Mahmoud Abbas’ Fairy Tale

This op-ed by Mahmoud Abbas is a great story, and very convincing to anyone who knows nothing about Middle East History. Full of lies, half-truths and omissions, it comes out as a really heart-rending tale—unless you know the truth.

= = =

The Long Overdue Palestinian State

By Mahmoud Abbas

mahmoud abbas1 pJ34p 18464

Published: May 16, 2011

Ramallah, West Bank

SIXTY-THREE years ago, a 13-year-old Palestinian boy was forced to leave his home in the Galilean city of Safed and flee with his family to Syria. He took up shelter in a canvas tent provided to all the arriving refugees. Though he and his family wished for decades to return to their home and homeland, they were denied that most basic of human rights. That child’s story, like that of so many other Palestinians, is mine.

[First lie. By his own admission on a PA TV talk show, Mahmoud Abbas admitted that his family left Safed in December of 1947 for Damascus, out of fear “the Jews” would take revenge for their actions during the Arab riots of 1936-39. Abbas’ family was among the Palestinian Arab elite who deserted the Arab lower classes and left them leaderless. Mahmoud Abbas and his family never lived in a "canvas tent provided to all the arriving refugees", but in a luxury villa on the outskirts of Damascus, and later in Beirut--by his own admission.]

This month, however, as we commemorate another year of our expulsion — which we call the nakba, or catastrophe — the Palestinian people have cause for hope: this September, at the United Nations General Assembly, we will request international recognition of the State of Palestine on the 1967 border and that our state be admitted as a full member of the United Nations.

[Will the UN be gullible enough to ratify statehood for a Palestinian state with an appointed caretaker government that is not representative of the political factions? Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to hold this debate AFTER a new government is elected and in place?]

Many are questioning what value there is to such recognition while the Israeli occupation continues. Others have accused us of imperiling the peace process. We believe, however, that there is tremendous value for all Palestinians — those living in the homeland, in exile and under occupation.

[This step doesn’t “imperil” the peace process that has been consistently thwarted by both sides, it violates the core principle of the Oslo Accord, which specifically states that the solution to the conflict can ONLY be achieved by negotiation between the parties.]

It is important to note that the last time the question of Palestinian statehood took center stage at the General Assembly, the question posed to the international community was whether our homeland should be partitioned into two states. In November 1947, the General Assembly made its recommendation and answered in the affirmative. Shortly thereafter, Zionist forces expelled Palestinian Arabs to ensure a decisive Jewish majority in the future state of Israel, and Arab armies intervened. War and further expulsions ensued. Indeed, it was the descendants of these expelled Palestinians who were shot and wounded by Israeli forces on Sunday as they tried to symbolically exercise their right to return to their families’ homes.

[Second lie. In 1988, the UN accepted the right of establishment for a Palestinian state. However, with no borders, a “government-in-exile” that was considered a terrorist organization and without any attempt to enter into negotiations with Israel, it fell flat on its face because it did not meet the main criteria for statehood.]

Minutes after the State of Israel was established on May 14, 1948, the United States granted it recognition. Our Palestinian state, however, remains a promise unfulfilled.

[Third lie. There was nothing that prevented the declaration of a Palestinian state at the same time Israel was declared. If the concept of a Palestinian state “remains a promise unfulfilled”, then at least part of the onus is on the Palestinians themselves, who, instead of declaring a state, declared that they would destroy the Jewish state. This wasn’t an empty declaration—they tried to do so, with the aid of six Arab armies, including the Jordan Legion, led by BRITISH ARMY officers and commanded by a BRITISH general.]

Palestine’s admission to the United Nations would pave the way for the internationalization of the conflict as a legal matter, not only a political one. It would also pave the way for us to pursue claims against Israel at the United Nations, human rights treaty bodies and the International Court of Justice.

[Since the “Palestinian-Israeli conflict” is a manufactured attempt to replace the real, general Arab-Israeli conflict, which was an international conflict from the first moment, this is just smoke and mirrors. He should be careful what he wishes for, though. There’s no statute of limitations on war crimes and crimes against humanity. Mahmoud Abbas was one of the planners of the Munich Olympics massacre of 11 Israeli Olympic athletes and the hijacking of the Air France flight to Entebbe in 1976. He could very well be indicted for his part in those and other terror operations.]

Our quest for recognition as a state should not be seen as a stunt; too many of our men and women have been lost for us to engage in such political theater. We go to the United Nations now to secure the right to live free in the remaining 22 percent of our historic homeland because we have been negotiating with the State of Israel for 20 years without coming any closer to realizing a state of our own. We cannot wait indefinitely while Israel continues to send more settlers to the occupied West Bank and denies Palestinians access to most of our land and holy places, particularly in Jerusalem. Neither political pressure nor promises of rewards by the United States have stopped Israel’s settlement program.

[This is just plain bullshit. All of Israel, the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Golan Heights make up a total of 23% of the Mandate for Palestine as ratified by the League of Nations. The remainder is what we now call the “Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan”. It would be a much more viable solution to demand that Jordan, with almost four times the area and half the population, absorb the Palestinians. That would make a reasonable completion to the Mandate, ratified by the League of Nations and re-ratified by the United Nations, with a commitment to create one Arab state and one Jewish state.

Isn’t it odd that he is only concerned with Israeli acts—and behaves as if there were no Palestinian acts that hampered the peace process… such as his predecessor’s hasty exit from Camp David in 2000 without even making a counter-offer to then Israeli PM Ehud Barak and President Clinton to start the second intifada, which killed over one thousand Israelis and maimed and wounded thousands more?

When Jordan (not Palestinians, in fact, at the time the Arabs from Palestine didn't even call themselves Palestinians--and the Arab League brought in truckloads of "experts" to the UN debates to prove "there has never been such a country as Palestine in history" - Prof. Philip Hitti, Arab-American historian, Princeton University) controlled the West Bank and Jerusalem, Jews (not just Israelis, but all Jews) were barred from the holiest site in their religion for 19 years. Christian access was limited, at best, with severe restrictions placed on the number of visitors and allowing repairs and renovations.]

Negotiations remain our first option, but due to their failure we are now compelled to turn to the international community to assist us in preserving the opportunity for a peaceful and just end to the conflict. Palestinian national unity is a key step in this regard. Contrary to what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel asserts, and can be expected to repeat this week during his visit to Washington, the choice is not between Palestinian unity or peace with Israel; it is between a two-state solution or settlement-colonies.

[Why are the negotiations a failure? Mr. Abbas should look at this more objectively. Why did he fritter away nine months of the ten-month building freeze that Netanyahu gave as a concession to negotiations? What did he expect to do except walk out after three weeks when “time was up”?]

Despite Israel’s attempt to deny us our long-awaited membership in the community of nations, we have met all prerequisites to statehood listed in the Montevideo Convention, the 1933 treaty that sets out the rights and duties of states. The permanent population of our land is the Palestinian people, whose right to self-determination has been repeatedly recognized by the United Nations, and by the International Court of Justice in 2004. Our territory is recognized as the lands framed by the 1967 border, though it is occupied by Israel.

[Until there is an elected government, not a caretaker one, he’s wrong, and the Palestinians do not meet the requirements. In addition, the “1967 borders” he repeatedly mentions aren’t borders at all, but cease-fire lines from 1948. Both UNGA Resolution 194 and UNSC Resolution 242 recognize that fact and state that any borders must be the result of negotiations between the parties. We won’t even talk about the failures of the Palestinian state to discharge its duties towards its citizens—there’s not enough room on this forum to do that.]

We have the capacity to enter into relations with other states and have embassies and missions in more than 100 countries. The World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the European Union have indicated that our institutions are developed to the level where we are now prepared for statehood. Only the occupation of our land hinders us from reaching our full national potential; it does not impede United Nations recognition.

[On the contrary, the West Bank has been doing very well “under the occupation”, while the Gaza Strip, which is NOT occupied, is living under an oppressive, totalitarian rule—the rule of Hamas. However, neither the West Bank nor the Gaza Strip is economically self-sufficient, nor will they be at any time in the foreseeable future. Is it logical to make the effort to create something that will become a failed state and another burden on the world’s economy? How long the present “unity government” and “reconciliation are going to last is anyone’s guess, but it probably won’t be very long—the differences between Fatah and Hamas are too great—and there is no third party with any alternative to these two.]

The State of Palestine intends to be a peace-loving nation, committed to human rights, democracy, the rule of law and the principles of the United Nations Charter. Once admitted to the United Nations, our state stands ready to negotiate all core issues of the conflict with Israel. A key focus of negotiations will be reaching a just solution for Palestinian refugees based on Resolution 194, which the General Assembly passed in 1948.

[Then it would be incumbent on both Fatah and Hamas to make some far-reaching changes in their manifestos BEFORE the UN votes on the question. Both the Palestinian National Charter and the Hamas Covenant call for the destruction of Israel. The Hamas Covenant goes one step farther—the murder of all Jews in the world. Can a country based on the principles of genocide and conquering its neighbor (both violations of UN Charter core principles) be considered a legitimate candidate for statehood?]

Palestine would be negotiating from the position of one United Nations member whose territory is militarily occupied by another, however, and not as a vanquished people ready to accept whatever terms are put in front of us.

[So far, the Palestinians have certainly not acted like a “vanquished people”. It is the Palestinians who have refused to make any concessions at all in the name of peace. Incitement, idolization of terrorists, veiled threats and the attempt to circumvent honest negotiations with a unilateral declaration of statehood in violation of the terms of a signed agreement are hardly the acts of a “vanquished people”. Historically, when an aggressor goes to war and loses that war, the victorious party defines the terms of surrender. That the Palestinians refuse to believe that they lost, and insist on attempting to dictate terms as if they were the victors is one of the majors factors leading to the continuing lack of progress in any peace negotiations.]

We call on all friendly, peace-loving nations to join us in realizing our national aspirations by recognizing the State of Palestine on the 1967 border and by supporting its admission to the United Nations. Only if the international community keeps the promise it made to us six decades ago, and ensures that a just resolution for Palestinian refugees is put into effect, can there be a future of hope and dignity for our people.

[It seems as though the Palestinians expect the world to do for them what they should have done for themselves 63 years ago, at the same time that Israel declared statehood. If the Palestinian Arabs had declared statehood at the same time, instead of embarking on a self-declared war of aggression, genocide and larceny, there would have been no “Palestinian-Israeli conflict”. And, as long as he’s reminding everyone of the Palestinian refugees, it’s time to remember the Jewish refugees from Arab lands who were no less victims of the conflict than the Palestinians claim to be. Without settling the “refugee problem in toto, INCLUDING the issue of the Jewish refugees resulting from the conflict, there can be no “just resolution” to the conflict. One-sided justice is no justice at all.]

Mahmoud Abbas is the chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization and the president of the Palestinian National Authority.

= = =

It is germane to include the full texts of UNGA 194 and UNSC 242 in this post. I’ve highlighted specific relevant issues that the Palestinians continuously refuse to acknowledge.

UNGA Resolution 194:

The General Assembly,

Having considered further the situation in Palestine,

1. Expresses its deep appreciation of the progress achieved through the good offices of the late United Nations Mediator in promoting a peaceful adjustment of the future situation of Palestine, for which cause he sacrificed his life; and extends its thanks to the Acting Mediator and his staff for their continued efforts and devotion to duty in Palestine;

2.

a. Establishes a Conciliation Commission consisting of three States Members of the United Nations which shall have the following functions:

b. To assume, insofar as it considers necessary in existing circumstances, the functions given to the United Nations Mediator on Palestine by resolution 186 (S-2) of the General Assembly of 14 May 1948;

c. To carry out the specific functions and directives given to it by the present resolution and such additional functions and directives as may be given to it by the General Assembly or by the Security Council;

d. To undertake, upon the request of the Security Council, any of the functions now assigned to the United Nations Mediator on Palestine or to the United Nations Truce Commission by resolutions of the Security Council; upon such request to the Conciliation Commission by the Security Council with respect to all the remaining functions of the United Nations Mediator on Palestine under Security Council resolutions, the office of the Mediator shall be terminated;

3. Decides that a Committee of the Assembly, consisting of China, France, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom and the United States of America, shall present, before the end of the first part of the present session of the General Assembly, for the approval of the Assembly, a proposal concerning the names of the three States which will constitute the Conciliation Commission;

4. Requests the Commission to begin its functions at once, with a view to the establishment of contact between the parties themselves and the Commission at the earliest possible date;

5. Calls upon the Governments and authorities concerned to extend the scope of the negotiations provided for in the Security Council's resolution of 16 November 1948 and to seek agreement by negotiations conducted either with the Conciliation Commission or directly with a view to the final settlement of all questions outstanding between them;

6. Instructs the Conciliation Commission to take steps to assist the Government and authorities concerned to achieve a final settlement of all questions outstanding between them;

7. Resolves that the Holy Places - including Nazareth - religious buildings and sites in Palestine should be protected and free access to them assured, in accordance with existing rights and historical practice that arrangements to this end should be under effective United Nations supervision; that the United Nations Conciliation Commission, in presenting to the fourth regular session of the General Assembly its detailed proposal for a permanent international regime for the territory of Jerusalem, should include recommendations concerning the Holy Places in that territory; that with regard to the Holy Places in the rest of Palestine the Commission should call upon the political authorities of the areas concerned to give appropriate formal guarantees as to the protection of the Holy Places and access to them; and that these undertakings should be presented to the General Assembly for approval;

8. Resolves that, in view of its association with three world religions, the Jerusalem area, including the present municipality of Jerusalem plus the surrounding villages and towns, the most Eastern of which shall be Abu Dis; the most Southern, Bethlehem; the most Western, Ein Karim (including also the built-up area of Motsa); and the most Northern, Shu'fat, should be accorded special and separate treatment from the rest of Palestine and should be placed under effective United Nations control; Requests the Security Council to take further steps to ensure the demilitarization of Jerusalem at the earliest possible date; Instructs the Conciliation Commission to present to the fourth regular session of the General Assembly detailed proposals for a permanent international regime for the Jerusalem area which will provide for the maximum local autonomy for distinctive groups consistent with the special international status of the Jerusalem area; The Conciliation Commission is authorized to appoint a United Nations representative who shall cooperate with the local authorities with respect to the interim administration of the Jerusalem area;

9. Resolves that, pending agreement on more detailed arrangements among the Governments and authorities concerned, the freest possible access to Jerusalem by road, rail or air should be accorded to all inhabitants of Palestine; Instructs the Conciliation Commission to report immediately to the Security Council, for appropriate action by that organ, any attempt by any party to impede such access;

10. Instructs the Conciliation Commission to seek arrangements among the Governments and authorities concerned which will facilitate the economic development of the area, including arrangements for access to ports and airfields and the use of transportation and communication facilities;

11. Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible; Instructs the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations;

[The key point in this article is the fact that the refugees must wish to live at peace with their neighbors. Without that key factor, no "return" is possible.)

12. Authorizes the Conciliation Commission to appoint such subsidiary bodies and to employ such technical experts, acting under its authority, as it may find necessary for the effective discharge of its functions and responsibilities under the present resolution; The Conciliation Commission will have its official headquarters at Jerusalem. The authorities responsible for maintaining order in Jerusalem will be responsible for taking all measures necessary to ensure the security of the Commission. The Secretary-General will provide a limited number of guards for the protection of the staff and premises of the Commission;

13. Instructs the Conciliation Commission to render progress reports periodically to the Secretary-General for transmission to the Security Council and to the Members of the United Nations;

14. Calls upon all Governments and authorities concerned to cooperate with the Conciliation Commission and to take all possible steps to assist in the implementation of the present resolution;

15. Requests the Secretary-General to provide the necessary staff and facilities and to make appropriate arrangements to provide the necessary funds required in carrying out the terms of the present resolution.

= = =

UNSC Resolution 242:

The Security Council,

Expressing its continuing concern with the grave situation in the Middle East,

Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in the area can live in security,

Emphasizing further that all Member States in their acceptance of the Charter of the United Nations have undertaken a commitment to act in accordance with Article 2 of the Charter,

1. Affirms that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:

(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;

(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;

[NOTE: sections i and ii are inseparable. Without termination of all claims of belligerency, there can be no withdrawal. Mr. Abbas' consistent refusal to declare that a peace agreement would signal the end of the fictitious "Palestinian-Israeli conflict" is a direct violation of the UNSC resolution he quotes frequently as his basis for demanding statehood.]

2. Affirms further the necessity

(a) For guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in the area;

(b) For achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem;

[NOTE: Nowhere does it say "the Palestinian refugees". The "refugee problem, according to many real experts on international law, including former justices from both the ICC and the ICJ, maintain that this article includes the Jewish refugees from Arab lands created by the same conflict-something the Arabs go out of their way to deny.]

(c) For guaranteeing the territorial inviolability and political independence of every State in the area, through measures including the establishment of demilitarized zones;

3. Requests the Secretary-General to designate a Special Representative to proceed to the Middle East to establish and maintain contacts with the States concerned in order to promote agreement and assist efforts to achieve a peaceful and accepted settlement in accordance with the provisions and principles in this resolution;

4. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Security Council on the progress of the efforts of the Special Representative as soon as possible.

= = =

READ the contents of both resolutions thoroughly. Understand what it is they say. Remember that each resolution is meant to be taken in its entirety; selective reading and omission of clauses that don’t support your case are NOT an option.

Since both resolutions were rejected by the Arab League countries, the question is really moot. Thanks to the Arab rejection, both these resolutions are long past their "sell by" date. What kind of twisted logic rejects a proposition for 40 (or 60) years, attempting to resolve the situation to their satisfaction by violent means, failing repeatedly, then thinks it can say, "Hey, remember that offer way back when? I'll take that now..."

Homework: See if you can find any mention, let alone a “promise”, of a Palestinian state in either of these resolutions.