Does This Help?

The logic of trying to strengthen Abbas and Fatah and improve living conditions in the West Bank seems clear enough to me, but does having George Bush and Ehud Olmert explicitly praise Abbas really help that cause? It seems to me that if I'm Abbas, I want improvements in Palestinian quality of life to be framed as concessions I succeeded in wringing out of the clutches of the Zionists, not favors that are being done for me because Israel and the USA thing I'm super-neat.

Photo by Flickr user Jordan Klein used under a Creative Commons license.

Comments

Abu Mazen seems willing to take whatever he can get right now, but you are absolutely right, after the Fatah coup against the elected government it is pretty dicey to openly appear like you are in the pocket of Ehud and W.

at least some of the cash is supposed to go to civil; servants in Gaza. we will see how well that works out. the real litmus test will be if Abu Mazen can get Ehud to dismantle one or more of the colonies. As long as Maale Adhumin and Ariel remain standing the whole world will understand he's been turned into Bush's bitch.

Posted by mrs. ibrahim al-jafaari | June 19, 2007 4:40 PM

Re mrs. ibrahim al-jafaari

Settlements today, settlements tomorrow, settlements to the far horizon.

Posted by SLC | June 19, 2007 4:51 PM

I'm no expert on Palestinian constitutional law, but didn't Hamas execute a coup of sorts in Gaza? I mean, throwing the Fatah guys out of high rise buildings seems like an extra-legal method of consolidating power to me.

In any case, I heard somewhere that the Palestinian Basic Law does give Abbas the right to appoint a new emergency government/cabinet for a temporary period (a month?). Anyone out there have any info on this?

IMO, Abbas ought to schedule elections ASAP (if that's allowed, according to Pal law, such as it is). Given that Hamas won last time because a bunch of erstwhile Fatah candidates ran as independents, Fatah would most likely win the next elections. Especially since Abbas has appointed probably the least corrupt-seeming Pal government so far and Gaza will likely not be a good showcase for Hamas running things.

Posted by Fred | June 19, 2007 4:54 PM

As long as Maale Adhumin and Ariel remain standing the whole world will understand he's been turned into Bush's bitch.

Olmert is not going to shut down Ariel. They aren't going to shut down anything other than maybe some symbolic checkpoints. Abu Mazen has been Bush's bitch for a good long while and I doubt he has long left to play this humilliating role.

Posted by Ed Marshall | June 19, 2007 5:05 PM

I am afraid you are right, Ed. The real missed opportunity was the Prisoner's Agreement. Unfortunately, Abu Mazen sided with the Dahlan gangsters against Barghouti and the prisoners. I doubt Abbas will remian head of the PLO for very long.

Fred, I know you are a wingnut, but what part of "democratically elected government" don't you understand?

SLC, how did those colonies in Gaza work out for you? Trust me, those colonies on the West Bank won't last forever, apartheid regimes never do. It took 400 years to get rid of the Afrikaaners apartheid regime, hopefully it won't take as long to get rid of the Israeli apartheid regime.

Posted by mrs. ibrahim al-jafaari | June 19, 2007 5:19 PM

That has to be a fake SLC, right?

Posted by JP | June 19, 2007 5:24 PM

Mrs. al-Jafaari:

"Fred, I know you are a wingnut, but what part of "democratically elected government" don't you understand?"

I don't understand the part about how throwing opposition party members out of high rise windows to their deaths comports with the democratic process. BTW, wasn't Abbas democratically elected president?

As I mentioned above, I am not an expert on Pal Basic Law, so I don't know the limits of his powers WRT appointing an emergency government -- but perhaps you are such an expert and can fill us in. Fire away.

Posted by Fred | June 19, 2007 5:32 PM

I don't understand the part about how throwing opposition party members out of high rise windows to their deaths comports with the democratic process.

Seemed to work just fine for Fatah, when backed up with American-supplied weapons, though how high the highrises were when Fatah was throwing Hamas members to their deaths, I do not know. If "throwing your opponents to their deaths" is a disqualifier (which it should be) then certainly Fatah's Dahlan gangsters use of this tactic should disqualify Abu Mazen himself, wouldn't you think?

Abbas can dissolve the government, but any new government MUST be approved by the Parliament. Hence, Abu Mazen can dissolve Haniyeh's government, but can only install a caretaker government until it is A) approved by Parliament or B)new elections are called with the winning party forming their own government. The president can dissolve the government, but he can not dissolve the Parliament. Considering how many members of the parliament and Ministers languish in IDF prisons I am not even sure if they have a quorum.

But your claim that "Hamas execute[d] a coup of sorts in Gaza" certainly fits in with the propaganda framing the Fatah coup has received in much of the Western press. Got any catapults for sale?

Posted by mrs. ibrahim al-jafaari | June 19, 2007 6:04 PM

Bush and Olmert don't simply want to strengthen Abbas - they want to shore up Abbas in a way that makes it clear to Palestinians that they have no choice but to submit. I suppose the real question is whether Abbas chooses to accept this role.

Obviously these calculations are crazy, and obviously they won't work - but if Palestinians are capable of nurturing their political fantasies, how much more capable are the far stronger Israelis and Americans of nurturing their own?

Posted by Dave L | June 19, 2007 6:21 PM

Your spinning is unconvincing, Al-Jafaari. Hamas (at least its younger, more impulsive members) instigated the recent fighting; they couldn't resist the tempting targets in Gaza and got caught up in the excitement of battle. So, yes, they won the battle. The war is another matter. They haven't yet lost, but they clearly didn't think things through and are now at a distinct disadvantage. Calling Abbas' moves a "Fatah coup" isn't going to disguise the fact that Hamas grossly miscalculated.

My departmental colleague is Palestinian and he still has some cousins in Gaza. He spoke to them on the weekend and reports that the mood there, even among Hamas supporters, is very depressing.

Posted by Jenkins | June 19, 2007 6:33 PM

Re mrs. ibrahim al-jafaari

The abandonment of the settlements in Gaza has resulted in the bombardment of the town of Siderot by Kassems fired by the Palestinian terrorists in Gaza. When the weakling Olmert is replaced by a leader with intestinal fortitude, Hama rules will be applied to the terrorists in Gaza which will settle their hash in short order.

Posted by SLC | June 19, 2007 6:56 PM

mrs. ibrahim al-jafaari:

"If "throwing your opponents to their deaths" is a disqualifier (which it should be) then certainly Fatah's Dahlan gangsters use of this tactic should disqualify Abu Mazen himself, wouldn't you think?"

Sure, but this begs a question: If Fatah and Hamas are both gangsters, by your lights, then why do you care that the head Fatah gangster dissolved the cabinet of the head Hamas gangster, after Hamas went to the mattresses in Gaza?

"Hence, Abu Mazen can dissolve Haniyeh's government, but can only install a caretaker government until it is A) approved by Parliament or B)new elections are called with the winning party forming their own government."

If that's the case, then as I mentioned above, Abbas should go for option B).

"But your claim that "Hamas execute[d] a coup of sorts in Gaza" certainly fits in with the propaganda framing the Fatah coup has received in much of the Western press"

Let me preface my response here by noting that I couldn't care less about Abbas or "framing". For you to call what Abbas did "a coup" when, as you point out, he had the legal authority to appoint a new government (provided he later gets parliamentary approval or calls for new elections) sounds ridiculous in light of your blithe acceptance of Hamas's violent consolidation of power in Gaza.

Posted by Fred | June 19, 2007 7:26 PM

Fred -

Mrs. I. A-J is just irked that after all the thrashing Hamas inflicted on Fatah in Gaza, things seem to have worked out not unfavorably for Israel and the US. Seeing Abbas (apparently) acquiesce to new aid from Israel and the US must be especially galling.

Posted by Giles | June 19, 2007 8:16 PM

Jack Kelly says no, it won't help. From his column Same Old Story from Palestinians:

The usual suspects will insist we prop up Mr. Abbas will billions in aid, and pressure Israel to make territorial concessions to him. That is, that we do more of what got us into this mess in the first place.

To do the same thing over and over again, each time expecting a different result, is a definition of madness.

Posted by Harry | June 19, 2007 8:32 PM

The fundamental problem is that Israel's peace partner is either a thug like Arafat or a guy like Abbas who has played too much kissy-face with our side to have any credibility amongst his people. What the Palestinians need is not a MLK or Gandhi, but a Nixon, someone who can get away with going to China and entering into a peace deal.

There is, of course, a right-wing fringe in Israel that hates anyone who engages the Palestinians in the peace process, even someone with as much right-wing cred as Ariel Sharon, but that fringe seems to be much less powerful as a segment of Israeli society than the Palestinian hardliners are. Yitzhak Rabin might disagree, I guess.

Posted by Steve | June 19, 2007 8:55 PM

If someone would have told me, say 6 months ago, that the long simmering competition between Hamas and Fatah would flare up into a short, vicious civil war that Fatah would lose... but that it would end up ahead overall, I would want to know what he was smoking. But that seems to be what happened. The situation is still very volatile, and can once again erupt into terrible violence, but the logjam that was consecrated in Mecca, does appear to have been cleared. For the first time since Hamas' parliamentary victory, there is movement, and that's good. By defeating Fatah in Gaza, Hamas has, paradoxically, enabled the diplomatic process to restart.

Posted by Giles | June 19, 2007 9:33 PM

Well, you were right in the first place, Fatah isn't on top. Fatah died with Arafat, and it just hasn't realized it yet. There is no one out there in Palestinian polity who really wants what it's currently selling (outside of a handful of buisnessmen making money out of the status quo). I don't know what will replace it to compete with Hamas but it's not going to be amenable to anything you would recognize as a viable solution.

Posted by Ed Marshall | June 19, 2007 9:56 PM

If that's the case, then as I mentioned above, Abbas should go for option B).

Fred, we are in complete agreement. New elections should be held, as the Haniyeh government has been dissolved. Don't count on it happening anytime soon. Now that the Israeli's are releasing the @$500 million in Palestinain taxes to a non-elected Palestinian government I think everyone on the West Bank and in Gaza will get the message: be our bitch and we won't starve you and steal your own tax dollars. Clever.

Posted by mrs. ibrahim al-jafaari | June 19, 2007 10:44 PM

mrs. ibrahim al-jafaari,

I'm just curious - when, if at all, do you expect the Palestinians to do something that you'd describe as "clever" - in terms of being in their best interests or otherwise.

And, regardless of whether you think it will happen or not, do you have any suggestions for them?

Posted by SoCalJustice | June 19, 2007 11:36 PM

I dunno, Matt. Would you prefer the U.S. pursued a foreign policy of attempting to trick the Palestinian people into thinking that we don't like the guys we actually do like (i.e. Abbas), in order to get those people to support those guys?

That doesn't sound like it would work.

Posted by Mr. Noah | June 20, 2007 12:37 AM

SLC:

When the weakling Olmert is replaced by a leader with intestinal fortitude, Hama rules will be applied to the terrorists in Gaza which will settle their hash in short order.

I wonder whether SLC is as hideously ugly on the outside as he is on the inside.

Posted by ArgleBargle | June 20, 2007 1:09 AM

mrs. ibrahim al-jafaari:

"Fred, we are in complete agreement. New elections should be held, as the Haniyeh government has been dissolved."

I would just add one thing: the next Palestinian elections should include a referendum question gaging Palestinian support for a two-state solution (a similar referendum question could be added to the next Israeli elections as well). If a majority of Palestinian voters rejects a two-state solution in principle, then we can all drop the pretense of a peace process. If a majority of Palestinians supports it, then the new Palestinian leader will be able to pursue that peace with confidence.

Posted by Fred | June 20, 2007 1:18 AM

SoCalJustice,

I hope you aren't expecting an honest answer from "Mrs. I. A-J". The recent turn of events, with money going directly to Abbas in Ramallah, and Israel and the US looking magnanimous, has clearly left "Mrs. I. A-J" nonplussed. This wasn't the way things were supposed to happen. Especially not after Hamas' military triumph in Gaza. "Clever" is a word to be used only with bitter sarcasm. The welfare of the Palestinians is not what counts (was it ever?). Scoring points is.

Posted by Giles | June 20, 2007 1:21 AM

Would you prefer the U.S. pursued a foreign policy of attempting to trick the Palestinian people into thinking that we don't like the guys we actually do like (i.e. Abbas), in order to get those people to support those guys?

I dunno, it works for our enemies. Bin Laden clearly wanted Bush to win the last election, but he wasn't stupid enough to come out and say it. Sure enough, you'll still find people who think al-Qaeda roots for the Democrats.

But I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting we work some massive deception on the whole world. It's enough to be a LITTLE more low-key about our support for the guys we like. Let them play to the hardliners, let them have their Sister Souljah moments with respect to America without getting all offended. Be smarter about it, in other words.

And the flip side of it is that you have to keep the dialogue open even when the bad guys are represented by someone as disgusting as Arafat, because you never know when one of them will turn out to be Nixon going to China. If you refuse to deal with the bad guys until they come up with a broadly acceptable leader, that leader is unlikely to have the street cred among his own people to accomplish much of anything.

Posted by Steve | June 20, 2007 1:28 AM

Would you prefer the U.S. pursued a foreign policy of attempting to trick the Palestinian people into thinking that we don't like the guys we actually do like (i.e. Abbas), in order to get those people to support those guys?

How about a foreign policy of Sit The Fuck Down And Shut The Fuck Up for a change?

Posted by BP | June 20, 2007 2:21 AM

I guess the thinking is that some Palestinians will be convinced that Olmert and Bush are on our side, but that does seem like a bit of wishful thinking considering all the other things that may have to be done to reach the level when that could become a feasible sentiment (not the Palestinian ledaership is blameless blah blah). In any event, that's a good point that MY makes. Everyone should read my own blog.

Posted by Wido Incognitus | June 20, 2007 4:50 AM

Re Arglebargle

I wonder if Mr. argiebargie is as dumb as his comments make him appear?

Posted by SLC | June 20, 2007 7:03 AM

Matt is exactly right that open support for Abbas is bad for Abbas. Measures that make Abbas look successful would help him. But it is not clear that Israel is ready to grant that since it requires returning freedom of movement to the West Bank, and that has not been on the increase of late. The worst thing would be if the people once again wrongly conclude that Fatah will feel the desperate need to make a deal and so will accept "peace" conditions that no human beings would accept as peace. Unfortunately that has been the Likud strategy for at least a decade.

The more interesting lesson of this mess is the importance of defining political institutions. In this country we have Bush trying to grab legislative power so he doesn't have to make good faith deals with the Congress. So it is not surprising that the Bush view on Palestinian government has not been that different parts of the government should have well defined roles, but rather that whoever seems most pro-American should count.

All new democracies start with the problem of where power lies when push comes to shove. Which is why constitutions are less important then the why that people understand them. But instead of encouraging workable institutions, Bush has been encouraging elasticity, so it is not surprising that each side should feel it is the other side that has engaged in a coup.

Posted by Lon | June 20, 2007 9:40 AM

Mrs. al-Jaffari:

You have been reading too many Jimmy Carter books.

Posted by nrglaw | June 20, 2007 10:17 AM

SLC:

I wonder if Mr. argiebargie is as dumb as his comments make him appear?

Good question. I think the most embarrassing example of my dumbness was when I stated:

Osama Bin Laden says that his motivation for ordering 9/11 was because of the presence of Christian (i.e. US) troops in Saudi Arabia, the home of Mecca and Medina.

After that display of extraordinary ignorance on my part, it's a wonder that I have the cojones to say anything.

Posted by ArgleBargle | June 20, 2007 11:59 PM