Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Operation pillar of cloud. Israeli assault on Gaza

Yet this is the reason that Britain is abstaining rather than supporting the Palestinians. According to something that I read yesterday anyway, because the Palestinians would give no guarantees that they would not pursue war crimes (why the fuck should they?), our government would not support their cause.

The logic escapes me too btw.
 
dylans said:
All UN recognition will do is boost Abbas dire support amongst Palestinians for a short time. This is the PAs whole purpose in seeking it. It offers nothing to Palestinians, nothing and you are kidding yourself if you believe the world will lift a finger to protect the sovereignty of this fictional state.
Click to expand...
But wouldn't UN recognition be a step forward? I can't see how it could hurt.
 
I had a migraine today and am unable to stare at the screen for very long so I cant drone on like I normally do.

But in brief, I dont quite agree with dylans stance on this. I am not expecting this stuff to make a massive difference in the immediate future, but symbolism is not utterly irrelevant. Israel are bothered by this stuff, and thats not automati reason to cheer it but it does suggest that there are some implications down the road.

And even if you think its irrelevant, it will still be interesting to see how Israel responds, since there has been talk previously of them squishing Abbas if he goes for it.

Also, oops:

Baroness Tonge, a frequent critic of Israel who quit the Lib Dems earlier this year, added: "By making our government's support for the UN bid conditional on Palestine not pursuing Israel through the ICC, is the government not admitting Israel has committed war crimes in Gaza and the West Bank and is seeking impunity for that country?"
Click to expand...

From near the end of http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20524115
 
two sheds said:
Does the UK abstaining make any difference to the outcome of the vote?
Click to expand...
Not really - they're still expected to get it apparently, though you never know how many deals are going on in the background. It's the UK govt sending a signal of its policy towards the issue, which we know already (i.e. wants to continue the current farce of "peace talks" indefinitely).
 
two sheds said:
Ta - so the UK's demand for no preconditions is just hot air - what I thought.
Click to expand...
They would have been aware that the PA would reject it (which they have done). The preconditions that they want are basically that Israeli settlers stop continuing to colonise while "talks" are going on. It suits the UK (and US) to have the pretence of talks which somehow always stall and fall apart, whilst at the same time Israel increases domination of the area in ways that are increasingly hard to reverse and increase the propensity of the talks to fall apart.
 
TomUS said:
But wouldn't UN recognition be a step forward? I can't see how it could hurt.
Click to expand...
My problem with it is that it's a substitute for resistance. It comes from a regime that actively crushes demonstrations in its territory,, locks up resistance fighters and political activists and polices the occupation for Israel. Abbas and the PA have resorted to this strategy out of desperation because their strategy of appeasement has failed and because Palestinians know it has failed. In fact 20 years of grovelling to Israel has given the West Bank nothing but hundreds of thousands more settlements. The PA are desperate to retain some shred credibility amongst Palestinians and have literally nothing left.

That's why I think its dangerous because if he wins it he will trumpet it as some kind of victory when it is in fact a chimera that gives the impression of achievement when in fact it gives Palestinians nothing and I see no reason to celebrate a strategy designed only to save Abbas' neck. Better it fails and contributes another nail into his political coffin
 
But even if he wins he may lose, just in a different way. ie if Israel sidelines him, knowing the rather crude way they do these things its not impossible to imagine that some good may come out of it eventually as a result of a backlash, in a roundabout sort of way.

I suppose what Im trying to say is that I have no faith in the PA or Abbas, but there is still propaganda potential in the UN stuff, and thats a front upon which Israel can and arguably have been suffering a very prolonged loss.

Oh I dont know, I've even wondered if it would suit Israel to have a less willing partner for peace in the west bank these days, but it isnt really clear to me just how much of the policing is presently left to the PA as opposed to Israeli's. Werent Israeli forces doing some of the violent policing there in recent weeks when protests flared, not just the PA?
 
elbows said:
But even if he wins he may lose, just in a different way. ie if Israel sidelines him, knowing the rather crude way they do these things its not impossible to imagine that some good may come out of it eventually as a result of a backlash, in a roundabout sort of way.

I suppose what Im trying to say is that I have no faith in the PA or Abbas, but there is still propaganda potential in the UN stuff, and thats a front upon which Israel can and arguably have been suffering a very prolonged loss.

Oh I dont know, I've even wondered if it would suit Israel to have a less willing partner for peace in the west bank these days, but it isnt really clear to me just how much of the policing is presently left to the PA as opposed to Israeli's. Werent Israeli forces doing some of the violent policing there in recent weeks when protests flared, not just the PA?
Click to expand...

Israeli strategy does appear strangely self defeating but then this is nothing new. They undermined the secular PLO and got Hamas for their trouble, then they undermined Oslo and got the second intifada for their trouble. Then they undermined (and perhaps murdered?) Arafat and replaced him with Abbas and gave Gaza to Hamas for their trouble and now they want to undermine Abbas in the face of a rising challenge from Hamas. Something that is only guaranteed to see Hamas' influence further undermine the PA in the West Bank.

The most self defeating policy of all of course, is Likud's stated intent to colonise and eventually annex the West Bank. It should be remembered that for all their public mutterings about a peace process, the colonisation and annexation of the West Bank is Likud policy. Its in their founding charter. Something that is guaranteed to bring over 2 million Palestinians into Israel (unless they go for straightforward direct ethnic cleansing and drive them into Jordan at gunpoint which it is be hoped would be beyond even them in 2012) and is guaranteed to turn Israel into an apartheid state as Israel will be forced to deny this population civil rights in order to maintain the Jewish Majority needed for a Jewish state.

Of course this is nothing new. Common sense would imply that giving the Palestinians a powerless fake state in the West Bank with the trappings of statehood would be in Israel's best interests (which was Rabin's belief) but we have seen Israel fatally undermine that possibility through settlement activity. I think it is important to see it from the point of view of Israel's ultra Zionists. To them, the West Bank is Judea and Samaria, it is an ideological attachment and a belief that the land is the god given right of the Jews. Such thinking is not amenable to common sense or to compromise. Rather it is a goal to be achieved regardless of the price and certainly not something to be given away in exchange for peace. To the likes of Likud and the Israeli right any peace deal that gives up the West Bank is a betrayal of Israel. As such, all public talk of a peace deal and two states is simply mealy mouthed rhetoric to placate world opinion while the process of settlement and colonisation continues unabaited.

To this end then, Abbas is useful so far as he is seen as aiding that process by helping to pacify and divide the Palestinians and he is someone to be dumped the moment he outlives his usefulness. The calculation then is whether his UN statehood bid and refusal to engage in meaningless negotiations, insistance on Israel ending or freezing settlement expansions etc means he is becoming more of a hindrance than an asset. In which case, Israel will simply scrap the PA and go back to directly administering the occupation without him. To be honest, I think Israel are pretty surprised they have managed to string him along this far. In private they must be laughing their heads off at his gullibility.
 
dylans said:
Israeli strategy does appear strangely self defeating
Click to expand...
They've been pretty suicidal for quite a while. Seems most Israelis would wake up.
In which case, Israel will simply scrap the PA and go back to directly administering the occupation without him. To be honest, I think Israel are pretty surprised they have managed to string him along this far.
Click to expand...
Israel is being stretched militarily. The huge # of troops & resources to fight little Gaza, a likely war with Hezbollah eventually, & of course Iran. I really wonder if they would be able to completely police the WB also. With the unrest among Israeli Jews over the economy (& I think they are crushed with taxes to support the IDF even with US gifts), I think they'll want a PA in the WB to continue. Weather it's Abbas that continues to lead it doesn't matter much I don't think to most Israelis or Palistinians.

Seems the UN thing will pass & it will make things much more uncomfortable to Bibi & co. Hamas doesn't oppose it & Israel & it's strong supporters are rabidly against it. That alone may be a good indication it's a good idea. It might even promote Palestinian reunification.
 
I'm watching the UN stuff on their video feed. Israeli bloke is speaking now, giving a history lesson which is not completely inaccurate in regards to the 1948-1993 period at least.

http://webtv.un.org
 
Watching this vote I am reminded of 1993 just after the Oslo accords and Rabin and Arafats famous handshake on the Whitehouse lawn. I was on a bus travelling from Jordan to the West Bank town of Jericho. On the bus people were celebrating, waving Palestinian flags, giving victory salutes. Women trilling in that unique way of Arab women. People handing out sweets. Outside the window, Flags hung on government buildings. People were happy. I got off the bus and someone immediately introduced me to a Palestinian policeman in his new uniform with Palestinian flag on his shirt and beret. "Welcome in Palestine" He said. "Soon we will be free."

That was 19 years ago. Then too it was heralded as a symbolic victory. Oslo was meant to run for 5 years before a final status agreement, independence and statehood. 19 years! Palestinians are choking on symbols. Now I'm sure people in the West Bank are celebrating and waving flags and giving victory signs and handing out sweets again. I don't begrudge them that.

But when the party is over the occupation will still be there with its roadblocks and barbed wire and concrete fences and the settlements will continue and nothing will have changed.

Abbas went to the UN not to ask it for anything new. Not really. He went, out of frustration and desperation to ask for a reaffirmation of something that has been UN policy since 1967. That is a recognition that land taken by Israel by conquest is occupied Palestinian land. This is not new. It has been reaffirmed by every UN vote on the question for half a century. It is a principle upheld by international humanitarian law, for all that's worth. No one except Israel seriously disputes it. Even the US claims to agree with this.

However Israel doesn't recognise this of course. So when attempting to enter negotiations, the PA and Israel are following completely different narratives. To the PA the starting point is international law and UN resolutions concerning the illegality of Israeli occupation and settlement of Palestinian territory.

To Israel the starting point is whatever Israel wants it to be. Including so called "facts on the ground". This is what negotiations with no preconditions means to Israel.

Abbas, by taking this to the UN is hoping that the UNs reaffirmation of the Palestinian starting position will somehow strengthen its position when it returns to negotiations. I think Israel will have other ideas.
 
For this not to have been vetoed the trade off has been massive conditions still imposed on Palestine. Apart from the settlements, occupation etc Palestine has had to promise not to use the ICC to bring any Israeli war criminals to justice.
 
9 countries who voted no: US, Israel, Panama, Palau, Canada, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Czech Republic, Micronesia

41 who abstained: Albania, Andorra, Australia, Bahamas, Barbados, Bosnia/Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Colombia, Croatia, Dem. Rep. of Congo, Estonia, Fiji, Germany, Guatemala, Haiti, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malawi, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Netherlands, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Poland, Korea, Moldova, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, San Marino, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Macedonia, Togo, Tonga, UK, Vanuatu

What do these tiny islands in the Pacific have against Palestine :hmm:
 
smmudge said:
9 countries who voted no: Israel, Panama, Palau, Canada, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Czech Republic, Micronesia

41 who abstained: Albania, Andorra, Australia, Bahamas, Barbados, Bosnia/Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Colombia, Croatia, Dem. Rep. of Congo, Estonia, Fiji, Germany, Guatemala, Haiti, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malawi, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Netherlands, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Poland, Korea, Moldova, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, San Marino, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Macedonia, Togo, Tonga, UK, Vanuatu

What do these tiny islands in the Pacific have against Palestine :hmm:
Click to expand...

Who was the 9th country to vote against? Iirc Botswana was the only country in Africa to oppose Palestine joining the UN.
 
sunny jim said:
For this not to have been vetoed the trade off has been massive conditions still imposed on Palestine. Apart from the settlements, occupation etc Palestine has had to promise not to use the ICC to bring any Israeli war criminals to justice.
Click to expand...
Can't be vetoed. Its a general assembly vote. Veto only applies to security council. Believe me, if the US could have vetoed this they would have.
 
Really it's the US who the Palestinians are at war with. I mean, come the fuck on:

Admission of the Palestinians to any UN agency automatically triggers the withdrawal of US funding to that agency. Admission of the Palestinians to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation last year saw the US withdraw its funding, about 20% of its revenue.
Click to expand...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/29/palestinian-un-vote-israel

And people go on like the US are just watching from the sidelines and maybe go in when they absolutely have to but of course they've got everyone's best interests at heart. Give me a fucking break.

The Palestinians won't be free until the US collapses as a superpower.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

littlebabyjesus
Israel's shoddy Gaza propaganda
2 3 4
Replies
116
Views
8K
frogwoman
frogwoman
teqniq
Worldwide protest/actions concerning events in Gaza/Palestine/Israel
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
173
Views
11K
zahir
Z
Jennaonthebeach
Derailed train in Ohio & giant cloud of polyvinyl chloride
2 3 4 5
Replies
122
Views
6K
hitmouse
hitmouse
Pickman's model
Israel and hezbollah after the exploding pagers
12 13 14 15 16
Replies
467
Views
20K
yield
Y
Protag
Israel-Iran conflicts - news and discussion
6 7 8 9 10
Replies
279
Views
15K
teqniq
teqniq
Back
Top Bottom