Who Will deliver the Palestinian State?

-

The is a guest note by Fadi Elsalameen, publisher of the Palestine Note.
Salam_Fayyad.jpgFor the past several years Palestine Prime Minister Salam Fayyad‘s name on the streets of the West Bank and Gaza has become synonymous with the words credibility, honesty, and transparency.
His hard work on building and reforming Palestinian institutions has paid off: Palestinians see him as a serious leader that can deliver to his people with or without the Israelis.
He has raised the bar of leadership so high that officials in the Fatah movement are feeling extremely uncomfortable and challenged. A senior Fatah leader and member of its central committee told me, last week, while the Brooking Institutions’ Saban Forum was taking place in Jerusalem “everyone comes to Ramallah to see Fayyad; they add us and Abu Mazen on their programs just as an excuse.”
The Fatah official was almost right: the Saban Forum did send a delegation to Ramallah, but they didn’t add him or Abu Mazen on the schedule, they only met with Prime Minister Fayyad.
This is the right approach: if the Palestinian politicians remain in internal political quagmire, the world should pay attention to those who are building in Palestine and help them build.
The international community should deal directly with the new style of leadership that is emerging in Palestine. It is the wish of the Palestinian people. The cult of self-appointed personalities that have done nothing for the Palestinians other than use their cause to create prestige for themselves and their families should be ousted. Everyone on the streets of the West Bank and Gaza will agree.
Why can’t they retire from political life, join universities in Palestine, and write books for the next generation to learn from their mistakes? Jibril Rijoub is one example of a Fatah politician that changed his useless political existence into a popular and productive head of sports. He is successfully building sports teams, and stadiums and giving sports a whole new meaning in Palestine.
When Arafat passed away, he took with him his style of leadership, and left the people with Abu Mazen and the personalities surrounding him as the figures of the transition period that followed.
That is why soon after people voted for Hamas. They did it for two reasons: to punish Fatah for its corruption, and out of a deep desire for change and improvement they wanted to see if Hamas could deliver what Fatah couldn’t.
Alas, to most Palestinians, Hamas and Fatah are both incompetent at this point. Nothing has been accomplished by either party to advance the cause of the Palestinians. In fact, the Palestinians are years behind.
Their PA and Fatah leadership enjoys traveling and shopping on trips abroad.
Meanwhile, Hamas is implementing Talibani backward policies such as Hijab in schools, and demanding women judges to cover in courts. Both Fatah and Hamas supporters are dismayed with their party leadership.
We must take note of an important change that is occurring in Palestine. Anyone on the streets will tell you Salam Fayyad is always visiting us, while Abbas and his people spend more days outside Palestine than inside.
Salam Fayyad represents the new Palestinian style of leadership that will deliver the Palestinian State. He is in touch with his people. He has visited almost every town in the West Bank. He puts on his shorts and runs in marathons for the handicapped, and when tragic personal events strike simple people in Palestine he calls them on the phone to elevate their spirits, promises to visit them personally, and then he actually does visit.
Fayyad’s is a promising example of leadership. The world owes it to the Palestinian people — who have yet to see a bright day in their lives — to support this kind of leadership and give it a chance to succeed. The people are ready to elect it and give it a mandate to implement its vision, and the world, especially the Arab world, must come through and help it deliver.
— Fadi Elsalameen

Comments

26 comments on “Who Will deliver the Palestinian State?

  1. nadine says:

    In his book _History Upside Down_ David Meir-Levi relates how Ho Chi Minh’s chief strategist, General Giap, met with Yasser Arafat and his lieutenants and told them that they, like the North Vitenamese, needed to redefine the terms of their struggle. Giap’s counsel was simple but profound says Meir-Levi: the PLO needed to to work in a way that concealed its real goals, permitted strategic deception, and gave the appearance of moderation: “Stop talking about annihilating Israel and instead turn your terror war into a struggle for human rights. Then you will have the American people eating out of your hand.” Meir-Levi goes on: ” At the same time that he was getting advice from General Giap, Arafat was also being tutored by Muhammad Yazid, who had been minister of information in two Algerian wartime governments (1958-1962).
    ‘ Wipe out the argument that Israel is a small state whose existence is threatened by Arab states, or the reduction of the Palestinian problem to a question of refugees; instead, present the Palestinian struggle as a struggle for liberation like the others. Wipe out the impression…that in the struggle between the Palestinians and the Zionists, the Zionist is the underdog. Now it is the arab who is oppressed and victimized in his existence because he is not only facing the Zionists but also world imperialism.’ ”
    These highly effective strategies have since been augmented by the Palestinian Myth Machine, an enormous but well oiled and efficient contraption. It beams its disinformation to an audience possessed of the sort of imbecile credulity that would make an African witch-doctor positively green with envy. This explains why after over five years of some 7000 unprovoked rocket attacks upon its civilian population Israel is demonized when she finally has the gall to defend herself.
    http://www.allrightmagazine.com/uncategorized/et-tu-goldstone-2392/

    Reply

  2. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “Water in the Gaza Strip is so salty that it is
    unfit for human consumption”
    Doesn’t bother Netanyahu and his nation of Nadines. Haven’t you heard, the Palestinians aren’t “human” anyway, they are subhumans on a par with 1950s american “nigras”. Any minute now, our resident zionist will be along to tell us its lucky they have any water at all, and that its a result of the graciousness of zionist charity.

    Reply

  3. Outraged American says:

    The Palestinians in the Gaza Strip now no longer have drinkable
    water. Genocide anyone?
    Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians isn’t even that slow
    anymore.
    Gaza water unfit for human consumption: Palestinians
    Sat Nov 21, 4:26 pm ET
    GAZA CITY (AFP) – Water in the Gaza Strip is so salty that it is
    unfit for human consumption, a Palestinian official in charge of
    water supplies inside the besieged coastal territory said on
    Saturday.
    “The water is no longer fit for human consumption, with analysis
    and international studies showing that just 10 percent of water
    in the Gaza Strip is usable… threatening the lives of
    Palestinians,” Munzir Shiblak warned.
    He called in a statement for “the necessary measures to be
    taken to end the problem of salinity in Gaza water supplies, a
    problem that is getting worse.”
    Shiblak called the water situation “critical.”
    He said the amount taken from underground aquifers last year
    to supply 1.5 million people with drinking water and for
    agriculture was 160 million cubic metres, but that natural
    replenishment was 80-90 million cubic metres.
    “The ground water deficit rose to more than 80 million cubic
    metres last year, and if this situation continues reserves could
    collapse in the next few years,” Shiblak said.
    In September the UN Environment Programme also said Gaza’s
    underground water supplies are “in danger of collapse” following
    years of overuse and the devastating war Israel waged in the
    territory at the turn of the year.
    http://tinyurl.com/yaenfbz
    h/t antiwar.com

    Reply

  4. nadine says:

    Saeb Erekate recently revealed on al Jazeera what he called “the secret” why the Palestinians refused Olmert’s offer in 2007:
    “According to reports in the Israeli press, the proposal presented by Israel would have given the Palestinians 98.5 % of this territory: all of the Gaza Strip, 93% of the West Bank and 5.5% of territory as a land swap that would enlarge Gaza to compensate for the West Bank land Israel intended to annex; in addition, a connecting route between Gaza and the West Bank would be made available.
    The Palestinians were quick to reject the Israeli proposal – again an event that apparently went largely unnoticed. Not long afterwards, with new elections already scheduled in Israel, there were rumors that prime minister Olmert and foreign minister Livni intended to make a last-ditch effort to clinch a deal.
    These rumors have now been confirmed by the long-time Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erekat during a recent appearance on Al-Jazeera TV.
    Erekat acknowledged that Israel had presented the Palestinians with a proposal in November 2008 which “talked about Jerusalem and almost 100% of the West Bank,” and he noted that Mahmoud Abbas could have accepted this proposal, just as the “Palestinian negotiators could have given in in 1994, 1998, or 2000.” Intriguingly, Erekat then proceeded to reveal what he considered a “secret”: he explained why the Palestinians had rejected the recent proposals just like the ones offered in 2000/01 during the negotiations in Camp David and Taba. What prevented an agreement every time – at least according to Erekat – was the Israeli request that the Palestinians acknowledge the central importance of the Temple Mount for Jewish history and religion.
    It is worthwhile to quote Erekat’s description of a scene at Camp David, when Bill Clinton tried to convince Yassir Arafat to come to an agreement: “You will be the first president of a Palestinian state, within the 1967 borders – give or take, considering the land swap – and East Jerusalem will be the capital of the Palestinian state, but we want you, as a religious man, to acknowledge that the Temple of Solomon is located underneath the Haram Al-Sharif.” According to Erekat, Arafat responded “defiantly” to Clinton: “I will not be a traitor. Someone will come to liberate it after 10, 50, or 100 years. Jerusalem will be nothing but the capital of the Palestinian state, and there is nothing underneath or above the Haram Al-Sharif except for Allah.”
    It may be debatable if Erekat is really revealing a “secret” here, but it is certainly surprising that the long-time Palestinian chief negotiator chose to emphasize an entirely symbolic issue and to present the repeated Palestinian refusal to compromise on this issue as a demonstration of proud defiance that is ultimately more important than the achievement of a peace agreement that would allow for the creation of a Palestinian state.”
    http://cgis.jpost.com/Blogs/warpedmirror/entry/saeb_erekat_s_secret_posted
    The politicians in charge of Palestine would rather be stateless forever than acknowledge that the Jews have a smidgen of of right to be there. They would rather kill the people’s chance of independence forever. What chance does Fayyad have? They will only tolerate him as long as he promises to get them something for nothing. The moment he has to give anything in exchange, even a purely symbolic recognition of anything pertaining to the Jewish State, they will disown him.

    Reply

  5. downtown says:

    Q: Who will deliver the Palestinian State????
    A: American Jews and their Jewish/Christian Zionist supporters in the US Congress.

    Reply

  6. ?????? says:

    Gotta love Nadine. Just substitute the word “Zionist” for “Arab,” and her statement reads: “many people have pondered the paradox of how the Zionist world can produce so many wonderful, generous, hospitable people, but gets stuck so badly in vicious, belligerent, unresponsive political systems. Unfortunately, there is just something about Zionist politics that makes vicious belligerence a winning formula for gaining and keeping power. I don’t have to understand how it works to observe that it is so

    Reply

  7. nadine says:

    “I don’t see how anything positive happens in the statehood fight if Gaza and Hamas are not fully involved.” (Dan Kervick)
    …but if they are involved, then it’s guaranteed nothing positive will happen.

    Reply

  8. Dan Kervick says:

    Fadi, do you think a Palestinian governing coalition that excludes Hamas can deliver a Palestinian state? And what kind of Palestinian state do you support? How do you propose to create it? Where do you think its borders should be? What are your views on the best way to end the occupation? Do you even think ending the occupation is possible?
    This West Bank inside political baseball is nice, but can you do more to convince me you are not just talking about rearranging deck chairs on the titanic?
    I don’t see how anything positive happens in the statehood fight if Gaza and Hamas are not fully involved.

    Reply

  9. Fadi Elsalameen says:

    what I wrote in 2006 before Hamas won the elections.

    This is a crucial time for President Mahmud Abbas. Unlike any other Palestinian official before him, he has held back on putting forward any final status issues, making security and reforms his top priority. Abu Mazen so far has ignored apparent splits within his movement, Fatah, and focused on bringing together the Palestinian factions, and beyond that, integrating them within the political system. Soon, Abu Mazen plans to use a law passed by Palestinian legislators last month to forcibly retire about 1,000 members of the security forces who are over the age of 60, opening the doors for a new generation to take charge, and putting an end to corruption.
    This will be translated into two lessons depending on the response Abu Mazen receives from the Israelis, and the Americans. First, resign, and never do this again. Should the Israelis keep on ignoring Abu Mazin, undermining his policies, and accusing him of not doing enough, and at the same time, continue to plan settlements advancements and building the separation wall; anyone can bet that we are heading towards a new wave of violence. If Congress retracts its support for Abu Mazen, especially by placing harsh restrictions than even Arafat?s era, on the aid promised to the Palestinian Authority, Abu Mazen?s authority will not only be undermined, but his ability to strengthen himself against these rifts will be shattered.
    Abu Mazen has yet to meet with the new head of Fatah, Farouq Qadoumi. This is a serious split within Fatah. Abu Mazen has made it clear that Hamas, as well as other militant factions are encouraged to enter the race for parliamentary elections, sparking even more anger among Fatah for what seems to be an inevitable weakening of his own party. Hamas has been so far the choice in municipality elections, and most indications point towards Hamas as the leading winner in the upcoming parliamentary elections. Should this happen, with only a couple of Palestinian cities under Palestinian control, let alone the rest of the issues remaining the same, Abu Mazen will be even weaker, and the prospect of him being able to fulfill his goal as a transition figure will greatly diminish.
    There is a clear chance for hope; we have to pay attention to it. It is Abu Mazen. The United States, as well as Israel must give Abu Mazen the chance to deliver. Having Mofaz in Washington, DC accusing him of not doing enough will not help, but will reiterate to the Palestinians that Israelis are still using the same old language, and change is far from coming. Abu Mazen has been working on the Palestinian grounds relentlessly to set up the stage for the next period. The Americans, and the Israelis guaranteeing Abu Mazen the required support to go back home and continue his work is just as essential for the next stage. This should be Abu Mazen?s second lesson, a lesson of encouragement rather than that of empty accusations and promises. Making Abu Mazen?s upcoming visit to Washington a great success is, a good start.”

    Reply

  10. JohnH says:

    Gotta love Nadine. Just substitute the word “Zionist” for “Arab,” and her statement reads: “many people have pondered the paradox of how the Zionist world can produce so many wonderful, generous, hospitable people, but gets stuck so badly in vicious, belligerent, unresponsive political systems. Unfortunately, there is just something about Zionist politics that makes vicious belligerence a winning formula for gaining and keeping power. I don’t have to understand how it works to observe that it is so.”

    Reply

  11. nadine says:

    I picked up this comment on Abu Mazen’s threats to declare independence by James Zogby from The Palestine Note:
    “A real declaration of independence, coupled with organized displays of mass non-violent popular resistance to the occupation and all its manifestations, followed by appeals to the world community for support, would have created a new dynamic for Palestinians, put Israel on the defensive, helped mobilize world wide public opinion for change, and earned new respect for the lagging P.A. And this popular mobilization and political dynamic would have nicely complemented Salam Fayyed’s two year institution and capacity building plan for statehood. It was my hope that this was what was intended.
    But then came the realization that this might not be serious at all. To be serious would mean taking the bold risk of seeking real independence, from Israel and the US. It would have meant acting independently, not asking permission from the US or EU or even the UN. It would have meant actually organizing and relying on popular support for strength and legitimacy, and having that popular support earn the recognition of the international community. It would have required vision.
    But then I heard a Palestinian leader explain that what was intended in this exercise was not a unilateral declaration of independence, but merely a call to the UN to reaffirm its commitment to the “two state” solution.
    I swallowed hard and said, “Not serious, again”. ”

    Reply

  12. nadine says:

    jdledell, I said, “in Palestinian politics, to support “The Cause” you have to reject a genuine Palestinian state”
    I did not say, “in the hearts of the Palestinian people, to support “The Cause” you have to reject a genuine Palestinian state”
    I’m talking about the forces that drive the politicians who control the guns and the real decision-making of Palestine. They are not the people and they answer very little to the people, as they do not regularly depend on the people for either money or votes. Palestine is not a functional democracy.
    I have made this distinction between the people and the politicians at least 20 times on TWN, but you remain “stuck on stupid” over it.
    I make no claims to understand the heart of the people, esp. as it’s a culture where people are usually not candid about their opinions even to pollsters, as Fadi Elsalameen pointed out regarding the poll results in 2006. The behavior of politicians is much more visible and much more predictable.
    I’m sure your sister’s nanny is a wonderful person. Many people have pondered the paradox of how the Arab world can produce so many wonderful, generous, hospitable people, but gets stuck so badly in vicious, belligerent, unresponsive political systems. Unfortunately, there is just something about Arab politics that makes vicious belligerence a winning formula for gaining and keeping power. I don’t have to understand how it works to observe that it is so.

    Reply

  13. JohnH says:

    It’s uncanny how Nadine “knows” exactly what the Palestinians want. She can be absolutely certain because her side wants exactly the same thing, with the word Israel substituted for the word Palestine. She can easily imagine the horrors the Palestine side might perpetrate, because they are just what the Israeli side has already done.
    It’s called projection.
    As an example, I took her statement and substituted Zionist and Jewish for Palestine and Palestinian: “In Zionist politics, you support The Cause by … favoring The Perfect Jewish State, the one which will make Palestine disappear and occupy all of Palestine, after Palestine is forced to take in 5 million Jewish refugees and all the Palestinians run away.”
    Amazing how well it works, isn’t it?
    Nadine should consider the possibility that Palestinians might not behave exactly as the Zionists have shown themselves to behave!

    Reply

  14. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “When you take the time to understand the WHOLE picture of this conflict, I’ll start paying attention to your opinions”
    Nadine’s schtick isn’t founded in a lack of knowledge. Its founded in bigotry. She will never “get it”. Her “whole picture” is that Palestinians are less human than Jews; inferior.

    Reply

  15. jdledell says:

    “In Palestinian politics, to support “The Cause” you have to reject a genuine Palestinian state”
    Nadine – This is BS! For an American Jew, you seem to “know” more about Palestinian people than even Palestinian arabs. Have you ever met a real Palestinian or been in a West Bank Palestinian town? Have you ever met and talked with Salam Fayyad or any of the other Palestinian politicians. I have.
    When my sister made Aliyah, her family moved to Haifa and hired an Israeli Palestinian couple to do the Nanny, housework and home maintenance/gardening. Over the years, I’ve become close to that family and they have graciously taken me all over the west bank visiting their relatives and government officials.(my own 35 relatives live in the settlements)As a result, I have come to understand the human decency of most Palestinians as I do for most Israeli Jews.
    When you take the time to understand the WHOLE picture of this conflict, I’ll start paying attention to your opinions.

    Reply

  16. ilona@israel says:

    i really hope it will work this way, but according to the expierence of other countries , the country that was under strong and difficult regim for years is not that easy to be changed.

    Reply

  17. nadine says:

    “…an effort to turn the remnants of the Palestinian Arab community there into some kind of pseudo-autonomous “Arab Quarter” under permanent Israeli rule, to give up for good on the idea of a genuine Palestinian state”
    You don’t understand, Dan. This is precisely what Fayyad will be accused of, not because he he is giving up on a genuine Palestinian state, but because he actually wants one.
    In Palestinian politics, to support “The Cause” you have to reject a genuine Palestinian state, the real kind that comes with institutions and lots of grubby compromises with a suspicious superior power called Israel. In Palestinian politics, you support The Cause by rejecting all that and favoring The Perfect Palestinian State, the one which will make Israel disappear and occupy all of Palestine, after Israel is forced to take in 5 million Palestinian refugees and all the Jews run away. This way you can be for a Palestinian State all day long, but you never have to build an institution or make a compromise.
    Of course, as the Palestinians have noticed, you never actually deliver any good results either. But you didn’t betray The Cause! Nobody can say you betrayed The Cause! Your honor is intact!

    Reply

  18. nadine says:

    A more practical question is how Palestinians are supposed to vote for Fayyad even if they wanted. Most Mideast observers regard as a certainty that Hamas and Fatah will remain divided, and no elections will happen next January. (There aren’t many subjects where Barry Rubin of the Jpost and Rami Khouri of the Beirut Daily Star agree, but this is one of them). They also take it for granted that Abu Mazen’s threats to resign will be as empty this time as they were all the previous times he made them. Abu Mazen’s “term” ended last January anyway.
    What sense does it make to speak as if Palestine were a working democracy where power might peacefully change hands after a vote? It is not accurate, and it’s not going to happen. What’s the point?

    Reply

  19. JohnH says:

    Fadi Elsalameen may be right. But I can’t believe that Palestinian voters would support anyone too closely associated with the United States, particularly after Obama raised their hopes and then dashed them.
    The only reason Palestinians might vote for Fayyad, then, is that he has delivered something important. The promise of “change you can believe in” is simply unbelievable. Reforming institutions and listening to the man on the street are nice, but where is the bacon? What are the fruits of his good relations with the West? More settlements in Jerusalem and the West Bank?
    Of course, Fayyad could easily win, if he runs unopposed, like Abu Mazen. But then he simply becomes part of the same old, same old problem.

    Reply

  20. Dan Kervick says:

    Alexander Horwitz, on what do you base your estimates of Fayyad’s popularity?
    Fadi Elsalameen, do you have any sense of Fayyad’s stature in Gaza, as opposed to the West Bank?
    From my distance here in the US, this whole new Netanyahu-supported effort to promote private investment and civil society projects in the West Bank looks like an effort to turn the remnants of the Palestinian Arab community there into some kind of pseudo-autonomous “Arab Quarter” under permanent Israeli rule, to give up for good on the idea of a genuine Palestinian state, and also to further divide the West Bank from Gaza.
    And to be quite blunt, if I learn some man is Joe Lieberman’s favorite Palestinian, I am inclined to think there must be something wrong with him, since I find Lieberman to be one of the most contemptible figures in American public life.

    Reply

  21. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Considering the complete and utter failure that Obama, Clinton, Hoyer, and Reid have made of any chance for constructive dialogue between Israel and the Palestinians, I’m suprised you think ANY leader can “deliver” a Palestinian State.
    Division amongst the Palestinians works in Israel’s favor, and if the Palestinians become close to establishing a unified front, Israel will simply derail the unification with a few strategic false flag assasinations or provocations that will turn Palestinian against Palestinian, once again. Even the comment section at your admirable blog demonstrates the vast chasm that exists between many Palestinians when debating what is the best road forward.
    From this American’s vantage point, the old adage “United we stand, divided we fall” seems to be particularly apropos when applied to the Palestinians. While you people bicker, Israel steals more land, commits bloodbaths and atrocities like Operation Cast Lead, and points their finger all the while, proclaiming “Look, these people can’t even get along with themselves, much less with Israel”. Unfortunately for you and your futures, there is much truth to that proclamation.

    Reply

  22. Fadi Elsalameen says:

    Several months before Hamas won elections in 2006 I wrote a “shallow post” to use Kervick’s language and I said the following: Hamas won municipal elections and they will win the Parliamentary elections with a majority.
    The polls said: Fatah will win the parliamentary elections with a majority, and Hamas will not win with a majority. As you can imagine, the people who believed the polls (including Bush and Condi at the time) have left serious mess that no one seems to figure out how to deal with. Its called the Hamas government.
    I know my people,Sir. the polls lie even if they tell the truth.

    Reply

  23. Alexander Horwitz says:

    I disagree Dan Kervick. I think Elsalameen is right when he says that Fayyad is gaining support on the street. I am not surprised that people are not happy with the government , and polls here are misleading because when people think of government they think of Fatah, Hamas, and abbas, not of salam fayyad. so this even further proved Elsalameen’s point.

    Reply

  24. Dan Kervick says:

    Mr. Elsalameen tries to assure us that there is a groundswell of support in Palestine for Fayyad, and that “anyone on the streets” will tell you this. However, the most recent poll for the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, in August, doesn’t bear out:
    http://www.pcpsr.org/survey/polls/2009/p33e.html
    According to that poll, the government Fayyad heads is still seen as corrupt by a substantial majority of Palestinians. Worse, a majority do not even recognize the legitimacy of that government. And in terms of sheer personal popularity as a future Palestinian, Fayyad badly trails the Barghoutis and Ismail Haniyeh.
    This post just seems like a shallow puff piece.
    Howard Berman, Netanyahu, Joe Lieberman and the Saban foundation might have concluded Fayyad is their kind of Palestinian, but it doesn’t look like a majority of Palestinians are buying it.

    Reply

  25. nadine says:

    Agreed, my understanding is that even the European donors got tired of handing cash over in brown paper bags, and so they help support Fayyad in office; because he is necessary to collect the money, he is tolerated by Fatah and Hamas.
    But how many guns does Fayyad command? That is a serious question, in Palestinian politics. Frankly, in an environment where hundreds have died in recent years in internecine Hamas/Fatah combat, it doesn’t seem very realistic to suggest any of these guys just retire and write their memoirs. If any of these guys were to give up their security forces, they wouldn’t last long. Their enemies have scores to settle.
    I am all for supporting a more reasonable alternative in Palestinian politics, but pretending that Fatah or Hamas will just go away quietly hardly seems like a pragmatic program. Insisting on a free press and some kind of public square where a moderate could even speak without being declared a traitor and marked for death would be a good first step.

    Reply

  26. JohnH says:

    Fayyad’s main problem is that he has no base– unless you count the Americans and the Israelis.
    “Fayyad, a personally decent man who made the choice to be parachuted into Ramallah as, essentially, the tool of the Americans back in 2005.
    He’s been playing a complicated game ever since. He is not a man with a history in any branch of the extremely lengthy and hard-fought campaign of resistance to Israeli occupation. He comes without his own political network, and has to rely almost completely on the US-mobilized funding that comes to him as PM of the PA in order to try to build support from Palestinians.”
    In the 2006 parliamentary elections, he and Hanan Ashrawi were the only two people elected to the parliament from the list that they’d formed.”

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *