Skip to main content

Reprinted with permission from:

The Progressive Zionist

Welcome to the return of Fry'd Daze. Fry'd Daze has been a long running series on Daily Kos dedicated to dialogue in the Middle East. For a while I pulled it, but recently was asked to bring it back and decided that I should. These articles are not intended to be a flame forum, but rather something where community members can meet and exchange ideas about I/P and/or issues that concern the Middle East.
Generally, these articles take the form of four to five news articles and short commentary selected by the diarist. These stories however, are just a platform to get discussion going.

Our lead this week is:

Abbas: Palestinians to seek full UN membership:

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said on Friday that the Palestinians plan to approach the United Nations Security Council for full recognition, clarifying that they are seeking to delegitimize the occupation, not Israel, by taking the UN route for Palestinian statehood.

He stressed that Israel is a legitimate state, but that by continuing to build in the settlements and rejecting the internationally recognized borders of a future Palestinian state, they are engaging in illegitimate activity.

"What I will take to the UN will be the suffering and concerns of our people that have been taking place over 63 years living under the occupation," Abbas said, adding that the Palestinians, like every nation, deserve independence, adding that the Palestinians want a state based on 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital.

So, President Abbas is determined to take this to the U.N. Security Council where the U.S. has promised that it will veto the move.

Ynet further reports Abbas as saying the following:

I’m going to the UN in order to demand our legitimate rights and secure full membership for the state of Palestine," the Palestinian president said in Ramallah. "We hope to secure full membership."

We are not going to annul Israel's legitimacy," he said. "Nobody can annul Israel's legitimacy. It's a recognized state," he said. "We wish to isolate Israel's policy."
Israel's policy of occupation is the Palestinians' "catastrophe and nightmare," Abbas said, slamming Israeli arrests and attacks by settlers.
"We wish to isolate the legitimacy of the occupation, but not Israel's legitimacy," he said.

He also does go on to say that he does not advocate violence and he did urge that all marches and demonstrations be peaceful.  Rumors in the area talk of the P.A. buying crowd control devices/weapons (the P.A. denies)  from the Israelis so that they can better handle crowds and not allow for clashes between Israeli Settlers and Palestinians.

One thing about about Abbas' comments stands out to me. It is when he talks about 63 years of occupation. The 1967 war was 44 years ago so the 63 years he talks about is the founding of the State of Israel (1948). YET... he says that he doesn't want to delegitimize the State, he just wants to delegitimize the occupation. However, he considers the State of Israel as an occupation. So... What does this mean?

To me it says that he refuses to consider Israel as the National State and Homeland of the Jewish People. He seems willing to accept that there is a State of Israel but he also seems to want to insist on Palestinian Right of Return to that State. Hence the comment about occupation. In effect it seems that Mr. Abbas is talking about recognizing Palestine now and negotiating for Palestine within Israel of 1967.

The second question I have is where are the Palestinians going to get their funding for their State? By going to the U.N. Security Council, they force the U.S. into a corner. This move is obviously going to succeed in the United Nations General Assembly. Despite a promise of ethnic cleansing from Ambassador Areikat and the P.L.O. this move will pass. So the U.S. now needs to do something completely against regional and world general opinion.  In doing this the U.S. puts its various alliances at risk and opens itself to losing regional influence to Turkey and Iran, two countries trying to force their own hegemonistic visions on the area.

Given that the U.S. is the largest single funder of the Palestinian Authority ($400 - $600 million per year), and is contemplating cutting off all funds to the P.A., exactly where do they think that money is going to come from? Their brother Arab States have been notoriously bad at keeping debt promises and the European Union simply doesn't have the kind of continual flow of money that the P.A. needs to sustain itself. Haaretz covers the myriad of congressional responses here:

Congress mulls closing PLO mission in light of UN bid -

Congress is considering taking punitive measures against the Palestinian Authority or closing the Palestinian Liberation Organization's mission in Washington should it go ahead with plans to seek full membership at the United Nations Security Council next Friday.

The Americans were frustrated that years of financial aid, currently comprising 600 million dollars annually, intended to promote peace negotiations and stability did not yield many material results.
At the discussions, which took place at the House of Committee on Foreign Affairs, some experts called to cut the aid, while others warned it might undermine the Palestinian-Israeli security cooperation, and would thereby undermine Israeli security.

Both President Abbas and PM Netanyahu will be addressing the U.N. next week AND President Obama will be meeting with both Israeli PM Netanyahu and Turkish Premier Erdogan in NY, so look for a great deal of movement on both sides in the coming seven days.

Our second story comes from Maan:  Israel calls in Egypt envoy, says peace deal vital -

JERUSALEM (Reuters) -- Israel's Foreign Ministry called in the Egyptian ambassador on Friday to stress the importance of the two countries' historic peace accord, an Israeli official said, after Egypt's prime minister said the treaty was not "sacred".

Egyptian Prime Minister Essam Sharaf told Turkish television on Thursday that the 1979 peace accord with Israel could be changed for the benefit of the region.

An Israeli official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Foreign Ministry Director General Rafi Barak told Egyptian envoy Yasser Reda that treaties must be honored to the letter.

and Haaretz delves into further depth here with:

The Foreign Ministry summoned Egypt's ambassador to Israel to a meeting on Friday morning, in order to clarify remarks made by Egypt's interim Prime Minister that the Israel-Egypt peace treaty should be revised.

A source in the Foreign Ministry said that Foreign Ministry Director General Rafi Barak requested clarifications over the remarks, especially considering previous contradictory remarks made by the Egypt's military council that the peace treaty should be preserved.

Earlier in the week Egypt's ruling cabinet had called for an emergency meeting to deal with the aftermath and diplomatic repercussions of the incident when protesters had stormed the Israeli embassy and Egyptians commandos had to rescue the besieged Israelis.

Finally,

Erdogan: Those in Syria who inflict repression will not survive

Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan stepped up his rhetoric against Syrian President Bashar Assad on Friday, saying those in Syria who inflict repression on the people will not survive.

Erdogan, who is visiting Libya, told a cheering crowd in Tripoli's Martyrs' Square, formerly Green Square, that by ousting Muammar Gadhafi the Libyan people had set an example to others seeking to throw off oppression.....

....The Turkish prime minister added, "do not forget this: those in Syria who inflict repression on the people will not be able to stand on their feet because oppression and prosperity cannot exist together."


In yesterday's column called "Suggested Reading" there is an article about Erdogan as the rising star of Middle Eastern politics. It is well worth a read after this.
Please participate. The only thing we ask is that you keep comments respectful, reality based and please no use of Anti-Semetic or Anti-Arab memes. Enjoy!

Originally posted to JNEREBEL on Fri Sep 16, 2011 at 01:33 PM PDT.

Also republished by Team Shalom.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (10+ / 0-)

    "Stay close to the candles....the staircase can be treacherous" (-8.38,-8.51)

    by JNEREBEL on Fri Sep 16, 2011 at 01:33:58 PM PDT

  •  Not that I really care (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mother Shipper

    as I was not a boycotter, but is volleyboy1 still observing the boycott if he allows you to re-post his diary?

  •  Abbas's Freudian slip. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mother Shipper, Skwege101, Hoodoo Man

    63 years of occupation.

    As I mentioned in a recent diary where this notion came up, it's interesting that some are so fast to find deception with Netanyahu and Israeli lead, not to mention participants here, but cannot conceive that Abbas or others are capable of the same.  It shows just how biased, how absolutist, things can be.

    A writer cannot prevent and is not responsible for the deliberate desire of some to distort his words. -- Eric Sevareid

    by citizen53 on Fri Sep 16, 2011 at 01:46:31 PM PDT

    •  Where is the deception? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Hoodoo Man

      Abbas and the Palestinians openly and repeatedly refer to 63 years of occupation, openly brag of not making any concessions, insist on the eliminationist RoR, openly speak of making their future state Judenfrei, refuse to lower their count of "refugees" by offering citizenship, openly state the only part of Jerusalem subject to negotiations is West Jerusalem and openly declare that achieving a state is not an end goal but the start of a new phase of demanding more.

      Why bother with deception when nobody cares when they speak the truth?

      •  Understood. It has to do... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Hoodoo Man

        with what is said for our consumption and their own.

        That is why MEMRI and PMW are so important.

        One need only watch Undercover Mosque and see the matter played out in the UK, which is illustrative of the matter.

        http://www.google.com/...

        A writer cannot prevent and is not responsible for the deliberate desire of some to distort his words. -- Eric Sevareid

        by citizen53 on Fri Sep 16, 2011 at 02:09:52 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Who are you referring to? (0+ / 0-)

      I've read plenty of harsh criticism of "Abbas or others" from those here who are on the pro-P side of things.

      •  I will not name names... (0+ / 0-)

        for several reasons.  You are free, of course, to believe as you like.  I hope, however, you will refrain from making claims that what I said has no merit because of my choice.

        The one-sidedness mentioned is illustrated by a tendency to focus on Israeli actions as demonous and discounts or ignores the Palestinian leadership's statements and motivations or casts them as virtuous actors fighting the demon.

        If you have not experienced this it may be because you do not, to my knowledge, advocate and raise issues where the phenomenon often happens to arise.

        A writer cannot prevent and is not responsible for the deliberate desire of some to distort his words. -- Eric Sevareid

        by citizen53 on Fri Sep 16, 2011 at 08:02:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The problem with your view (0+ / 0-)

          is that you fail to recognize that many on the other side of this issue have been very critical of Abbas and the Palestinian leadership.  You suggest that this isn't so, and come off as a two-bit propagandist in the process.

          Further, your complaints about "one-sidedness" fail to acknowledge the obvious -- that no one on this blog is more one sided than you are. I'm not saying there aren't others that are one sided; there are.  But you are as one-sided as they come, incapable of engaging in any serious criticism of Israeli policy, and only willing to criticize the faults on the other side.  That's (one of the reasons) why your words carry no weight; you simply have no credibility with anyone on either side of the issue.

          •  Not really. (0+ / 0-)

            I do not claim not to be one-sided, and am so for a reason.  This site is anti-Israel, in the event you have not noticed.  There is a virtual tidal wave here that requires some counter.  If it was not so bad, then I would certainly be less vociferous.

            I believe I have more credibility than you think.  I stick to issues and, unlike many, do not engage in name calling or labeling of others.  Too bad more are unable to refrain.  

            You are entitled to your opinion, of course, but that does not necessarily make it accurate.  As for your need to throw insults, much like the others here, I saw long ago that you behave different than how you come off.  In other words, I need no lessons from you.

            A writer cannot prevent and is not responsible for the deliberate desire of some to distort his words. -- Eric Sevareid

            by citizen53 on Sat Sep 17, 2011 at 12:56:04 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You deny the obvious (0+ / 0-)

              The one-sided participants on the other side of the issue are not credible . . . and obviously so. Even you see that. They ignore facts that are in conflict with their narrative, and they wish to paint a picture of the blame being on one side . . . alone.

              And you're no different.

              That's why you have no credibility . . . just like the anti-Israel propagandists.

              •  You can call me what you like. (0+ / 0-)

                I am not here for YOUR approval.  I actually speak more to the actual suffering of the Palestinian people than I have seen you do, and many purported pro-Palestinian people here, who care generally when Israel is involved.    

                Yes, these people may not be credible, to you.  As I said, this site is way imbalanced.  They have credibility to many others, more than it seems you accept.

                Perhaps you should be less prone to judge people you do not really know.  Your need to be insulting does not help in making your case, and to me shows a very small side.

                A writer cannot prevent and is not responsible for the deliberate desire of some to distort his words. -- Eric Sevareid

                by citizen53 on Sat Sep 17, 2011 at 01:21:27 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  You speak to the actual suffering (0+ / 0-)

                  of the Palestinian People? You . . . Mr. One-sided?

                  I'm laughing, and not with you.

                  The lack of balance of other participants here does not make you any more credible then they are.

                  Your blatantly one-sided and dishonest approach to this issue does nothing to bring "balance" to this site. All it does is demonstrate that a lack of credibility exists on both sides.

                  Way to go.

                  •  Actually, I have done so MANY times. (0+ / 0-)

                    Perhaps if you were less prone to tossing insults you would have seen it.  I frequently mention how Palestinian and Arab leaders mistreat and deny human rights to the Palestinian people.

                    Indeed, I just wrote a diary about how Palestinians living in camps in what would be the Palestinian state will not receive citizenship.

                    You are just wrong.  And, so far as I am concerned, you come off a bit too sanctimonious.  That is why I dismiss what you say, and the way you say it.

                    A writer cannot prevent and is not responsible for the deliberate desire of some to distort his words. -- Eric Sevareid

                    by citizen53 on Sat Sep 17, 2011 at 02:35:44 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Ah . . . I see (0+ / 0-)

                      You use them as means to trash Palestinian and Arab leaders . . . part of your admittedly one-sided and (consequently) dishonest propaganda.

                      So (and obviously) I am not wrong. It is just part of your little game of placing all the blame on one side . . . just like so many on the other side of the issue.

                      •  What is your problem? (0+ / 0-)

                        Yes, I trash the leaders because I believe they deserve it.

                        Who makes you the fount of honesty?  I love how so many here self-proclaim as you have.

                        For your information, I don't play games here, and I get amused by those who think that way, and what it show about them.

                        Finally, time after time, you attack me while showing a very small, bitter and obnoxious side.  

                        A writer cannot prevent and is not responsible for the deliberate desire of some to distort his words. -- Eric Sevareid

                        by citizen53 on Sat Sep 17, 2011 at 03:31:35 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Actually, you do play games . . . big time. (0+ / 0-)

                          You complain bitterly about the one-sidedness  of others, and yet you are just as one-sided and biased as anyone on this blog.

                          •  I explained myself. (0+ / 0-)

                            The difference with those others is they do not make the same acknowledgement, not to mention the abuse in the way they treat others who see things differently.  You have emulated the latter.

                            I do not complain bitterly, either.  You are projecting.  I point it out only when I believe it is appropriate.

                            A writer cannot prevent and is not responsible for the deliberate desire of some to distort his words. -- Eric Sevareid

                            by citizen53 on Sun Sep 18, 2011 at 02:04:46 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  There's really no difference at all. (0+ / 0-)

                            You indeed complain about how biased and absolutist they are, all the while being every bit as biased and absolutist as anyone who participates in I/P here.

                            That's why you're not credible.

                          •  But I do think there is a difference... (0+ / 0-)

                            and have explained it, yet you are carrying on and on and on.  To what end?

                            I understand you believe I am not credible.  You have told me how many times now.  You don't want to know anything else it seems.

                            I am not here for your approval.  I do not agree with your characterizations.  I think your assertions are out of context.  It's as simple as that.

                            I am biased, as I have said repeatedly, but far from absolutist.  I do not care if you believe I am not credible, but don't be misleading and inaccurate.  That's even worse than being insulting without cause.

                            A writer cannot prevent and is not responsible for the deliberate desire of some to distort his words. -- Eric Sevareid

                            by citizen53 on Sun Sep 18, 2011 at 04:13:25 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Calling you out on your blatant hypocricy (0+ / 0-)

                            is neither misleading nor inaccurate.

                          •  We should all be thankful... (0+ / 0-)

                            that you are provided with a mission to obsess over, preventing blatant hypocrisy, and doing it in an obnoxious and accusatory fashion.

                            You should look at my sig line.  It was intended for you.

                            At this point I'll just conclude by saying we have different notions of what constitutes hypocrisy.  And that I am thankful for.

                            A writer cannot prevent and is not responsible for the deliberate desire of some to distort his words. -- Eric Sevareid

                            by citizen53 on Sun Sep 18, 2011 at 04:43:49 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Chow, my friend (0+ / 0-)

                            Try lightening up with the hypocrisy next time.

                          •  Lightening up. (0+ / 0-)

                            There I agree.

                            A writer cannot prevent and is not responsible for the deliberate desire of some to distort his words. -- Eric Sevareid

                            by citizen53 on Sun Sep 18, 2011 at 04:52:02 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

  •  At least, there are some good rumblings (4+ / 0-)

    from the IAEA:

    Arabs to avoid targeting Israel at UN Atom meeting

    This is a constructive step on the part of the Arab states and should be welcomed by all.

    I'm EAGER to act to rid the site of anyone that even skirts the line into racism. kos

    by Its the Supreme Court Stupid on Fri Sep 16, 2011 at 02:07:37 PM PDT

    •  Pretty absurd! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      renfro

      Having a conference about a nuclear free Middle East and not focusing on the one country with nuclear weapons is absurd.  

      The reality is that  Israel will never give up nuclear weapons.   Equally obvious, Iran will develop nuclear weapons.   Iran is under a far more immediate threat from Israel and the US than Israel in under threat from Iran.   Yes, they will continue to use subterfuge in their pursuit of nuclear security.    That is how Israel did it.

      Of course this process will continue.   Other countries will feel threatened by Iran (and Israel) and will develop their own nuclear weapons.   In time everyone will have then.

      Israel has the chance now to head off this impending disaster.   Nuclear weapons do not provide security for Israel.   Israel is a regional superpower even without nuclear weapons.   Is seems that Israel intransigence now will result in a very grim future for Israel and it's neighbors.
       

      •  Oh, bullshit. "Iran is under a (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wiscmass, JayinPortland

        far more immediate thereat from Israel and the US than Israel is under there from Iran"   Iran has directly threatened to destroy Israel.   The Israelis have had nuclear weapons for 40 years (or, so it is believed).   Have they used them?  No.  They have them for deterrence alone.  

        Under Ahmadinijad, I do not doubt that a nuclear Iran would use nuclear weapons offensively.  

        I'm EAGER to act to rid the site of anyone that even skirts the line into racism. kos

        by Its the Supreme Court Stupid on Fri Sep 16, 2011 at 06:14:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Don't engage the zombie (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JayinPortland

          If kos can't be bothered to enforce his own rules and keep previously banned antisemitic users from returning to violate his new rules as well, then the best we can do is ignore them.

          Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

          by wiscmass on Sat Sep 17, 2011 at 09:06:04 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Several key words and phrases (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        zemblan

        in your comment give you away, jajohnson2.

        Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time. (Terry Pratchett)

        by angry marmot on Sat Sep 17, 2011 at 09:41:15 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  The UN statehood bid is the last gasp for 2 States (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    renfro, Dont Call It

    IMHO. If this statehood bid doesn't move things forward I doubt there will even be a Palestinian Authority 2 years from now, and things will have shifted to a drive for Palestinian citizenship rights within Israel IMHO.  

    The UN called for an independent Palestinian State in 1948. First the West Bank was occupied by Jordan, and in turn Israel.

    That makes 63 years. Comprende?

    Gasoline made from the tar sands gives a Toyota Prius the same impact on climate as a Hummer using gasoline made from oil. ~ Al Gore

    by Lefty Coaster on Fri Sep 16, 2011 at 08:47:24 PM PDT

  •  This bit explained. (0+ / 0-)
    One thing about about Abbas' comments stands out to me. It is when he talks about 63 years of occupation. The 1967 war was 44 years ago so the 63 years he talks about is the founding of the State of Israel (1948). YET... he says that he doesn't want to delegitimize the State, he just wants to delegitimize the occupation. However, he considers the State of Israel as an occupation. So... What does this mean?

    Jordan occupied them before Israel did.  Israel replaced Jordanian occupation with it's own harsher form.  Thus, they have been occupied since 1948 by one nation or the other.

    A democratic come back

    by Dont Call It on Sat Sep 17, 2011 at 02:46:53 AM PDT

    •  Since there is more I want to address (0+ / 0-)

      I will address it under my own comment at the bottom of the diary.  I do not wish to spam or cause other comments in the diary to be pushed down.

      This statement you make is bogus.

      Despite a promise of ethnic cleansing from Ambassador Areikat and the P.L.O. this move will pass.

      Repatriating Israeli citizens back to Israel is not ethnic cleansing.  It is required under international law.  Since no nation may annex land through war as well as colonize that land.  

      On the subject of the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel I would like to make a few statements.  If I am wrong please correct me with the appropriate links.

      Technically the treaty is flexible enough for accommodation as was seen when Egypt requested that they be allowed military personal when the gas line was being sabotaged by unknown individuals.  Israel permitted this to happen.  So the treaty can be revised if both parties agree.

      Technically, but not officially stated by both states, Israel broke the treaty already.  During the unfortunate and horrid terrorist attacks in south Israel by unknown (or rather disputed to be Palestinians from The Gaza Strip) terrorists, Israel sent in troops into the Sinai in pursuit.  In doing so they killed several Egyptian military personal that had previously been permitted to be there by Israel.  

      Both nations leaders want this incident forgotten about as fast as possible in my opinion.  Thus they have kept it as low key as they possibly could.

      Nationalism, however, is the damnedest thing.  The events (the revolution) that have happened have brought up memories and nationalistic vendettas from the time of Nasser.  Egyptian citizens did attack the Israeli embassy.  At that same moment and to a lesser extent, Egyptian citizens also attacked the Saudi Arabian embassy.

      The difference between both attacks could very well have been due to the accidental killings of Egyptian military personal in the Israeli incursion into Egyptian territory.  Which might have compounded the anger in these age old nationalistic sentiments.  

      A democratic come back

      by Dont Call It on Sat Sep 17, 2011 at 03:47:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site