entity that is itself negotiating with a vicious, murderous and unrelenting terrorist group hell-bent on the destruction of Israel and outlawed around the world? Of course Abbas knew full well when he agreed to unity with Hamas that this would end the peace negotiations. But this is only the latest in a series of steps that Abbas has taken to sabotage the peace process. He rejected U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry's framework principles last month; he has repeatedly refused to discuss PA recognition of Israel as the national homeland of the Jewish people; and at the end of March he initiated a move to join 15 international organizations, contravening an agreement to make no unilateral moves in the international arena during the period of the peace negotiations. One of the greatest challenges in the peace process, should it be resumed at some point, is resolving Israel's security concerns in the West Bank. Since the Israel Defense Forces left Gaza in 2005, Palestinians have fired into Israel over 8,000 rockets, killing 44 Israelis and injuring more than 1,600.
Iran, sworn to Israel's destruction, as are its Gaza-based proxies, has funded, armed, energized and directed both Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. As we saw with the Israeli interdiction of the Iranian arms shipment aboard the Klos-C only last month, Iran's sponsorship of terrorism continues unabated -- even as the international community is rehabilitating its extremist regime. Especially in a region and among neighbours that are becoming even more unstable, violent and unpredictable, Israel must ensure that in the event a Palestinian state should ever reach fruition, the West Bank does not become a second Gaza. The bloody consequences of that for the Israeli people would be far greater than from anything Hamas could hurl out of the Strip. Kerry has proposed international troops to provide security against attacks on Israel from the West Bank. Few Israelis believe that they could rely on such a force to protect them. There are the historical precedents for the failure of peacekeeping forces in the region and beyond, especially when the going gets tough. And in the West Bank, the going would get very tough very soon and very often. There is the criminal failure of the international community, as both accomplice and accessory before the fact, to make any meaningful effort to prevent endless salvoes of lethal terrorist rocket attacks against Israeli civilians for over nine years. Worse still, when Israel has been forced to respond to protect its citizens, it has been stabbed in the back by the international community, who have accused it of war crimes. The UN's ill-conceived and deeply flawed 2009 Goldstone Report, for example, amounted to nothing less than incitement to terrorism. And then there is the spectacle that we have witnessed over the past few days, of the pusillanimous and equivocating international response to plans for an active and violent terrorist group to join the PA. Confronted by world leaders who lack the moral courage to face down terrorists whom even they themselves have designated as such, Israel is entirely right in its assumption that when it comes to security it can rely only on its own moral strength and its own armed forces. Colonel Richard Kemp spent most of his 30-year career in the British Army fighting terrorism and insurgency, including in Iraq, the Balkans, South Asia, and Northern Ireland. He was Commander of British Forces in Afghanistan in 2003. He was also involved in the direction of national policy at the highest level, working at the Joint Intelligence Committee and as a member of COBRA, the UK national crisis committee. He writes regularly for The Times and speaks worldwide on terrorism, international security and other issues. |
|||||
|
To subscribe to the this mailing list, go to http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/list_subscribe.php |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





