With friends like these...
One small fact probably says more about the Annapolis conference, and the Israeli-Palestinian "peace process" it is supposed to inaugrate, than any of the many other things I could mention. That is, the identity of the US/Israeli-approved representative of the Palestinians at this ceremonial charade: Fatah.
Let's set aside for a moment the fact that it is Israel and the US, not the Palestinian people, who effectively gets to choose who negotiates on the latter's behalf (as a thought experiment, try imagining the Palestinians choosing which Israeli or US politicians get to join them in negotiations). Instead, let's just focus on the quality of the Palestinian's appointed representatives. Can they be relied upon to act in the best interests of the Palestinian people?
Allow me to offer you a small indication.
Since Hamas won a free and fair election in January last year, Israel and the West (including Britain) have punished the Palestinian people for their incorrect political choice through impoverishment and starvation via a blockade and theft of Palestinian revenues. I wrote about the crushing human costs of the blockade here. When Hamas took control of the Gaza Strip, apparently in response to a coup attempt by elements within Fatah, the Occupied Territories became divided between Fatah's West Bank and Hamas-controlled Gaza. The blockade of Gaza continued, but was lifted for the West Bank.
The humanitarian situation in Gaza deteriorated further. Last week a senior UN official described the blockade as "indiscriminate", "illegal" and displaying "profound inhumanity". The "crushing sanctions" had resulted in "truly appalling living conditions". The Independent reported the official, John Ging, saying that the UN "was unable to provide more than 61 per cent of the necessary calories to refugees. "At present we do not have sufficient funding to provide just one high nutrient biscuit to 200,000 children in UN schools"". The sanctions had caused "human suffering and misery for the entire civilian population in Gaza".
In the summer, a draft UN resolution was put forward by Qatar and seconded by Indonesia, simply expressing concern over the humanitarian situation in Gaza. Fatah, the Palestinian representatives at Annapolis this week - are you sitting comfortably? - lobbied hard and successfully, not only to kill the resolution, but to block the presidential statement that is usually made when a resolution falls to explain why it was rejected.
Just take that in for a minute.
In September last year - 14 months ago now - The Independent reported that some Palestinian mothers had been reduced to scouring rubbish dumps to find enough food to feed their children once a day. Now you see in Annapolis, negotiating on the Palestinians behalf, people who actively support the starvation of Gaza by the occupier and its allies.
That, I believe, should give us the measure of the latest "peace process".
*****Let's set aside for a moment the fact that it is Israel and the US, not the Palestinian people, who effectively gets to choose who negotiates on the latter's behalf (as a thought experiment, try imagining the Palestinians choosing which Israeli or US politicians get to join them in negotiations). Instead, let's just focus on the quality of the Palestinian's appointed representatives. Can they be relied upon to act in the best interests of the Palestinian people?
Allow me to offer you a small indication.
Since Hamas won a free and fair election in January last year, Israel and the West (including Britain) have punished the Palestinian people for their incorrect political choice through impoverishment and starvation via a blockade and theft of Palestinian revenues. I wrote about the crushing human costs of the blockade here. When Hamas took control of the Gaza Strip, apparently in response to a coup attempt by elements within Fatah, the Occupied Territories became divided between Fatah's West Bank and Hamas-controlled Gaza. The blockade of Gaza continued, but was lifted for the West Bank.
The humanitarian situation in Gaza deteriorated further. Last week a senior UN official described the blockade as "indiscriminate", "illegal" and displaying "profound inhumanity". The "crushing sanctions" had resulted in "truly appalling living conditions". The Independent reported the official, John Ging, saying that the UN "was unable to provide more than 61 per cent of the necessary calories to refugees. "At present we do not have sufficient funding to provide just one high nutrient biscuit to 200,000 children in UN schools"". The sanctions had caused "human suffering and misery for the entire civilian population in Gaza".
In the summer, a draft UN resolution was put forward by Qatar and seconded by Indonesia, simply expressing concern over the humanitarian situation in Gaza. Fatah, the Palestinian representatives at Annapolis this week - are you sitting comfortably? - lobbied hard and successfully, not only to kill the resolution, but to block the presidential statement that is usually made when a resolution falls to explain why it was rejected.
Just take that in for a minute.
In September last year - 14 months ago now - The Independent reported that some Palestinian mothers had been reduced to scouring rubbish dumps to find enough food to feed their children once a day. Now you see in Annapolis, negotiating on the Palestinians behalf, people who actively support the starvation of Gaza by the occupier and its allies.
That, I believe, should give us the measure of the latest "peace process".
p.s. I am indebted to Richard Seymour, aka Lenin of the blog Lenin's Tomb, for the key link above on the UN resolution. Lenin and I may be children of different political families and differ on a few issues, but I have to say that his writing's consistently very well informed and tightly argued. A useful resource which I recommend.
Labels: Israel/Palestine
posted by David Wearing at 7:45 PM
2 Comments:
"And the name?"
I am Quisling
And the name?
Post a Comment
<< Home