This, from AP is interesting:
- Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar was asked if the atmosphere were ripe for Hamas to form a government that would not deal with Israel, Hamas reported on its Web site.
“Yes. We are running for the Legislative Council to put an end to the vestiges of Oslo,” Zahar said, referring to the Oslo peace accords between Israel and the Palestinians of the early 1990s.
I don’t have time to hunt down the original source (described as a posting on Hamas’s own website) or put in much background here. But until now Hamas has sustained a policy of seeking only strong representation in the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC), rather than explicitly to govern.
However, the implosion of Fateh and the rest of the current PA (see e.g. here) means that there is a real crisis of governance in Palestinian society that is harming every community in the occupied territories. Any political organization that takes itself seriously and that has some governing capabilities would have to step forward and express readiness to do so.
Zahar is the head of Hamas in Gaza but not the overall head of the movement. Still, his word is extremely weighty.
It will be interesting to see how Israel and the US respond to this. Elections are still scheduled for January 25. Of course, there may well be those in the Israeli right wing who would seek to use the present crisis-ridden circumstances on both sides of the “Green Line” as a pretext for escalation.
Of course, there may well be those in the Israeli right wing who would seek to use the present crisis-ridden circumstances on both sides of the “Green Line” as a pretext for escalation.
WTF? Smearing is now extended to what a party may do in the future?
Of course there may be those in my neighborhood who would seek to exploit my responding to JWN mud to steal my car. So what?
David
Escalation of Zionist killing of Palestinians is very much to be feared at this juncture because the only possible restraint on the unilaterally-acting Zionists are themselves…. not likely at all.
Israel’s “unilateral” solution is no better, and no different in quality and objective, than the unilateral solution which our forefathers imposed on the Cherokee. The US, have decimated a peaceful Cherokee society, its culture and and most of its people, achieved “peace” – what I call cemetary peace. This is the Zionist “peace” which is achievable only by escalating violence to provoke the helpless Palestinians and obtain a mandate from the Israeli public for unilateral imposition of the “Cherokee final solution” for Palestine.
Nice diatribe Timothy. It is great to come across well informed open minded posters like you. The more I get to know you the more I’ll like Helena.
David
Nice diatribe Timothy. It is great to come across well informed open minded posters like you. The more I get to know you the more I’ll like Helena.
David
I would also remind Timothy that, in 1996, it was not right-wing Jewish Israel settlers who escalated the violence to influence Israeli elections. It was Hamas.
Well, fellas, the setting of the violence was Begin’s rejection of Ben Gurion’s advice in 1967 to discontinue the military occupation in Judea and Samaria (Ben Gurion’s words). Begin chose a program of Lebensraum, not peace. All historians agree that with Likud in 1977 the active Zionist violence to displace the Arab natives really took off. For example:
“The Likud victory of 1977 brought an end to the cautious settlement policy of the Labour administration. The new policy called for massive settlement of the entire West Bank. The practical purpose of this policy was to create an irreversible situation in the West Bank, so much settlement that future political compromise over the area would be impossible. This was to have an enormous effect, polarizing relations between Jews and Arabs and leading to an increase in violence.”
“From the beginning of the occupation in 1967 the Jewish settlers were allowed to carry arms…. Soon vigilantism became the norm. By 1983 an Israeli researcher found that 28% of male settlers and 5% of female settlers admitted to having participated in some type of vigilante activity that involved attacks on Arab property and people. Only 13% of settlers disapproved of vigilante activity, which became a way of life.”
So, fellas, when a Zionist says “peace” he means the “Cherokee final solution”, i.e. the graveyard quiet attainable only by genocidal decimation of the native population. Jabotinsky, Zionism’s Andrew Jackson, wrote that he equated the Arabs with the Cherokee… if they won’t hand over their land, kill them off and take it.
Well, Timothy, I think you’ve got some things confused here. I don’t think that it was Ben Gurion who advised Begin in 1967 to offer the Palestinians autonomy. Actually, it was Moshe Sneh who gave that advise Levi Eshkol.
It would be helpful if you were to reference your quotes. I would also like to know where the reference to Jabotinsky came from, because I’ve never seen or hear this before.
Ultimately, what you’ve quoted here really doesn’t change the fact that it was Hamas that launched a string of brutal suicide attacks against Israeli citizens to influence the Israeli elections. How do I know? Because Yassir Arafat and the PA told me so when Jibril Rajoub put the “handler” of the suicide bombers on television and had him confess.
I’m glad to see that re the present risk from violent extremists among the Israeli rightwingers, according to this Haaretz article, the Israeli government is taking responsible preventive action.
That report says: Police yesterday raided the offices of the extreme right-wing organization known as the Jewish Battalion, in the settlement of Tapuah and in Jerusalem… [S]ome 200 police from the Jerusalem and West Bank districts arrived yesterday morning, and closed down an office and storerooms in a yeshiva belonging to the organization in Tapuah [settlement] in the West Bank… They also shut down a kennel where police spokesman Shlomi Sagi said members of the organization allegedly raised and trained dogs to attack Palestinians when the group went on “patrols” in the West Bank. Police took six dogs with them from the kennel… Investigators also raided an Internet cafe allegedly run by the organization on Jerusalem’s Moriah Street… and a fourth-story apartment at 210 Jaffa Road, where members of the group are said to have resided. Police also … detained four people who worked at the Internet cafe for questioning.
All historians agree that with Likud in 1977 the active Zionist violence to displace the Arab natives really took off. For example:
”The Likud victory of 1977 brought an end to the cautious settlement policy of the Labour administration. The new policy called for massive settlement of the entire West Bank.
Yah, its all policies and rules and parties, what you talking about its just naivety and nonsense criminal act according to all international laws.
Any change of the occupied land should not persuaded and should returned according to 99 UN reglations.
What a bathetic arguments and explanations we all knew the rise of the number of settlements that distributed all around Arabs lands to cause chaos and steal their land under your laws with every day demolishing Arab homes not allowing those Palestinians owners of that lands to rebuild their homes and then you clamed its inhabited land.
To be clear and obvious in your arguments can you tell us the Israel papulation that raised dramatically due to new immigrated starting 1967 till now, how much and where they settled? And how many % from those settled in occupied Palestinians Land “West Bank”?
JES: I’ll take the trouble to reference my quotes if you specify which facts in the quote you dispute. If there is no dispute of fact, you are just looking for a messenger to slander.
Jabotinsky in “The Iron Wall” equated the native Arabs in Palestine with the Native Americans in his justification for colonization of other peaople’s lands. In relevant part: “Another point which had no effect at all was whether or not there existed a suspicion that the settler wished to remove the inhabitant from his land. The vast areas of the U.S. never contained more than one or two million Indians. The inhabitants fought the white settlers not out of fear that they might be expropriated, but simply because there has never been an indigenous inhabitant anywhere or at any time who has ever accepted the settlement of others in his country. Any native people – its all the same whether they are civilized or savage – views their country as their national home, of which they will always be the complete masters. They will not voluntarily allow, not only a new master, but even a new partner. And so it is for the Arabs. Compromisers in our midst attempt to convince us that the Arabs are some kind of fools who can be tricked by a softened formulation of our goals, or a tribe of money grubbers who will abandon their birth right to Palestine for cultural and economic gains. I flatly reject this assessment of the Palestinian Arabs. Culturally they are 500 years behind us, spiritually they do not have our endurance or our strength of will, but this exhausts all of the internal differences. We can talk as much as we want about our good intentions; but they understand as well as we what is not good for them. They look upon Palestine with the same instinctive love and true fervor that any Aztec looked upon his Mexico or any Sioux looked upon his prairie.”
On the issue of the continuation of the military occupation, no one questions that there was a substantial dispute about this at the highest levels in Israel in 1967. Exactly who said what to whom is certainly less relvant than the fact of the dispute and the sorry consequnces of its resolution to adopt a Lebensraum program.
JES, you must be about the last person in the world who believes everything Jibril Rajoub says! Some of the ’96 bombings were Hamas, some Jihad (i.e. out of control Fathawis). Also, the string of bombing started not w/ respect to the Israeli elections but as a response to the Israelis’ assassination of (I think) Fathi Shikaki.
The bombings were an outrage. Peres responded with a massive (but as it turned out quite counter-productive) escalation of the violence by launching a huge new assault against Lebanon (why Lebanon, you may well ask? Well, I did ask him, in 98, and got an extremely muddle-headed reply.)
Remember Kafr Qana?
Bottom line: there’s been a lot of extremely inhumane violence on both sides. Israel, w/ many more means of lethality at its disposal, has killed many more noncombatants than all the violent Palestinian groups put together. So let’s all work together to identify and strengthen non-violent means that seek to resolve differences on a reasonably equitable (and therefore sustainable) basis.
That should, surely, take priority over trying to “score points” re the past?
Timothy, your portrayal of jabotinsky’s thesis is completely off base. have you even read ‘the iron wall?’
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Israel/Iron_Wall_Jabotinsky.html
I am optimistic that they will indeed be granted satisfactory assurances [on “practical questions like a guarantee against expulsion, or equality and national autonomy”] and that both peoples, like good neighbors, can then live in peace.
how the hell do you get “kill them off and take their land” from this piece????
Helena,
You mean that Rajoub and Abu Amar lied? Oh dear!
To get serious for a minute, I agree with you that both sides have a capacity for violence. I also agree with you that it is good that the Israel Police have been cracking down on the “Jewish Brigades”. I would like to see the same thing on the other side in relation to Hamas, PIJ and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs brigades – especially seeing as rockets are being fired daily into Israel. (And it hadn’t occurred to me before this incident, but one might also consider what some people would say if the “Jewish Brigades” or Kach were allowed to run for the Knesset!)
I hope that you will take this the right way, and with all due respect, but the fact that “Israel, … has killed many more noncombatants than all the violent Palestinian groups put together” is really quite irrelevant. We are not running a contest here, and there have been more than enough innocents killed on both sides for this to be a mutual tragedy.
birth right to Palestine for cultural and economic gains
What the difference Israelis also thinks and behaved according to “birth right” to Palestine for cultural and economic gains!
Who is the right who is wrong here? At least Arab not invaded and occupied the Palestine it’s their land the first wave of movement of the peoples from Arb desert from the Aljazrah Al Arabia toward north to Mesopotamian’s land and others.
Vadim, I can read as well as you.
Now, tell me how Jabotinsky’s theory of Zionist colonialism has been APPLIED by today’s Zionists? Tell me about Israel’s “guarantee against expulsion”, or “equality (for Arabs)” and “national autonomy” for the Palestinians.
More to the current point, an overwhelming case can be made from recent history that the “peace” in todays’ Zionist program is the peace at the graveyard of Palestine. The force of the evidence to this end casts grave doubts on Zionist restraint from escalated violence in the next weeks – which is the topic relevant here. The recent events Helena cited are relevant but must be seen as a small beginning. A few tactical police decisions do not a national policy make.
Political wing of Hamas can take part in what they have for political process in WBG. But there is no way that military factions will just disappear.
Escalation of Zionist killing of Palestinians is very much to be feared at this juncture because the only possible restraint on the unilaterally-acting Zionists are themselves…. not likely at all.
I don’t think there has actually been much change along this dimension in the past several years. Even with the illness of Ariel Sharon there has been no change in the level of Israeli military activity.
Palestinian society is coming apart at the seams, especially in Gaza, and there is plenty of reason to worry about the loss of human life, but the unpredictable and escalatory factors are all Palestinian. Especially the random gunmen and corrupt gangs. The Israeli side isn’t changing much right now. There is no more or less “Restraint” now than 6 months or a year ago.
Palestinian society has been growing under Israeli administration. Aside from the Intifada years, it is almost thriving. That is, compared to the status of Palestinian society under Jordanian, Egyptian, British or Turkish occupation. The Palestinians have founded there own Universities and Hospitals under Israeli administration, which something that simply was not happening under the Jordanians, Egyptians, British or Turks. I am not saying it is a bowl of cherries, or a democracy, but it is the exact opposite of the genocidal picture painted by Timothy.
Palestinian society has been growing in numbers even faster than the Israelis; And if you don’t know that, you don’t know anything, and should refrain from comment until you do. Timothy, you are so ignorant I think you must be trolling, or an out-and-out anti-semite, or some other kind of racist. Your remarks constitute another anti-semitic blood libel. I suggest you look up what that is.
Interestingly, the “Jewish Battalion” is unknown to Google. Which means, what, they have no web site? They may not be a political organization at all, but a criminal one. Or Haaretz may have bobbled the story.
The report says they’ve trained dogs to “Attack Palestinians”. Exactly how are the dogs to tell the Jews from the Muslims? Theological exam? Or maybe the dogs know the national flags? What will the dogs do with Christian Arabs? And with Israeli Moslems? I want these dogs examined!
My real point, of course, is that the Haaretz article raises my suspicions.
Helena refers to some amorphous “Israeli right wing” who will try to take advantage of the situation. For the next few months, the government will be led by the relatively moderate Ehud Olmert. I doubt that he will try to provoke anything.
As for Hamas taking power. That may lead to Israel taken more forceful steps. But that’s hardly a “pretext” for anything. Hamas is a violent and racist organization. Israeli action against them wouldn’t be based on pretext, it would be based on justification. Can Hamas be reformed? Perhaps. Is Israel required to “wait and see” if that happens? I don’t think so.
Joshua, there are plenty of “right-wingers”, in and out of government, who can and have in the past performed major provocations, at times not entirely under the
control of the (acting) head of government. No one more than the person whose illness is causing the current crisis-ridden circumstances on one side of the Green
Line. Both sides have a history of policy and events being hijacked by extremists.
International law – which as one should remember, means laws that Israel has agreed to observe – common sense and basic morality require that Israel take a “wait
and see” attitude towards legal political events outside Israel. The IDF is a violent and racist organization. So have been many parts of Israeli (or American or
Arab) society. Reversing your argument, should, say, Egyptians have said in 1977:
As for Likud taking power. That may lead to Egypt taking more forceful steps. But that’s hardly a “pretext” for anything. Likud is a violent and racist organization.
(Led by a self-proclaimed terrorist, one might add.) Egyptian action against them wouldn’t be based on pretext, it would be based on justification. Can Likud be
reformed? Perhaps. Is Egypt required to “wait and see” if that happens? I don’t think s
Neither international law, common sense, or basic morality require Israel to “give Hamas a chance.” Perhaps Israel should as a prudential matter. But so long as Israel is dealing with a government or group that claims it is at war with Israel, it may take that government or group at its word, and respond as if it is at war.
As for Egypt in 1977. You are correct, Egypt did not have to wait and see. It could have chosen to have its army decimated again. Makes no difference to me, really.
“It will be interesting to see how Israel and the US respond to…[the rising political power of Hamas].”
it will be EVEN MORE interesting to see how the Fatah generation that takes for granted its patronage control and entrenched bureacratic position will respond to having to turn over their portfolios to Hamas.
The report says they’ve trained dogs to “Attack Palestinians”. Exactly how are the dogs to tell the Jews from the Muslims? Theological exam?
Why play semantic games? Trained dog will attack anybody its handler wants.
Zvi Alush. Israeli goat fights terror http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3197258,00.html
Commentary from Max Hastings, in the Guardian.
you people are snobs
The force of the evidence to this end casts grave doubts on Zionist restraint from escalated violence in the next weeks – which is the topic relevant here.
What evidence? Just saying so doesn’t make it evidence.
Frankly, I find this whole thread interesting, in that the entire focus has been on the need for Israeli restraint in the face of an assumed attempt by presumed Israeli “right-wing extremists” to disrupt elections.
I am certain that such restraint (or rather the restraining of any such elements within Israel) is required and, as Helena pointed out, the Israel Police is undertaking to do so. Yet no one speaks here of restraint on the other side, particularly restraining a collection of armed reactionary militias who regularly fire rockets at civilian targets within Israel.
And BTW, anyone who wants to challenge the racist an reactionary bona fides of Hamas would do well to read their charter first.
to Warren W:
We agree to disagree on the facts of the conditions in Palestine – OK. Another issue, another forum.
But I take to heart your accusation/suggestion that my differing opinion is an
“anti-semitic blood libel. I suggest you look up what that is.”
I looked it up. An “anti-semitic blood libel” is an unproved and unprovable accusation that is made when the accuser cannot rebut either the facts or the legality of the accused’s position – so just call him dirty names.
I strongly believe in and advocate the need for restraint and discipline on the Palestinian side. This is necessary both for humanitarian reasons and– I argue– reasons of solid political pragmatism, given Israel’s domination of every step of the escalation ladder and proven readiness to use escalatory force.
Hamas has, indeed, been remarkably disciplined (with one notable exception) since its commitment to the tahdi’eh (calming/ceasefire) of last March, and that hasn’t been easy. Many commentators have noted that the low level of Israeli casualties during these past months can be attributed in good part to Hamas’s commitment to the tahdi’eh.
It is among the warring Fateh factions and Jihad that the violence has been undisciplined and often unrestrained. (This violence has caused many more casualties and much more suffering among Palestinians than among Israelis.)
We are however talking about two completely different political and social situations on the Israeli and Palestinian sides. In Israel there is a recognized, well-organized, well-funded, and very well-armed government capable of enforcing all aspects of public security in its own national territory (and also exercizing the responsibility under IHL to do the same in the OPTs). There is also a public enjoying a high standard of living and considerable international aid.
On the Palestinian side there is no governing authority that’s capable of ensuring public security or even the most basic necessities of life to its people. (And the pauperization of such a great proportion of the people has left many palestinians with “little left to lose” in the event of tension and violence.) The failure of the Palestinian authorities is due in great part to the systematic, violent, and multi-faceted assault that Sharon’s government undertook against them in 2002-2003. You can’t just “rebuild” them to order, just like that! And especially not in conditions of continued stasis in the peace negotiations.
So yes, we need restraint on both sides. But let’s look at the capabilities and responsibilities of each side, and its potential for in particular escalatory violence. From this viewpoint– and under IHL– Israel bears the paramount responsibility for ensuring the safety of both peoples.
As I said, I’m glad that the Olmert government seems aware of the need to exercize restraint. May it continue– and may it be accompanied by a much more realistic view of what is needed to build a true, sustainable peace with israel’s Palestinian neighbors…
Helena,
I have to disagree with you on several points.
First, although most of the rockets during the period of the tah’dieh (which, like the previous hudnah, is an internal Palestinian agreement, to which Israel is not a party, and was not asked to be a party)may have been fired by other groups, my understanding is that Hamas workshops and expertise in producing Qassams has been freely provided to those doing the firing.
In Israel there is a recognized, well-organized, well-funded, and very well-armed government capable of enforcing all aspects of public security in its own national territory (and also exercizing the responsibility under IHL to do the same in the OPTs).
I have two central problems with this assertion.
In the first place, one might look at Ben Gurion’s reaction to the lack of discipline and misadventures, including war crimes such as Deir Yassin, of EZL and LEHI in 1948. This can be summarized in one word: Altalena. In that period the Israeli leadership was, objectively speaking, neither well-funded nor well-armed. It was, however, well-organized and, more importantly, well-disciplined.
This brings me to the second point that I have trouble with in your argument. You rightly assert that Israel has responsibilities under international humanitarian law (i.e. the IVth Geneva Convention) to secure law and order in areas that it occupies. However, to do this, Israel must be free to act in a policing capacity, if the local authorities are either incapable or unwilling to take up this responsibility themselves. (This is all mandated under the IVth Geneva Convention, I believe.) In short, it has to be one way or the other; it cannot be both (i.e. the PA refusing to rein in the “miltants” followed by Israel being castigated for trying to do so itself).
The failure of the Palestinian authorities is due in great part to the systematic, violent, and multi-faceted assault that Sharon’s government undertook against them in 2002-2003. You can’t just “rebuild” them to order, just like that! And especially not in conditions of continued stasis in the peace negotiations.
And I maintain that the failure of the Palestinian authorities is due in great part to their conscious decision (or, at least, passive acquiescence to) the violent uprising. The PA also received significant internation aid. Yet today, although there is not enough money for food, let alone for the PA to invest in the economic infrastructure of the Palestinians, there is, curously, no apparent shortage of funding for arms and ammunition.
In summary, while we certainly do need to “look at the capabilities and responsibilities of each side, and its potential for in particular escalatory violence,” we must also look at the lack of responsibility exercized by each side in containing violence. It seems to me to be a bit absurd to blame Israel for maintaining fairly well-run, disciplined institutions, while at the same time excusing the Palestinians because they haven’t succeeded yet in causing significant casualties with their Qassams.
Helena:
“…the systematic, violent, and multi-faceted assault that Sharon’s government undertook against them in 2002-2003.”
Helena is confusing assault and counter-attack. The Israeli actions were in response to the Intifada, a Palestinian-instigated war. The results must be laid at the feet of those Palestinian leaders, living and dead, who instigated the warfare.
Merely losing the war, or at least many battles, is not enough to explain the chaos on the Palestinian side. Many military organizations on the run and taking losses have maintained themselves in better order.
The Palestinian chaos is due to both the internal Palestinian decision to pursue the multi-track of diplomacy at the high-level, and war at the low-level, hoping for a one-two punch effect, AND the intervention of various external jihadi and anti-Israeli forces such as Iran, Syria and Hizbullah. That is, dividing the Palestinian forces created additional competing centers of leadership and the external exploiters magnified that effect. It’s unlikely that Israel was able to direct or predict the course of Palestinian history other than to attempt to suppress the Intifada.
While it would be wise of Israel to try to capitalize on the Palestinian chaos it is not clear how it can do so, especially given the rudderlessness Israel is now experiencing due to the loss of Ariel Sharon’s leadership.
The Israeli government has today decided to permit East Jerusalem Palestinians to vote in the upcoming elections. This can be interpreted as sabotage of Mamoud Abbas or as support of Palestinian unity or even as the muddled thinking of an Israeli government in crisis. But we can’t be sure of it’s intent nor of it’s intent.
It seems to me to be a bit absurd to blame Israel..we must also look at the lack of responsibility exercized by each side in containing violence.
JES, in this moral framework “responsibility” is a rigid function of capability. Incompetence actually diminishes culpability. Factions answering to no elected (or even unelected) body are ipso facto more virtuous than an organized military with a disciplined command structure, so long as their bombs are cruder and kill fewer people. It’s all rather counterintuitive and sophisticated, nest-ce pas?
Vadim,
Yes, yes. Now I understand. At some point the ineptitude devolves into splapstick, and then they become kind of cute.
as for a Hamas political ascendency, I don’t think it matters to Israel whether the Sewer Commissioner in Jenin is Hamas or Fatah, whether the Mayor of Rafah is Hamas or Fatah…it would of course be a different story if a Hamas Interior Minister were to dispatch suicide bombers or Qassam rockets to Israel…then the reponsibility of the Israeli government – whether led by Likud, Kadima or Labor – would be to do all in its power to protect its citizens.
Warren and his “Palestinian society has been thriving under Israeli “administration”!!
The more I read the drivel put out by Zionist apologists, the more it reminds me of the drivel put out by the Soviets to justify their occupation of Eastern Europe. The words are the same, the reasoning is the same, and the utter shamelessness is the same. And many of the people who seem to be expounding this stuff even seem to have received their training in the old USSR, literally.
Warren reminds me of the US newsman who visited the labor camps in Siberia and upon returning wrote an article about the “pink cheeked workers gamboling in the snow”.
“Kassandra”, read this please:
http://hdr.undp.org/reports/global/2005/pdf/HDR05_HDI.pdf
Pay special attention to the HDI numbers on page 224 applicable to the occupied Palestinian territories. Then you can come back and explain how the Zionist/Stalinist/Likudniks at the UN HDRO got it all wrong. In case you’re too lazy to check, the figure for the occupied territories (.73) is on a par with that of syria (.72) and jordan (.76) and considerably higher than that of egypt (.66).
you might also read this piece by Efraim Karsh (disclaimer: he’s an Israeli Jew, get over it.)
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=21711611
During the 1970’s, in fact, the West Bank and Gaza constituted the fourth fastest-growing economy in the world — ahead of Singapore, Hong Kong, Korea, and substantially ahead of Israel itself. Although GNP per capita grew somewhat more slowly thanks to the rapidly expanding Palestinian population, the rate was still high by international standards, with per-capita GNP expanding tenfold between 1968 and 1991 from US$165 to US$1,715 (compared with Jordan’s US$1,050, Egypt’s US$600, Turkey’s US$1,630, and Tunisia’s US$1,440).
Kassandra
I said “almost thriving” in response to Timothy’s blood libel ‘”Cherokee final solution” for Palestine’. My fact are straight. Timothy’s hysteria is willfully dishonest or the product of an unbalanced mind.
Life for the Palestinians is not a bowl of cherries nor is it a tea party. Most of the pain results from the Intifada and other military aggressions on the part of the Palestinians. It is noteworthy that the condition of the Palestinians in Lebanon, Syria and Jordon is so poor. The various Arab leaders have been organizing a series of military misadventures since 1948 that has hurt the Palestinians more than the Israelis.
Vadim, we have no clue where Effi Karsh got those numbers from. He is not in any way a qualified development economist. I prefer to use the much more solid and excellently documented work of people like Sarah Roy, whose book on the “De-development of Gaza” under Israeli occupation is a classic study of the effects of a colonial-type administration on an indigenous economy.
Have you ever been to Gaza? Have you ever really talked to people in Gaza or the West Bank about their lives? Or more to the point, listened as they talked?
Sarah Roy did that, over a lengthy period of time. Effi Karsh probably hasn’t talked to any Palestinians for many years now. (Certainly, he hasn’t listened to any of them.) Why on earth should we give any weight to his– or your– uninformed, hostile, and incredibly patronizing view of the situation of the Palestinians?
Tell us about your areas of expertise sometime, Vadim. Then we’ll know how much weight to give to your views.
Sorry Helena, but I don’t believe that someone has to be a “qualified development economist” to understand and cite the macroeconomic and social statistics that “Effi” Karsh has cited. These numbers (e.g. GNP, infant-mortality statistics, electricity coverege statistics, numbers of school children, number of universities, etc.) were all compiled by “qualified development economists” working for the Israel Bureau of Statistics, the World Bank, and various UN agencies (all documented in Prof. Karsh’s book Arafat’s War on page 259).
In fact, I believe that Vadim cited precisely the same HDI sources that you previously cited in support of some of your arguments.
Further, I believe that it is rather irrelevant, in relation to these statistics, whether or not Vadim has or has not been to or spoken to anybody in the Gaza Strip. I also think that it is a bit pretentious, if you will pardon me, to use your own assumption about whether or not Prof. Karsh (“Effi”) would or would not spoken or listened to Palestinians.
As for Sara Roy, she may be a “qualified development economist”, but that doesn’t meen that she is immune to prejudice or that she doesn’t have less of an axe to grind than does, say, Professor Karsh.
I don’t pretend to have any more expertise than Vadim but I remain convinced that in focusing upon the Israeli reaction to the Palestinian elections, we are missing the far more significant story, namely the reaction to a strong Hamas showing of the old line Fatah generation who regard their political fiefdoms – particularly the associated public jobs, contracts, payoffs – as their birthright.
We will find out soon enough.
Sorry. Early morning. That should have been:
“I also think that it is a bit pretentious, if you will pardon me, to use your own assumption about whether or not Prof. Karsh (“Effi”)spoke to or would or would not have listened to Palestinians.”
And this should have read:
“As for Sara Roy, she may be a ‘qualified development economist’, but that doesn’t meen that she is immune to prejudice or that she has less of an axe to grind than does, say, Professor Karsh.”
or your [sic]– uninformed, hostile, and incredibly patronizing view
Helena, you should try to avoid [falsely] perceiving aggression in every dissenting voice.
there’s nothing hostile about my comment (unlike the remark that prompted it.) As far as ‘uninformed’ goes — anyone can read reports issued by the World Bank, which I’m quite sure is the provenance of Professor Karsh’s not-so-controversial data. The World Bank compiled its study data from among other sources the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics. There’s nothing strange about its methods or conclusions. I’m surprised you’d challenge them, frankly and I’m eager to hear your factual or statistical basis for doing so. Here’s another more in-depth report from the same source (World Bank economist Sebastien Dessus) that makes the same claim, exploding in some depth the very same GDP and growth estimates.
http://www.erf.org.eg/9th%20annual%20conf/9th%20PDF%20Presented/Finance%20-%20Macro/FM-P%20Sebastien%20Dessus.pdf
Dessus holds a doctorate in economics from the Sorbonne and worked at the OECD for 8 years. Since you asked, my own professional background is in econometrics (financial derivatives, stochastic calculus, energy economics), but it shouldn’t matter who I am or what my background is, since I’m citing sterile, verifiable data, not offering views or impressions much less professional opinions of my own. I suggest you read the Dessus piece (it’s short), and if you take issue with any of Karsh’s claims re: GDP growth in the occupied territories, please do let us know exactly where your objections lie. I look forward to reading about them.
And if you look at the population statistics you’ll see that the Palestinian population is growing by leaps and bounds. And if you look at the street, or at photos of the streets, you’ll see that the Palestinian youngsters are taller than their parents (or clearly on their way to growing that tall). Average height is a decent measure of prosperity over subsistence. And is perhaps less subject to the manipulation of statisticians and economists.
All this claptrap about the oppression of the Palestinians, removing the context of the Palestinian-instigated wars, is so far removed from reality as to bring into question the motives of the accusers.
there IS something surrealistic about the protests of Palestinian sympathizers…it is like the boy who killed his parents and wants sympathy for being an orphan…we hear so much about Israeli occupation and Palestinian suffering…but very little about the missed opportunities of the 1947 UN Partition Plan, Nasser deciding to go ahead and provoke the 1967 war by expelling UN peacekeepers from Sinai, blockading the Straits of Tiran, mobilizing his armies and encouraging his Syrian allies to do the same even though at the time Gaza was occupied by Egypt and the West Bank by Jordan, the Carter/Sadat 5-year autonomy plan for Palestinians in 1979, no counteroffer by Arafat to the Clinton/Barak proposal in 2000, suicide bombing campaigns, Qassam missiles, etc.