Warding off Palestinian Revolution

Epl

Description

Warding off Palestinian Revolution

Informations

• Publié par: ycyzadom
• Nombre de lectures: 51
• Langue: Français

Extrait

Editorial

ANALYSIS

COMMENTARY

The Island

8

Saturday 7th May, 2011

P

akistan has reportedly warned of dire conse-

quences for anyone who may be planning

unauthorised military raids inside its territo-

ry. It has every right to protect its sovereignty. In the

wake of last Sunday’s US military operation which

took Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in Pakistan,

several countries including India have adopted a

holier-than-thou posture on terrorism and Pakistan

has been at the receiving end of a vilification cam-

paign; a black picture has been painted of it as a

country harbouring terrorists.

Simply because bin Laden was living in a city an

hour's drive from Islamabad, it cannot be argued

that Pakistan had been protecting him. The benefit

of the doubt should be given to Pakistan in that not

even the US, which boasts of having at its disposal

the best intelligence agency in the world was aware

of the general location of bin Laden's hideout until

a few months ago. The US-led troops had been bomb-

ing Afghanistan for ten years thinking that their

wanted terrorist was there!

It was with the help of Pakistan that the US creat-

ed the Al Qaeda monster and bin Laden must have

cultivated a lot of people in Pakistan during the past

three decades or so even without the knowledge of

Islamabad. Terrorists work in mysterious ways!

Therefore, how can anyone accuse Pakistan of hav-

ing harboured bin Laden without producing conclu-

sive evidence of collaboration on the part of the

Pakistani military or political establishment? The

principle of natural justice demands that an investi-

gation be conducted before judgment is passed on

Pakistan, whose right to defend itself must be recog-

nised. But, if such a probe were ever to be launched,

no country suspected of sponsoring terrorism

should be spared or considered 'more equal', howev-

er powerful it may be.

The US is directly responsible for the current

predicament of Pakistan. During the US-backed

guerrilla war to drive the Russians out of

Afghanistan, huge quantities of arms and stagger-

ing amounts of money found their way into the

wrong hands in Pakistan, especially in its frontier

provinces turning those areas into a safe haven for

terrorists of all hues. Pakistan's democracy has also

suffered immensely due to the wrong US foreign pol-

icy which promoted pro-American dictatorships in

that country.

It is not only in Pakistan that terrorists have taken

sanctuary. We pointed out in these columns the

other day that India had created terrorism to tame

Sri Lanka. Britain is home to many dangerous ter-

rorists. It has been mollycoddling the LTTE for

decades notwithstanding the outfit's heinous crimes

against civilians. The late Anton Balasingham coor-

dinated the LTTE's international terror network

from Britain, where funds for Prabhakaran's terror-

ist war were raised openly. Leaders of successive

British governments have on their hands the blood

of innocent men, women and children killed by the

LTTE in this country. The same goes for many EU

countries where the LTTE is quite active in spite of

a ban. How supportive those nations have been

of

Sri Lanka's terrorists became manifestly clear in

the manner in which Britain and France tried to res-

cue Prabhakaran in 2009. Norway is another coun-

try full of terrorists. So is Canada, where terrorists

are polluting national politics by contesting elec-

tions. In the US, the LTTE rump is very active. The

State Department worthies have no qualms about

meeting LTTE activists, who will resort to terrorism

again given half a chance.

Thus, it may be seen that most of the champions

of human rights crusading against terrorism have

been harbouring terrorists and promoting their

causes while condemning others for doing that.

It is time friends of Pakistan joined forces to

defeat a sinister attempt by the western bloc and

some puppet states beholden to it to confer the

pari-

ah

status on that trouble torn nation. What Pakistan

needs urgently at this hour is unstinted interna-

tional assistance to protect its ailing democracy and

rid itself of the scourge of terrorism.

Let a country that has not sinned by sponsoring

terrorism cast the first stone at Pakistan!

Sponsoring terrorism

and casting stones

Published by Upali Newspapers (Pvt) Ltd.

223, Bloemendhal Road, Colombo 13.

Tel: [phone]

Fax: [phone]

www.island.lk / E-mail: [e-mail]

The Island

Advertising Dept.

Circulation Dept.

Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]

Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]

Saturday 7th May, 2011

B

Y

G

WYNNE

D

YER

P

alestine is ripe for a revo-

lution. How do we know

that? Because the two rival

governments that have so spec-

tacularly failed that hypotheti-

cal country are finally ending

their four-year-old breach and

getting back together. Or at least

that’s what they say they’re

doing.

The reconciliation took place

in Cairo on Wednesday, when

Mahmoud Abbas, the president

of the Palestinian Authority

(which controls the West Bank),

and Khaled Meshaal, the leader

of Hamas (which controls the

Gaza Strip), signed an agree-

ment to form an interim govern-

ment to rule both parts of the

would-be country. “We forever

turn the black page of division,”

said Abbas in his opening

remarks.

The two men went further

than that. They agreed that no

member either of Hamas or of

Fatah (the movement that is

Mahmoud Abbas’s political

base) could be part of the inter-

im government. That govern-

ment would pave the way for

free elections next year in both

parts of the disjointed proto-

state that would really restore

Palestinian national unity. Or so

the deal says.

But Fatah and Hamas still

hate each other, and they

haven’t actually made a single

compromise on the key areas

where they disagree, like the

question of whether to make

peace with Israel. Most

observers still doubt that the

gulf between the two sides can

ever be bridged. So why would

they even bother to sign such a

“unity” accord?

Because they are both run-

ning scared. They have seen

what happened to other oppres-

sive and/or corrupt regimes in

the Arab world as the “Arab

spring” has unfolded, and they

are afraid that a comparable

revolution could drive them

from power too. Fatah, after all,

is very corrupt and quite

authoritarian, while Hamas is

less corrupt but extremely

repressive and economically

incompetent to boot.

There have already been

large popular demonstrations in

the Palestinian territories,

although they have not been

widely reported. The protesters’

main demand is “national

unity”, but there is good reason

to suspect that many of them

actually have a broader agenda.

Like the Syrian demonstra-

tors demanding the repeal of

the 48-year-old “state of emer-

gency” in that country, when

what they really want is the end

of the regime, many of the

Palestinian protesters are using

“national unity” as a popular

mobilising call when what they

really want is the end of both

Fatah and Hamas.

So Fatah and Hamas are giv-

ing them what they say they

want, in order to avoid having to

give them what they really

want. But it is a shotgun mar-

riage at best, and most unlikely

to last.

One further incentive for the

deal, from Abbas’s point of view,

is that he hopes to get formal

recognition of the Palestinian

state from the United Nations

General Assembly in September,

even though its borders with

Israel have still not been agreed

and much of it is under Israeli

military occupation.

This is mere gesture politics,

since it will not force Israel to

remove its troops or make any

other concessions, but Abbas

hopes that it will strengthen his

standing with his own people.

Besides, he can hardly ask the

UN members to recognise

Palestinian sovereignty so long

as different parts of its territory

are ruled by rival and indeed

hostile regimes. A cosmetic rec-

onciliation with Hamas is neces-

sary, at least for a while.

The probable price of this

Fatah-Hamas deal is a complete

shutdown of peace negotiations

with Israel, because Israel, the

European Union and the United

States define Hamas as a “ter-

rorist movement”. Therefore,

they will have nothing to do

with a Palestinian government

that includes Hamas (or so they

say).

Israel’s hard-line prime min-

ister, Binyamin Netanyahu, said

the accord was a "tremendous

blow to peace and a great victo-

ry for terrorism". But

Netanyahu is widely and proba-

bly correctly seen as a man who

isn’t interested in a peace agree-

ment anyway, so Abbas doesn’t

think anything important will

be lost if he cozies up to Hamas

for a while.

The real question is whether

the Palestinians will ignore all

this window-dressing, and rise

up like their Egyptian neigh-

bours to rid themselves of the

arbitrary and corrupt govern-

ments that now rule them. The

answer is probably no, because

the felt need for “unity” in the

face of the Israelis usually crip-

ples Palestinian attempts to

address the failings of their own

institutions.

Indeed, the biggest short-

term consequence of the “Arab

spring” for the Palestinians may

be another Israeli military

assault on the Gaza Strip, or

even a full-scale re-occupation of

that territory, because the new

Egyptian government plans to

reopen its border with Gaza

very soon.

Under Hosni Mubarak,

Egypt’s recently deposed dicta-

tor, Cairo fully cooperated with

Israel in enforcing a tight block-

ade of the Gaza Strip. Once the

border with Egypt is re-opened,

Israel fears, the extremists who

regularly fire rockets into Israel

from the territory will have

access to an endless flow of

weapons.

Trying to shut that border

down again would immediately

embroil Israel in a conflict not

only with Hamas but with newly

democratic Egypt. That would

certainly not be to Israel’s long-

term advantage, but that doesn’t

mean they won’t do it.

Warding off Palestinian Revolution

Palestinian woman reacts as she sits in the rubble of shacks and tents destroyed by Israeli bull-

dozers near the village of Yatta, south of the West Bank city of Hebron, Thursday, May 5, 2011.

Witnesses said the structures were destroyed for lacking building permits. (AP)

Indeed, the biggest

short-term conse-

quence of the

“Arab spring” for

the Palestinians

may be another

Israeli military

assault on the

Gaza Strip, or

even a full-scale

re-occupation of

that territory,

because the new

Egyptian govern-

ment plans to

reopen its border

with Gaza very

soon.