American Taxpayers Now Paying the Salaries of Palestinian Terrorists

What a unity government bringing together Hamas with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah party means

Lee Smith  June 3, 2014

Some major turning points in the lives of nations announce their importance in plain sight, in front of TV cameras, while the whole world is watching, for example: Sept. 11 or the fall of the Berlin Wall come to mind. Others happen in secret. And still others try to slink away from the lights while clothed in the drab, everyday disguise of bureaucratic double-speak, as happened at a State Department press conference in Washington on Monday, at which a reporter wondered how America, once the leader of a global war on terrorism, would respond to the announcement of a Palestinian unity government that would include Hamas, which the State Department has clearly and repeatedly designated as a global terrorist organization.  

“Based on what we know now,” State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki told the press, “we intend to work with this government,” adding that “if needed” the United States might “recalibrate our approach.” Hidden beneath this deliberately boring verbiage was a shocking change in American foreign policy: Instead of making war on terrorists, America would henceforth be directly funding one of the largest and most deadly terrorist armies in the world.

Israel denounced the United States for accepting Abbas’ government, but many of the reporters in the room found nothing all that shocking in Psaki’s announcement. That’s not entirely their fault. Generations of American diplomats working on the Arab-Israeli conflict have been motivated by the conviction that there’s nothing to be lost—and plenty to be gained—by trying to make peace between the two sides.

 What harm could there be in getting the two sides in the same room to feel each other out, to explore possibilities and find common ground? Certainly that was the idea that inspired Secretary of State John Kerry, compelling him to make dozens of trips to Jerusalem and Ramallah over the past two years.

Yet Psaki’s announcement is, in fact, shocking. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’ move on Monday to bring Hamas into a unity government with his own Fatah party means that U.S. taxpayers will be paying the salaries of men and women who belong to an organization sworn to the destruction of an American ally—and who repeatedly endorse and employ the murder of innocent civilians through the grim arsenal of terror as a means of achieving their goals. It is hard to imagine any significant number of Americans who would endorse blowing up women and children on buses, or sending shrapnel-laden suicide bombers into pizza parlors and discos, or sending volleys of rockets against kindergartens—let alone would want their tax money to wind up in the pockets of people who dream up and carry out such atrocities.

How did this happen? After all, it was Washington that invented the Palestinian Authority, The purpose of the PA was to placate America’s Arab partners, like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, while ensuring that the remaining regional troublemakers—from Saddam Hussein to the Islamic Republic of Iran—would be unable to use the Palestinian cause to their advantage. Moreover, it was believed that the easiest way to neutralize Yasser Arafat and the PLO was to suffocate him in a warm American embrace that would reward the scruffy old terrorist for good behavior, and hold out the promise of a late-life transformation into the Palestinian Nelson Mandela.

 It came as a shock to American policymakers that Arafat didn’t want to be Mandela; he wanted to be Saladdin, and if he couldn’t free Jerusalem with fire and blood he would rather die trying than go down in history as the traitor who relinquished the dream of a Palestinian homeland, the way that the Palestinians—not the Americans—imagined it.

Arafat was a hard case. But now the United States has been outfoxed by Mahmoud Abbas, a dull 79-year-old bureaucrat who is also regularly proclaimed to be “a man of peace” but who displays little interest in any aspect of governance besides collecting tribute from Western powers and daring them to call his bluff. In Abbas’ view, the Americans and the Israelis are not in control; he is. Without him, the White House loses control of the peace process, which is a key part of the American diplomatic patrimony in the region—an asset that the Obama Administration can ill afford to lose, especially now.

Abbas is therefore gambling that the Obama Administration will continue to pay out hundreds of millions of dollars to whatever he proclaims to be the new Palestinian government. The White House is desperate, and so it doesn’t matter that including Hamas in a government is against the letter of U.S. law—indeed, a number of U.S. laws.

The 2006 Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act, for instance, prohibits any U.S. funds from going to Hamas, Hamas-controlled entities, or a power-sharing PA government that includes Hamas as a member, or results from an agreement with Hamas. Most recently, the 2014 Consolidated Appropriations Act prohibits “assistance to Hamas or any entity effectively controlled by Hamas, any power-sharing government of which Hamas is member, or that results from an agreement with Hamas and over which Hamas exercises undue influence.”

That last clause regarding “undue influence,” say some analysts, represents a loophole the administration may try to crawl through. “The White House may argue that since Abbas is still president of the PA, and since there aren’t really that many new Hamas members in the cabinet, Hamas does not have ‘undue influence,’ ” says a senior official at a Washington-based pro-Israel organization. “But if that’s true, then why won’t the new PA cabinet disarm Hamas?”

That’s not going to happen, of course. One purpose of the deal is for Fatah to protect Hamas’ arsenal, which, so long as it’s pointed at Israel, will enhance the prestige of a PA president whose term in office was over five years ago, and who has failed at both the small-bore work of ending corruption, fixing roads, and providing real jobs for his people, as well as big-picture tasks like winning his people a state. Protecting the weapons of his rival, in other words, is all that Abbas has left to offer the Palestinians and that suits Hamas fine.

“If anyone expects Hamas to hand over its missile network to the PA, he’s making a big mistake,” said one Hamas official. The reality is that Fatah has embraced Hamas.

Hamas has plenty to gain from the deal. Without the Iranian assistance that Hamas once enjoyed, what Gaza’s Islamic resistance needs most is some relief on the Egyptian side of the border. Cairo’s new ruler, Sisi, can afford to be magnanimous with Hamas, especially if it means he will inherit the Palestinian file in toto. Indeed, some Palestinians hope that Sisi will choose to confront Israel. In short, Palestinian reconciliation is good for everyone—except the United States and Israel.

The results for Israel are likely to be particularly unpleasant. Both Bush and Obama White Houses boasted that the security cooperation between Israel and the PA was excellent. But that seems over now since there is reportedly a clause in the Palestinian unity agreement that “criminalizes” security coordination with Israel. Perhaps, as many have feared over the last decade, those U.S.-trained Palestinian security forces will now turn their American weapons on an American ally, as they did during the second intifada. More such attacks will certainly follow, and some of them will be more successful—whether perpetrated directly by Hamas, or by Fatah, or some new terror entity in which both parties cooperate together.

Meanwhile, as crazy as it sounds, U.S. diplomats will continue searching for loopholes that allow us to fund officially designated terrorist organizations with taxpayer dollars. As Jonathan Schanzer, director of research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, explains “there are waivers embedded in the legislation, with which the president can override stipulations for reasons of national security or national interest. The assumption,” says Schanzer, “is that Obama is going to override everything.”

The administration will also be able to cite a regional precedent for its likely next step of embracing the new Palestinian “unity government” as a “partner for peace” while claiming that America is not funding terrorism. Hamas officials boast that they are now employing the “Hezbollah model”—i.e., becoming a political party that avoids responsibility for governance, while also maintaining an independent military organization that engages in terrorism. In other words, the PA will serve as legitimate cover while the Islamic resistance continues to wage its war of liberation against Israel.

The Palestinian Authority is an entity created by the United States, and it cannot exist without massive U.S. financial, political, military, and diplomatic support. Rather than finding ways around American law, the Obama Administration should be looking for ways to snap Abbas’ spine.

 If Kerry’s assiduous and careless peace processing was evidence of the administration’s incompetence, the decision to work with Hamas is evidence of the White House’s cravenness. The bill for this moral rot will be paid by Israelis—and by American taxpayers who will now be directly covering the salaries of thousands of card-carrying members of a terrorist organization. It’s not just Obama who will be crossing a red line by funding Hamas—he’s dragging the rest of us along with him into a political and moral swamp, in which America will combat terrorism with one hand, while paying for terror with the other.

Palestinian Magical Thinking

The campaign to place pressure on Israel through activism on the international stage is the latest example.

Jonathan Spyer May 7^th 2014

http://tinyurl.com/p5nep6w

So April 29^th has passed, and the nine-month period allotted by the current U.S. administration for its effort to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian dispute has come and gone.  Entirely predictably, it has failed, in its entirety.

What can be learned from the failure? And what may be expected to happen now?

The failure of the talks was predictable first and foremost because of the irreconcilable positions of the sides.  This is not a matter of small details, as is sometimes maintained.  It isn’t that the Palestinians want 99% of the West Bank while Israel will offer only 98%.

Palestinian nationalism in both its Fatah and Hamas variants rejects the possibility of accepting the permanence of Jewish statehood in any part of the area west of the Jordan River.

For the Palestinian Authority, the nine-month period of negotiations came as an unwelcome interruption to a very different strategy to which it will now return.  This strategy consists of an attempt to place pressure on Israel through action in international forums to isolate and delegitimize the Jewish state.  Presumably the intended result of this is to induce Israel eventually to make concessions in return for nothing. The struggle would then continue for further concessions.

This strategy is unlikely to bear fruit, but its adoption follows a notable pattern in Palestinian politics – namely, the constant attempt to find an alternative to a negotiated peace based on compromise.

At the root of Palestinian perceptions is a very notable strategic optimism.

The Palestinians see themselves as part of the local majority Arabic-speaking Sunni Muslim culture.  From this point of view, the establishment of a non-Muslim sovereignty in Israel was not only an injustice, it was also an anomaly.  Israel, being an anomaly, is therefore bound eventually to be defeated and disappear.  So there is no need to reconcile to it, with all the humiliation therein.

This core perception leads to the momentary embrace of all kinds of unlikely strategies, which are invested with tremendous hopes.

This pattern has been around for a while.

In the 1970s, in their first incarnation as an independent national movement, Palestinians believed that the long war strategy of the Palestinian terror organizations would serve to hollow out and destroy the hated Zionist entity, on the model of the FLN in Algeria.

In 1990/91, almost forgotten now, Palestinians en masse embraced the empty promises of Saddam Hussein to “burn half of Israel.”  Arafat went to Baghdad to embrace the Iraqi dictator.

In 2000, after the short Oslo period, Palestinians looked to Hizballah and its ideology of resistance as the model for what they hoped would be a successful military and terror campaign against Israel.

All these strategies failed.  All turned out to be based on illusion.

In the meantime, the Jewish state went from strength to strength – absorbing millions of new immigrants, leaping ahead economically, diplomatically and militarily.

The campaign to place pressure on Israel through activism on the international stage is the latest example of this Palestinian magical thinking.  It is likely to share the fate of its predecessors.  The noisy BDS movement  notwithstanding, Israel’s position on the global stage remains strong.

Its alliance with the U.S., despite the utter lack of warmth from the current administration, remains strong at its core, reflected in cooperation on myriad levels, both military and economic.

Israel is forging ahead in constructing positive relationships with the emergent powers of India and China.  It maintains very close and warm relations with Canada, Australia, Germany and other important western players.  None of this is under threat from the automatic majority the Palestinians enjoy at the UN because of the Arab and Muslim blocs of states.

So Palestinian optimism regarding  the model for defeating Israel is hard to understand. But then  the faith placed in the previous approaches noted above also made little apparent sense.

What we are in for now is a period in which the current chimera will need to be played out.  On the bright side, this means that a return to large-scale political violence is unlikely.  The Palestinians were defeated heavily in the 2000-4 period, and there is little energy for a return to war.

The Palestinian elite and their children live comfortable and privileged lives in Ramallah and elsewhere in the region and beyond it.  Combining this with diplomatic and political activity can be pleasant and rewarding.  Combining it with military activity, by contrast, could be harmful and has already been proven not to work.

So expect more furious and pathos-filled denunciations of Israeli crimes from various UN committees largely staffed by the representatives of sundry dictatorships.

Expect Saeb Erekat and the others to come up with yet more inventive reasons as to why Islam and Arabic are “indigenous” to Jerusalem while Judaism and Hebrew represent foreign implants.  And so on, and so forth.

And at the end of all this, expect more failure, more bewilderment and a pause until the next alternative to a negotiated peace is stumbled upon.  This is the nature of the  magical thinking that lies at the core of Palestinian Arab politics.

This politics, in its various manifestations, exists to reverse the verdict of the war of 1948. It has no other purpose.

Its  credo was perfectly rendered in the words of the Moroccan scholar Abdallah Laroui, as quoted by Fouad Ajami: “On a certain day everything would be obliterated and instantaneously reconstructed and the new inhabitants would leave, as if by magic, the land they had despoiled; in this way will justice be dispensed to the victims, on that day when the presence of God shall again make itself felt.’

The language is elegant. The message is one of politicide and destruction. For as long as this credo remains at the root of Palestinian politics, peace between Israelis and Palestinians will remain unachievable. All else is mere detail.

Palestinians: The War between Mahmoud and Mohamed

Khaled Abu Toameh November 1, 2013

http://tinyurl.com/pcetkyv

Dahlan was quoted as saying that Abbas and his team were not negotiating with Israel about the restoration of Palestinian rights, but in order to win American and Israeli backing.

Abbas's aides are accusing Dahlan of being part of a "conspiracy" to topple the Palestinian Authority President.

A weak and divided Fatah further boosts Hamas's popularity among Palestinians.

After a prolonged lull, the ongoing war between Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and ousted Fatah operative Mohamed Dahlan erupted once again over the past few days.
The two men are now accusing each other of treason, corruption and conspiracy, prompting some Palestinians to wonder whether the time has come for U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry to make an effort to hold "peace talks" between Abbas and Dahlan.
The Abbas-Dahlan rivalry reflects growing tensions in the ruling Fatah faction, which dominates the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.
But the war is not only between two figures. Rather, it is between two camps in Fatah representing the old guard and new guard.
There were days when Abbas and Dahlan were considered close allies and friends. When Abbas served as prime minister under Yasser Arafat, in 2003, he appointed Dahlan as Minister of Security.
Back then, Abbas and Dahlan were forced to work together to face Arafat's autocratic regime, which sought to undermine the power of the two men.
However, tensions between Abbas and Dahlan first surfaced after Hamas seized control over the Gaza Strip and drove the Palestinian Authority out of the area in the summer of 2007.
Abbas and his loyalists then held Dahlan and his forces responsible for the Hamas "coup," saying they had not done enough to prevent the defeat of the Palestinian Authority. Dahlan was a former commander of the Palestinian Preventive Security Force in the Gaza Strip.
The tensions between the two reached their peak four years ago when Abbas learned that Dahlan had been bad-mouthing the president's sons, Yasser and Tareq Abbas.
In response, Abbas ordered the Palestinian Authority security forces to raid Dahlan's residence in Ramallah and confiscate documents and various types of equipment. Some of Dahlan's friends and aides were arrested during the raid.
Dahlan was forced to flee Ramallah and has since found refuge in the United Arab Emirates.
Abbas escalated his campaign against Dahlan by persuading Fatah's Central Committee to expel him from the faction.
Abbas aides have since accused Dahlan of involvement in various crimes, including the "poisoning" of Arafat, who died in November 2004, the assassination of a number of Fatah officials in the Gaza Strip, and embezzlement of public funds.
In recent weeks, the United Arab Emirates and other Arab countries have been trying to negotiate an end to the war between Abbas and Dahlan, but to no avail.
Palestinian sources claimed that the Arab mediators had even asked the 78-year-old Abbas to appoint Dahlan, 53, as his deputy. Abbas, according to the sources, turned down the proposal, saying he would never forgive Dahlan for betraying him and Fatah.
The failure of the mediation efforts prompted Dahlan last week to launch a scathing attack on Abbas and his close aides in Ramallah, reigniting the war between the two men.
Dahlan was quoted as saying that Abbas and his team were not negotiating with Israel about the restoration of Palestinian rights, but in order to win American and Israeli backing. "The leadership of the Palestinian Authority is so weak that it can't turn down any Israeli request," Dahlan was quoted as saying.
Dahlan was also quoted as accusing unnamed Palestinian Authority officials of providing logistical aid to construction work in Jewish settlements.
Dahlan's statements have drawn strong condemnations from Abbas and his top aides. They are now referring to the ousted Fatah operative as "Lieberman Dahlan" – a reference to Israeli right-wing politician and former Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who is a strong critic of the Palestinian Authority and its leaders.
Abbas's aides are also accusing Dahlan of being part of a "conspiracy" to topple the Palestinian Authority president. They claim that Dahlan is wanted by the Palestinian Authority for his role in the assassination of Fatah activists and financial corruption.
Dahlan does not seem to be standing alone in his battle against Abbas. Several Fatah-affiliated groups and figures in the Gaza Strip and Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon have come out in support of Dahlan, deepening divisions inside Fatah.
The war between Dahlan and Abbas has seriously undermined Fatah's credibility among Palestinians. Fatah has already lost much of its credibility as a result of its failure to reform and come up with new leaders.

This war, a weak and divided Fatah, plays into the hands of Hamas and further boosts its popularity among Palestinians. Before pursuing its efforts to achieve peace with Israel, Fatah needs to solve its internal problems. A weak and divided Fatah would never be able to sell any peace agreement with Israel to its people.

Palestinians Dismiss Prisoner Release as a "Bribe" (which, of course it is!)

by Khaled Abu Toameh  August 5, 2013

 http://tinyurl.com/me2exc8

They regard the prisoner release as something Israel was supposed to have done anyway, many years ago. Many will continue to see it as as part of an Israeli-American scheme to extract concessions, and will continue to attack Abbas for "succumbing" to US pressure.

The argument that the release of Palestinian prisoners boosts the standing of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and "moderate" Palestinians and facilitates the resumption of peace talks with Israel is not necessarily true.

Many Palestinians do not see Israel's decision to release more than 100 Palestinians who were imprisoned before the signing of the Oslo Accords two decades ago as a gesture on the part of Israel.
Rather, they regard the Israeli move as something that Israel was supposed to have done anyway, many years ago.

As Saeb Erekat, the chief PLO negotiator, explained: "This Israeli cabinet decision is an overdue step towards the implementation of the Sharm Sheikh agreement of 1999, whereby Israel committed to release all the pre-Oslo prisoners. We welcome this decision 14 years later."

So unlike the US and other Western governments, the Palestinian Authority does not see the release of prisoners as a conciliatory move on the part of the Israeli government.

Moreover, Palestinian Authority representatives do not believe there is a link between the release of prisoners and progress toward achieving peace between Israelis and Palestinians.

Many of the prisoners who are scheduled to be released do not even belong to Abbas's Fatah faction.
It is unrealistic to think, for example, that members of Islamic Jihad or the Marxist Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine who killed Israelis are going to come out of prison and declare their support for the Oslo Accords and the two-state solution.

There is also no guarantee that Fatah prisoners who were incarcerated before the signing of the Oslo Accords will endorse the peace process.

Of course Abbas and Fatah will do their utmost to take advantage of the prisoner release to try and score points on the Palestinian street.

Abbas's aides and loyalists are busy these days preparing a big rally in Ramallah to celebrate the release of the prisoners.

They are keen on presenting the prisoner release as a "huge achievement" by Abbas.
But even if a large number of Palestinians turn out to greet the prisoners, this still does not mean that they support Abbas's decision to resume peace talks with Israel.

Some Palestinians, including Abbas loyalists, see the release of a few dozen prisoners as a "bribe" offered by US Secretary of State John Kerry to the Palestinian Authority president to entice him to return to the talks.

These Palestinians point out that in return for this "bribe," Abbas was forced to drop his two other preconditions for resuming the peace talks: a full cessation of settlement construction and Israeli acceptance of the pre-1967 lines as the basis for a two-state solution.

There are also Palestinians who see the release of about 100 prisoners as a "minor" achievement for Abbas, especially in comparison to Hamas's success in securing the release of more than 1000 inmates in return for kidnapped Israel Defense Forces soldier Gilad Schalit.

"Israel is not doing anyone a favor by releasing 100 prisoners," said a Fatah official in Ramallah. "While we welcome this decision, we do not see how it could help the peace process, particularly in light of the fact that there are more than 5,000 Palestinians who are still in prison."

So while most Palestinians are expected to rejoice over the release of the prisoners, it is naïve to think that they will take to the streets to celebrate the resumption of peace talks with Israel.
The prisoner release could benefit Abbas in the short-term. But in the long-term, many Palestinians will continue to see it as part of an Israeli-American scheme to extract concessions from Abbas and the Palestinian Authority leadership.


After the celebrations over the release of the prisoners end, Palestinians will continue to criticize Abbas for "succumbing" to US pressure and going to the peace talks against the recommendation of the PLO leadership. And of course they will continue to attack Israel for not fulfilling all their demands, including a settlement freeze and the release of the rest of the prisoners.

Abbas Reinstates a Radical Political Doctrine

Lt. Col. (ret.) Jonathan D. Halevi

Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs

• Mahmoud Abbas, chairman of the Palestinian Authority and leader of the PLO and the Fatah movement, presented a radical political doctrine in his speech on January 4, 2013, honoring the anniversary of Fatah's establishment. The messages Abbas conveys express the political and national vision that he bequeaths to the Palestinian people.

• In his speech Abbas avoids all mention of a historic compromise with Israel that would bring the conflict to an end. Nor does he mention the land-for-peace formula or the establishment of a Palestinian state beside Israel. Instead, Abbas chose to reemphasize that the Palestinian people remain on the path of struggle to realize "the dream of return" of the Palestinian refugees and their millions of descendants.

• Abbas pledged to continue the path of struggle of previous Palestinian leaders, mentioning the Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husseini, who forged a strategic alliance with Nazi Germany, and heads of Palestinian terror organizations who were directly responsible for the murder of thousands of Israeli civilians. All are equal and suitable partners in the Palestinian struggle, and their ideological platform, even if it is terrorist and/or radical-Islamist, is a source of inspiration for the Palestinian people.

• In honor of the anniversary of the founding of the Fatah movement, which is headed by Mahmoud Abbas, at the end of December the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, the military arm of Fatah, held parades of armed men in the city of Hebron, the town of Bani Na'im, and the Kalandia refugee camp just north of Jerusalem. In Hebron and Bani Na'im, scores of activists armed with assault rifles participated.

• Anyone who expected that Abbas would follow a more moderate course after the UN General Assembly resolution of November 29, 2012, upgrading the status of the PLO's Observer Mission to that of an observer state, was undoubtedly disappointed with Abbas' remarks. He was not preparing the Palestinian people for making peace, but rather reverting to rhetoric perpetuating and even escalating the conflict.

Lt. Col. (ret.) Jonathan D. Halevi is a senior researcher of the Middle East and radical Islam at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. He is a co-founder of the Orient Research Group Ltd. and is a former advisor to the Policy Planning Division of the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), chairman of the Palestinian Authority and leader of the PLO and the Fatah movement, who lately has also been exalted with the title “president of the state of Palestine,” presented a radical political doctrine in his speech on January 4, 2013, honoring the anniversary of Fatah’s establishment. Abbas spoke by telephone from Ramallah to a crowd of thousands gathered in Gaza’s Al-Saraya Square.

Abbas’ speech is of great importance because he directly addresses the activists of the movement, who are the main propof the Palestinian Authority, and the Palestinian people as a whole. The messages Abbas conveys in his speech to the nation express more than any other statement the political and national vision that he bequeaths to the Palestinian people, in terms of which he asks them to proceed.

In his speech Abbas avoids all mention of a historic compromise with Israel that would bring the conflict to an end. Nor does he mention the land-for-peace formula, the establishment of a Palestinian state beside Israel, recognition of Israel, or Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people.

Instead, Abbas chose to reemphasize that the Fatah movement has not changed since the day of its establishment – marked by its first anti-Israel terror attack on January 1, 1965 – and that the Palestinian people remain on the path of struggle. The keywords in his speech were the “dreams” and “national goals” to be achieved; that is, “historical justice,” as the Palestinians view it. Translated into the language of action, that means, according to Abbas, “realizing the dream of return” of the Palestinian refugees and their millions of descendants.

Abbas reinforced his uncompromising message with a pledge to continue the path of struggle of previous Palestinian leaders, mentioning the Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husseini, who forged a strategic alliance with Nazi Germany, and heads of Palestinian terror organizations who were directly responsible for the murder of thousands of Israeli civilians, including Halil al-Wazir Abu Jihad (Fatah), Sheikh Ahmed Yassin (Hamas), Abd al-Aziz al-Rantisi (Hamas), Fathi al-Shikaki (Islamic Jihad), George Habash (Popular Front), Abu Ali Mustafa (Popular Front), Abu al-Abbas (Arab Liberation Front), and Izzadin al-Qassam (leader of the jihad war against the Jewish Yishuv and the British in the 1930s).

Abbas refrained from setting red lines for the “Palestinian struggle,” condemning terror, or denouncing Palestinian terror organizations and leaders. All of these, in his view, are equal and suitable partners in the Palestinian struggle, and their ideological platform, even if it is terrorist and/or radical-Islamist, is a source of inspiration for the Palestinian people in their ongoing endeavor to achieve their national goals.

This is not just a matter of lip-service about solidarity with historical leaders who have left this world. Abbas regards the tradition of national unity with Palestinian terror organizations as an imperative and a duty that are incumbent on him and on the Palestinian people, a key to “realization of the dreams” – in other words, the destruction of the State of Israel.

In honor of the anniversary of the founding of the Fatah movement, which is headed by Mahmoud Abbas, at the end of December the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, the military arm of Fatah, held parades of armed men in the city of Hebron, the town of Bani Na’im, and the Kalandia refugee camp just north of Jerusalem. In Hebron and Bani Na’im, scores of activists armed with assault rifles participated.

Anyone who expected that Abbas would follow a more moderate course after the UN General Assembly resolution of November 29, 2012, upgrading the status of the PLO’s Observer Mission to that of an observer state, was undoubtedly disappointed with Abbas’ remarks. He was not preparing the Palestinian people for making peace, but rather reverting to rhetoric perpetuating and even escalating the conflict.

* * *

The following is a translation of Abbas’ speech:

In the name of Allah the merciful and compassionate, O members of our heroic Palestinian people, O members of heroic Fatah, O heroic residents of Gaza:

Peace on all of you, dear Gaza, peace on you O Gaza of Hashim [grandfather of the Prophet Muhammad], O the one [Gaza] that clasps the struggle to its soul, all through its bitter history and various forms, peace on you O Gaza, O those born from its womb, the first cells of your pioneering movement [that were set up] in 1957, some eight years before it was founded on January 1, 1965, peace on you O Gaza, which launched the First Intifada.

Peace on the souls of your martyrs [shahids] O Gaza, and peace on you who have taken the patient path and are gathered in Al-Saraya Square, square of the martyr Yasser Arafat, to mark the anniversary of the beginning of the Palestinian revolution. Peace to the heroes who bore the burden and the pain so as to maintain the national Palestinian personality. Peace to those who stand firm against the blockade. Peace to every sister and brother of you, every son and daughter.

To all I send all my love from the bottom of my heart.

My brothers and my sisters, this mass gathering is being held on the anniversary of your revolution, which began under the most difficult of conditions. Our situation on the day of the establishment [of the Fatah movement] was harder than our situation today, since the world had not recognized the existence of our people outside the context of the expulsions and the misery, and we did not have an entity nor a state on the political map of the world, which regarded us as a problem of refugees who needed nothing more than charity. Yet the spearhead of this proud people decided to alter the course of history. Your modern revolution transformed the problem of your people through sacrifice, determination, and faith in the reality of a state with a flag of its own, to be flown at the United Nations beside the flags of the rest of the countries of the world.

The Fatah of yesterday is the Fatah of today. It was established for the sake of Palestine, and Palestine remained its compass, and it upheld the ideal that cannot be questioned, that of fealty to the [Palestinian] problem, and according to [this principle] national unity is the foundation of the national Palestinian endeavor and safeguarding the national identity is the first priority. If it were not for unity in the framework of Fatah, the sole legitimate representative that will not be divided and will not be replaced, we could not have progressed from a situation of misery and from refugee tents to a situation in which the [Palestinian] problem is the most important one in the international arena. In this context of the struggle of the heroes, the Palestinian problem has become a symbol of liberation, of defiance, and of rebellion against injustice and tyranny all over the world!

I bless you, sons of our people and those congregated in the square of the martyr Yasser Arafat, on this wonderful day marking the establishment of [the movement], which became a foundational moment in our path of struggle, and which is exalted in the restoration of the national unity that has no substitute when it comes to achieving our national objectives.

I bless you and strengthen the hand of each of you, since you have inscribed [on the pages of history] the most wonderful epics of heroism, patience, and steadfastness, and you have remained firm in your hearts even as your role in worthy actions and in sacrifices along this path increased, as, for example, when the names of the martyrs and the gravestones of leaders multiplied, commanders of the struggle and warriors, innocent children, mothers and sisters, who fell in the path of freedom amid all the Israeli aggression that wreaked injustice, and to which our precious [Gaza] Strip was subjected!

Brothers and sisters, all of our Palestinian people lives under occupation and blockade, while our eyes and our hearts are directed at Al-Quds [Jerusalem], which is being subjected to an enormous settlement campaign, in which the occupiers compete with time and think it is an opportunity [for them], and under these circumstances the obligation falls on all of us, Palestinians and those who are not Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims, and with us the liberals in the world, to unite our efforts, our hearts, and our resolve for the rescue of Al-Quds, our eternal capital city, and this by providing the means and elements of steadfastness, and support for the residents of the city, righteous Muslims and Christians.

And as for Gaza, the first Palestinian soil from which the army and the colonists exited, we focus our thoughts on ending the blockade imposed on it, so that Gaza will be free and liberated and connected to all the other parts of our homeland.

On the anniversary [of Fatah] we renew with a faithful heart the pledge to the heroic martyrs to walk in the path of the brother-martyr Abu Amar [Arafat] and his brother-friends, the leaders of all the national forces: Abu Jihad, Abu Iyyad, Abd al-Fatah Hamud, Abu Ali Ayyad, Abu Sabri Saydam, Abu Yusuf al-Najjar, Kamal Adwan, Kamal Nasser, Abu al-Walid Saad Sa’il, Faisal Husseini, Abu al-Hol, Abu al-Mondhir, Abu al-Said, Ahmed Yassin, Abd al-Aziz al-Rantisi, Ismail Abu Shanab, Fathi al-Shikaki, Majed Abu Sharar, Suleiman al-Najab, Bashir al-Barghouti, Hani al-Hassan, Abu Ali Mustafa, Abu al-Abbas, Samir Rusha, Abu al-Abd Khatab, and tens of thousands of heroic martyrs, and here it is obligatory to mention the first pioneers: the Mufti of Palestine, Hajj Amin al-Husseini, Ahmed al-Shukeiri, Yehiyeh Hamuda, Izzadin al-Qassam. These left on our shoulders and on our conscience their last bequest to continue in the path and to act in unity, and there is no other alternative than unity for achieving the national objectives and arriving at victory.

Blessings to our heroic prisoners and a blessing to all the members of our people in the homeland and in the diaspora and in every place where the Palestinians have agreed on the united dreams and objectives and the fulfillment of the dream of return. In the near future, with the help of Allah, we will achieve our unity on the road to ending the occupation so that the flag of the state of Palestine will wave over the churches of Al-Quds and the minarets of the mosques, as our eternal martyred leader Yasser Arafat reiterated at every opportunity, and we, with the help of Allah and the resolve of our people and the support of the friends and the brothers and the free world, will realize our objectives, and we will celebrate on the next anniversary of the revolution that has begun, so as to achieve the victory, and the victory will come, will come, will come.

With the help of Allah we will meet with you in proud Gaza very soon.

Source: http://www.wafa.ps/arabic/index.php?action=detail&id=145853  

* * *
Lt. Col. (ret.) Jonathan D. Halevi is a senior researcher of the Middle East and radical Islam at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. He is a co-founder of the Orient Research Group Ltd. and is a former advisor to the Policy Planning Division of the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs.