Abu Mazen has been quoted as saying that a “senior figure” in the Israeli cabinet has been blocking the Israel-Hamas peace deal and he is widely thought to have been referring to Defense Minister Ehud Barak. As some possible corroborating evidence for this, note that IOF troops operating undercover killed five militants in an assassination op in the West Bank today. Of the five, four were reported as being Islamic Jihad and one with the (Fateh-linked) Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade.
In the west, Ehud Barak is generally widely thought of as a relative “peacenik” among Israeli political leaders. In 1999, when he was head of the Labor Party, he was indeed elected PM on a strongly pro-peace platform. (“I will complete the negotiations with the Palestinians within 6-9 months,” etc.) He failed miserably. In fact, he was hustled at the speed of light out of being the IDF’s chief of staff into being head of Labor, and never had time to learn anything at all about politics or diplomacy along the way. Hence, the coalition that he headed in Israel fell apart in almost record time, because of his total lack of political skills. The “peace process” fell apart disastrously, too, bringing us n short order Sharon’s disastrous September 2000 visit to Al-Aqsa Mosque, the outbreak of the Second Intifada, and Sharon’s amazing trioumphant re-entry into national leadership just 17 years after the Kahan Commission had said he should be banned from high office for life.
Along the way, Barak did make what could be described as two “drive-by, quickie” attempts at peacemaking. One with Hafez al-Asad, which failed miserably because of Barak’s arrogance and duplicity (and Bill Clinton’s complicity with both those aspects of Bark’s behavior.) That failure almost certainly helped kill Hafez al-Asad. After that one failed, Barak turned those same attributes in Yasser Arafat’s direction, forcing him to the completely ill-prepared Camp David 2 summit from which both Barak and Clinton emerged vociferously and in a quite one-sided way blaming Arafat.
My best friends in the Israeli peace movement heap a lot of blame on Barak for killing the Israeli peace movement at that point. By successfully spreading the (significantly inaccurate) story that he had made Arafat a “generous offer” and that Arafat had turned it down out of hand, Barak spread the idea very broadly in Israel and the US that the Israelis had “no partner for peace” on the Palestinian side.
Israel’s Labour Party has always been a flawed vehicle for any hopes of concluding a just and sustainable peace. One problem with the party since its inception has been the extremely incestuous relationship between its leadership and that of the Israeli military. Some of the IDF’s retired generals have become voices of good sense regarding the need for peacemaking; but many more of them have not. People like Ephraim Sneh, Binyamin (“Fouad”) Ben-Eliezer, and Ehud Barak have taken into the party’s upper echelons the mindset of bulldozers and bullies. They are also very much aware of the huge interests many of their friends and former colleagues have in the success of Israel’s massive military-industrial complex.
So I’m not totally surprised now if we see Ehud Olmert being more forward-leaning on peace issues than Ehud Barak.
Let’s hope Barak gets up to no more mischief and the Israel-Hamas ceasefire deal can still be saved.
37 thoughts on “Ehud Barak the blocker?”
Comments are closed.
You write: “I hope that the JWN comments boards will be a place where we can all discuss ideas, interpretations, and differences in a friendly way, realizing that no one person has a monopoly on truth…”
It is clear, from your profoundly slanted and skewed view of the Mideast, that your views come from one who believes she has a “monopoly on truth.”
xxxxx- What you write is classically flawed logic. You may be right, that H believes that she has a monopoly of truth, but your argument is merely assertion.
Actually it would seem to be provably wrong that Helena thinks she has a monopoly on truth, given that she has more than once questioned her own assumptions.
Well, let’s see now. A slanted (or skewed) view is one that takes a particular position, much to be favored, IMHO, over an unslanted (unskewed) view that presents no partiality at all on important issues. And of course taking a position carries with it, per se, no belief in a monopoly on truth. So it’s no wonder that one making such charges would wish to remain anonymous while refusing to discuss issues in a friendly way.
Besides the Israel-Hamas talks we have the Arab Summit on the 29th in Damascus which Saudi Arabia will attend, possible Israel-Syria talks (to isolate Iran), overtures being made by Iran toward Egypt to improve relations, the firing of Admiral Fallon and Cheney’s visit to the ME — a full plate for the (dieting) US State Department!
I don’t see anything particularly “friendly” about the opinions I have read on this web site. And Ms. Cobban, to refresh your memory, is the one who said that “no one person has a monopoly on truth.” I was simply pointing out this irony: that her opinions about the Middle East have that precise air to them–that of someone who believes herself to possess a “monopoly on truth.” But I always love people who plead for “friendly” dialogue, then proceed to express distinctly hostile opinions, and who skewer anyone who disagrees with them. But if you want to call that “friendly”, be my guest. And my wish to remain anonymous is none of your business.
A quick clarification, concerning my last remarks. I wasn’t referring to your comments, Mr. Bacon, as being not particularly friendly. I meant to say, if I was not clear, that the comments on this web site (by Ms. Cobban) that I have read are not all that friendly, it seems to me–that there is the suggestion, when posting comments, to be “courteous”, yet I find little that is “courteous”, or to use your word, “friendly”, about the philosophy/viewpoints Ms. Cobban has expressed on her site, at least those comments and opinions which I have read; the comments of hers I have read are, in fact, quite hostile to Israel. So I guess hostility to Israel is fine, but when you leave comments, you have to be “courteous”, and “friendly.” I think maybe there is a bit of a contradiction there. Thank you for letting me clarify that.
According to Israel Police (who actually carried out these operations – not the IDF), in all cases there was an attempt to arrest these “militants”, who opened fire on the police officers.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/963700.html
JES, its reported by many channels all same sorty that those Isralie police, or IDF forces are undercover in unmarked van they the stopped shoots the car those Palictinians inside.
Whatever Haarezt saying its to chill down this operation and calm the anger that raised due to this planed assassination.
The television pictures showed dozens of bullet holes in a concentrated pattern on the drivers’ side of the windscreen. They also showed a corpse being dragged out of the car. If there was a gun-battle it was certainly very onesided. On the television report it was described as a “targeted killing”, reinforcing the suggestion that the outcome (killing the people in the car rather than arresting them) was pre-ordained.
JES’s correction is misplaced. Helena’s article says “IOF”, not IDF, were the killers. No doubt this is intended as the acronym for Israeli Occupation Forces, accurate whether the police or the army did the shooting!
“According to Israeli Police” makes the statement highly questionable, very alike to “According to the statements made by the police of apartheid South Africa.” Both entities have been proven to, shall we say, distort the truth to unbelievable lengths.
Is Hasbara beginning to break down?
I just saw the mayor of that ethnically-cleansed Palestinian town of Najd, now known as Sderot, on BBC’s HardTalk. He was drunk! He mumbled, he squirmed in his chair, he became rudely combative with the host, he continuously interrupted the host, talked over her. He did everything to make himself look like a complete idiot. He acted as if he were drunk, or does the true zio personality bubble to the surface from time to time?
The first comment above, and all the others posted in the name of this feisty truth-teller (irony alert there) who calls her/himself “xxxx” serve only to make personal attacks, and not to discuss the topic of the post.
Yes, it is true I express opinions (and no-one is obliged to read them if they choose not to.) But I base my opinions and my analysis on a considerable amount of data, gathered over many years. For examnple, regarding the present post, I have met Ben-Eliezer and Sneh and had significant small-group conversations with them. I have also met and interviewed a number of their former IDF colleagues who then moved on to run sizeable Israeli defense-industry firms with contracts all round the world, especially in Asia. All of them Labour people! I think we certainly have to entertain as a real possibility the influence of these distinctly non-eirenic interests within the Labour Party.
Also, when I write here, I am careful to make my sourcing as transparent as possible. So if people would like to contribute to the discussion, I’d ask again that they (1) stick to the topic, (2) avoid personal attacks, and (3) keep their comments as transparently evidence-based as possible– or, pose new questions for the reading community to consider.
in all cases there was an attempt to arrest these “militants”
Give me a break.
Israel has an assassination policy which to date has resulted in the death of more than four hundred people, unfortunately with the help of Palestinian collaborators in these extra-judicial killings. “Today a request to exit the Gaza Strip to receive medical treatment, visit a dying relative or study in the West Bank or abroad is often contingent upon one’s willingness to collaborate.” Israel’s security agencies penetrate, fragment and control Palestinian society through the production of profound distrust while they are killing Palestinian leaders and innocents.
Ref: Army of Shadows by Hillel Cohen, as reviewed in The Nation.
I think that police forces around the world operate undercover, when necessary, to apprehend criminals. Further, I’m not certain of the appropriateness of a forensic analysis based on a television news broadcast. (“dozens of bullet holes in a concentrated pattern on the drivers’ side of the windscreen” simply tells me that the police officers are well trained and good marksmen.)
I did not bring this up for the sake of argument. Each “targeted assassination” has been followed by cries arguing that Israel should use legal procedures – arrest and trial – to deal with the “militants”, and that it is wrong to use aircraft and missiles to take out combatants. Well, yesterday that’s exactly what the police did, they went in on the ground and attempted to arrest the Islamic Jihad fighters. Witnesses, including a Palestinians journalist whom they had just visited prior to the incident in Bethlehem, stated that Shahade and his companion were armed with automatic weapons.
The former governor of New York glorified the meaning of double standards.
JES,
It is great that you are not reactive-that you present your views in a well-argued manner, thus contributing much to the tragedy that is the enduring I/P conflict.
Imagine if we recognized that all people’s children matter-and right now, I/P are both living in terror-which is tragic.
KDJ
Apologies, JES, I ought to have written contributing to understanding the tragedy that is the I/P conflict.
from Ha’aretz:
“Targeted assassination / Little room for mistakes”
Mohammed Shahada, the most senior of the militants killed Wednesday, sensed that his days were numbered. Wednesday, about two hours before his death, Shahada and three associates visited the Bethlehem offices of the Palestinian news agency, Maan. The four spoke with Chief Editor Nasser Laham. Shahada complained about the IDF’s demolition of his home during a failed attempt to arrest him last week.
“The Israelis aren’t planning to arrest me, they’re planning to kill me,” Shahada said He refused even to drink coffee with Laham, fearing that the IDF was following him. The four drove to a restaurant owned by a relative of Shahada’s. The police’s undercover team was waiting nearby.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/963898.html
Sorry to say, but this forum is beyond pretentious. Ms. Cobban, you say to avoid personal attacks, but evidently your persistent attacks on and hostility towards an entire country, Israel, are just fine and dandy. So you are quite selective in your notion of what constitutes acceptable attacks. And Mr. Bacon’s attack on Israel, above, is just more of the same. Maybe when the Palestinians stop thumbing their noses at Israel every time Israel seeks to reach a peace agreement–and maybe when Palestinians stop blowing themselves up in a strategy to destroy any notion of a peace process–then perhaps peace will take place. Maybe the next time Israel takes an action like leaving Gaza, Palestinians will decide to build something, create something, rather than, perversely, use Israel’s exit as an opportunity to launch thousands of missles in an effort to kill people and cause as much havoc as possible. But this forum does nothing to contribute to “understanding” and a “just world.” It simply contributes to distortion, and attacks against a country which are coupled with entreaties to avoid “personal attacks”, and be “friendly.” You should do more than look at your “data” Ms. Cobban. You should look within, and ask these kinds of questions: what kind of a society routinely encourage people to blow themselves up, and kill as many people as possible at the same time? And what kind of society holds celebrations in the streets when Jewish seminary students are murdered in a terrorist attack? These kinds of celebrations, I’m sure you know, have taken place for years. Maybe when Hamas, and its supporters, re-think their obsession with death, and their utter joy over such crimes as suicide bombings, then peace will have a much better chance at succeeding.
anonymous,
You state the Ms. Cobban’s “philosophy/viewpoints” are not courteous or friendly enough, as if positions were people. This is where you’re confused, ascribing personal qualities to positions and thereby seeing a “contradiction.” Does that clarify the “contradiction” for you?
stop thumbing their noses at Israel every time Israel seeks to reach a peace agreement-
Historically this approved more than one time it’s the opposite what it stated.
Is this your truth you come to tell us here?
And what kind of society holds celebrations in the streets when Jewish seminary students are murdered in a terrorist attack?
what kind of society that throw millions of cluster bombs in 72 hours?
What kind of socity that used genocide,atrocities to create thier state trying wheelingback the history?
What kind of socity that headed by criminal like Ben Gorion and had criminal personals like Colonel’s Ze’ev Razand his ilks who attaked Iraq?
What society believing in “A land without people for a people without land.
Isn’t it “a monopoly on truth.”?
anonymous,
People who blow themselves up to kill the enemy would, I’m sure, much prefer to use F-16 fighters, Cobra gunships and high-tech drone aircraft. Unfortunately, because the US only provides these things to Israel, Palestinians have only their own bodies as delivery systems, and one does what one must to kill the enemy in a war, in this case a war for Palestine, which is increasingly being occupied by the invader in direct violation of United Nations sanctions.
Mr. Bacon: Your defense of suicide bombers–committed by and supported by people who obviously relish the act of killing, in particular the killing of civilians–is absolutely disgusting. I will point out, again, the fixation, the love, that so many people in Hamas and like-minded groups have for death.
There have been routine pronouncements–again and again–such as this, from one such leader: ‘We love death more than the Israelis love life.” If those are the kind of people you want to defend, be my guest. I’d love to know what action you’d take if suicide bombers came to your neighborhood, to your street, to commit mass murder. Defend them? Excuse them? Coddle them? And with that, I will exit from this revolting forum.
Do we got here Ayatollah “xxxxx”!
When I commented upon the late xxxx’s contribution I had no idea whether he was a partisan of Zionism or not.
I thought about it: it occured to me that the tone employed and the casual question begging, not to mention the fluent use of English, were all indications that he was, but…
I mention this because, by any objective reckoning, even Helena’s contributions are, inevitably, skewed towards Israel. Even to acknowledge the existence of Israel is to twist the discussion against the Palestinians.
The fact that zionists refuse to acknowledge the validity of the Palestinian case against the League of Nations, against the British government, against the Soviet and US governments, against the Security Council of the UN, (leave alone against the Ben Gurion government and its agents) should not be (I’m reminding myself) an excuse to forget that this is a case in which there is a wronged party and a violent aggressor whose behaviour keeps on pushing back the frontiers of delinquency.
As to Barak: Helena’s worst fears were being confirmed even as she posted her commentary.
So let me get this straight, Bevin – the only way not to “twist the discussion against the Palestinians” is to deny existing facts of political geography? Forward, one and all, to a parallel world?
It may well be that the Palestinians have been wronged by the entire world, which appears to be the gravamen of your argument. Others – Jews for instance – can make the same claim, with varying degrees of justice. I’m not sure how this is supposed to impact their rights and remedies in the here and now, though, especially since some of the entities they must look to for compensation do not exist.
And lest I be accused of excessive sarcasm, I am quite serious in saying that the Palestinians have been wronged by the world, including, quite often, Israel. What’s more, I say this as, in your words, a partisan of Zionism.
Others – Jews for instance – can make the same claim, with varying degrees of justice.
azazel , How they can can make the same claim?
Are the Arab/Palestinians causes what Jews Suffers?
A part from they shared same land 5000 years whatever happened to Jews can not be hold accountable to Arab/Palestinians in any way whatsoever unless you override all the historical facts and other matters of British empire gifting not their owned land to strangers.
Going back to Camp David, as I recall it wasn’t so much Arafat “turning it down” as Arafat refusing to even make a counter proposal – this after Barak, under huge pressure from the US, having publicly accepted the division of Jerusalem – a concession on a seminal issue for the Israelis?
Then of course there was the outbreak of the 2nd intifada which Arafat clearly intended to use to force further concessions out of Israel. There seems to be no mystery at all about the motives behind Arafat’s choice of tactics – perfectly legitimate from his point of view.
The only mystery to me was whether Arafat had thought the intifada tactic through to the point of understanding that the result would be the resurrection of Sharon? Did they have the idea that releasing Hamas to conduct relentless suicide bombings on Israeli civilians would result in Sharon pursuing such brutal retaliation that Israel would become isolated from the west and be forced into accepting UN peacekeepers? If this indeed was the Palestinian strategy, it backfired spectacularly as Sharon outsmarted them at every turn. The Israeli peace movement collapsed, Sharon ended up defeating the intifada, delivered Gaza to Hamas and Palestine is now, probably permanently, split in two while settlements continue to be constructed in the West Bank?
Could things have been worse for the Palestinians had they not ensured Barak’s defeat in 2001?
Salah, I was not saying that the Palestinians are accountable for what Jews have suffered. What I was saying was that, like Palestinians, Jews can make the claim that they have been mistreated by the world. Many others can also make that claim, especially as interconnected as we are these days: one can make the case that any mass killing or persecution, such as happened in Rwanda or Chechnya, represents a failure of the world order.
azazel I may put it not clear enough.
But when you sayinglike Palestinians, Jews can make the claim that they have been mistreated by the world.
Here there is differences between what Jews and what they suffer from the “world” comparing what the Palestinians suffering from Israelis “Jewish State” so there far differences between the tow claims here, if we say the world treat Palestinians badly, this because of supporting Israelis for so long blindly and unconditionally as looks they ask Jews for their giveness for their atrocities and suffering the Jews suffer in West and east Europe for long time.
Bringing “Rwanda” with the case of Palestinian it’s relevant here. Its tribe’s fights for power ended in killing millions, as for “Chechnya” they are resisting the humiliations of Russian power, they defending for their freedom.
Finally Palestinian case is very special the only case had created and by empire power, if Israelis think that they will end the resistance to their dream by force, look not far of 60 years approved its that not can happen. they need to think gain and again, today there is peace offer on the table (Saudi’s King Abdullah Peace Offer with approval and support of Arab League and many of its members states) they should be very concerned and come forward if they welling for peace.
Israelis should understand that building settlements between and on Arab land its “ILLIGLE” under international law and UN resolutions and for Mr. anonymous he should know these settlements are on Palestinian land that’s why targeted by militant with Hamas Qassam rockets are on “Illegal” built settlements.
Israeli settlement of Kfar Mimon
Israeli settlement of Sderot, which perches on our occupied land.
Israeli settlement of Nir Eshaq
Israeli settlement of Muftahim near Gaza Strip.
The True Face of Ehud Barak
By Alain Gresh
Israeli settlement of Sderot, which perches on our [sic] occupied land.
Salah, you’re as much a Palestinian as I am.
Still its good to know you (like so many here) consider land within Israel proper “Arab land.” Very sad.
Even to acknowledge the existence of Israel is to twist the discussion against the Palestinians.
Really!
vadim,
If you believe in peace lets give the Palestinians their land that occupied in 1967 and let them get on with their life on their own. You knew very well Arabs / Palestinians coming forwards they forgot what happen in the past,they agreed to negotiate peace the offer on the table till now.
Do not twisting facts here by trying to judge people on your own mindset.
The sad thing that you still defending a state that occupied others lands, continuing building “Illegal” settlements in the same time they restricting /band Arab “Palestinians” to built homes on their land (Just read what Abu Mazin said today in the news).
You should ashamed having an open mind still defending aggressors and occupiers for decades causing misery for people suffering.
Those who claiming are victims of the World “west” they are the offenders today in Palestine shame on you vadim.
“ Another time, we can argue about “what Zionism was supposed to be.” Just now, let us take note of what Zionism was not supposed to be: Two days after the yeshiva attack, Israel announced renewed construction of hundreds of homes in the West Bank town of Givat Ze’ev and authorized hundreds more in East Jerusalem. So much for the Road Map; so much for Israel’s explicit commitments at the Annapolis conference last fall
Zionism, then, as an act of spite; Zionism to keep a fractious coalition together; Zionism to satisfy those in the religious camp who are as far from “shameful Jewish passivity” as can be. Take your pick: a Zionism that polishes its boots, or a Zionism that spits in the face of the Other and on its own moral tradition. Either way, you lose. ”
What Zionism Was Not Supposed To Be
By Leonard Fein
Givat Ze’ev
– Exact Location: Ramallah district
– Established: 1983
– Number of settlers: As of 2006 – 10,796
– Distance from the Green Line (1967 border): 4.9km
– The settlement located inside the constructed or planned fence route.
“
Today, around 260,000 people live in 121 settlements throughout the West Bank (not including East Jerusalem).
17 settlements in the Gaza strip and 4 in Northern Samaria in the West Bank.