Obama's Nobel Prize: Reactions from the Israeli-Palestinian Front

Obama’s Nobel Prize: There’s Concerned…And Then There’s Stupid
Instant Reaction: Barack Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize
Video/Transcript: Obama’s Reaction to the Nobel Peace Prize

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

After U.S. President Barack Obama's winning Nobel Prize, leaders of Israel and Palestine expressed their feelings. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed the hope that his presidency would "usher in a new era of peace." In a message to Obama, he said:

Congratulations on winning the Nobel Prize for Peace... You have already inspired so many people around the world, and I know that this award also expresses the hope that your Presidency will usher in a new era of peace and reconciliation.

Another Npbel Prize holder, Israeli President Shimon Peres, also sent Obama a letter congratulating his Nobel Prize. In his letter, he wrote:

Very few leaders if at all were able to change the mood of the entire world in such a short while with such profound impact. You provided the entire humanity with fresh hope, with intekllectual determination, and a feeling that there is a lord in heaven and believers on earth.

Under your leadership, peace became a real and original agenda. And from Jerusalem, I am sure all the bells of engagement and understanding will ring again.

You gave us a license to dream and act in a noble direction.

On the Palestinian front, Fatah welcomed the prize but Hamas was sceptical. The chief Palestinian peace negotiator, Saeb Erekat expressed hope that Obama "will be able to achieve peace in the Middle East". On the other hand, Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri said: "Obama has a long way to go still and lots of work to do before he can deserve a reward... Obama only made promises and did not contribute any substance to world peace... And he has not done anything to ensure justice for the sake of Arab and Muslim causes."

Israel-Palestine: Sacrificing the Goldstone Report to the War of Politics

UPDATED Palestine: Pressure on Abbas to Resign in Goldstone Report Furour
Saudi King Abdullah in Damascus: Where is Syria Heading?

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

The Goldstone Report on the Gaza War is no longer a set of findings on possible crimes by both sides during the fighting. So, an enquiry that was supposed to cast bring light on the bombed rubbleis now  a political tool to be wielded against the "enemy". And that is not only the "enemy" in the Israel-Palestine conflict but also within Palestinian politics.

Yesterday the Palestinian UN Mission issued a press release saying asserting full support for the Libyan request for a meeting of the UN Security Council. However, Libya's proposal was rejected. Although the Council decided to move its next meeting from 20 October to 14 October, Washington's position was clear. US Deputy Ambassador Alejandro Wolff said that the Obama Administration would not approve any decision:

The report needs to be discussed by the Human Rights Council, and decisions on what next steps and what is the appropriate disposition of this report are decisions that will be taken in Geneva. So, for Washington, it is not the Report itself [but] the peace process [that] is more significant.

Meanwhile, Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas tried to repair his political position, damaged by the PA's initial support for deferral of a UN vote on the Report. An Abbas associate said, "If Israel does not soften its positions on the peace process, the Palestinian Authority will resume pushing to get the Goldstone report moved to the Security Council, and thence to the International Criminal Court." Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat told the French media that the PA could reveal the names of all the countries who pressured Abbas to defer the UN vote and, instead, negotiate with Israel without preconditions.

Hamas is increasing its bargaining power with the claim that Abbas deferred the UN vote because Israel threatened to expose his support for its war on Gaza. Egypt had announced that Hamas and Fatah would sign an accord on October 25, but on Wednesday, some Hamas officials said on Wednesday hat this was not the appropriate time for a deal. Mahmoud Zahar, a senior Hamas leader in the Gaza Strip, reportedly told Egyptians to either postpone or call off the planned intra-Palestinian conference in the wake of Abbas's "high treason".

UPDATED Palestine: Pressure on Abbas to Resign in Goldstone Report Furour

LATEST Israel-Palestine: Sacrificing the Goldstone Report to the War of Politics
The Ultimate Israel-Palestine Football Match

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

UPDATE 1330 GMT: EA readers have noted this report, originally from Palestine's Shahab News Agency: "[Palestinian Authority] representatives at a meeting in the US initially rejected Israel's request not to endorse the Goldstone report. But, then, Brigadier Eli Avraham, an Israeli representative, played a videotape showing a meeting between Abbas and Ehud Barak, the Israeli defence minister during the Gaza war, in which Tzipi Livni, Israel's former foreign minister, was also present. The tape showed Abbas trying to convince Barak to continue the offensive.

"Avraham also played an audiotape of a telephone call between Dov Weissglass, a senior Israeli official, and al-Tayyib Abdul Rahim, secretary-general of the Palestinian president's office....In the conversation, Abdul Rahim noted that circumstances were suitable for entry of the Israeli army into Jabalya and al-Shatea refugee camps, and said that the fall of these two camps would end Hamas's rule in Gaza Strip....Weissglass then told Abdul Rahim that such an army operation would lead to the deaths of thousands of civilians, but, according to Shahab, Abdul Rahim said: 'They have all elected Hamas, so they are the ones who have chosen their fate, not us.'"

We have found no further information about this claim, but Al-Manar, Hezbollah's media outlet, adds: "[Israel's] Ma'ariv newspaper had previously quoted the Israeli occupation Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi as saying that the Palestinian Authority, represented by its President, went to war with Israel in Gaza. Ashkenazi sent a letter to the Israeli Attorney, in which he revealed that the Abbas maintained unprecedented cooperation with the Israeli occupation army during the Gaza war."

All this may be considered in the context of our repeated analyses, during the December-January Gaza War, that the Fatah party of Abbas was backing the Israeli operations against Hamas. See, for example, a 6 January entry, "Gaza: The Israel-Fatah Collaboration".

The pressure on Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas, after his support for the deferral of a UN vote on the Goldstone Report on the Gaza War, is increasing.

For the first time, an Israeli Arab party (Balad) has challenged the Palestinian leadership, calling for Abbas' resignation. Haaretz reports that even members of Fatah have unofficially asked what needs to be done in to save the party's prestige.

On Monday, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine called on Abbas to "go home." The council of Palestinian organizations in Europe also issued a call for Abbas to step down. Hamas leader in Gaza Ismail Haniyeh called the formation by the PA of a committee to investigate the circumstances around the deferred UN vote "unnecessary": "The circumstances here are clear. Abu Mazen [Abbas] gave the order to his representative. An investigation is only necessary when the circumstances are not clear."

And the issue is not going to disappear. At the request of Libya, the United Nations Security Council will discuss the Goldstone Report on Wednesday. Haaretz reports that Libya will look for possible ways to pass a resolution but in case of a veto, Libya is prepared to call on the UN General Assembly to make a decision. Yet the proviso is added that it would be "ridiculous" for Libya to act in the name of the Muslim world or the Arab League as long as the Palestinian Authority is not interested in acting.

The Ultimate Israel-Palestine Football Match

UEFA president Michel Platini said, during a visit to Jerusalem on Tuesday, that he believes football can play a role in bringing about peace in the Middle East. Maybe, he is right. Maybe, it is only football that can bring peace to the region...

After Platini's words, we thought how two sides might come together, shake hands before the kickoff, and talk politics in the middle of the pitch. Imagine Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu drinking from Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas's water and Israeli President Shimon Peres congratulating Hamas political diretor Khaled Meshaal's freekick goal. Just imagine...

The Palestinian Squad:

1 - Salam Fayyad - PA Prime Minister
2 - Bassam Al-Salhi - Leader of The Palestinian People's Party
3 - Ahmad Sa'adat - General Secretary of The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine
4 - Khaled Meshal - Hamas leader in Syria
5 - Farouk al-Kaddoumi - Secretary-general of Fatah's central committee
6 - Aziz Duwaik - the Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council
7 - Saeb Erekat - Palestinian Authority negotiator in Israeli-PA peace process
8 - Ismail Haniyeh - Hamas leader in Gaza
9 - Nayef Hawatmeh - Leader of The Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine
10 - Mahmoud Abbas - PA President
11 - Saleh Ra'fat - Leader of The Palestinian Democratic Union

The Israeli Squad:

1 - Shimon Peres - President
2 - Yitzhak Aharonovich - Minister of Internal Security
3 - Silvan Shalom - Vice Prime Minister
4 - Moshe Ya'alon - Vice Prime Minister
5 - Avigdor Lieberman - Foreign Minister
6 - Ehud Barak - Defense Minister
7 - Danny Ayalon - Deputy Foreign Minister
8 - Dan Meridor - Deputy Prime Minister
9 - Eli Yishai - Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Internal Affairs
10 - Benjamin Netanyahu - Prime Minister
11 - Ya'akov Ne'eman - Minister of Justice

Ref: George Mitchell (USA)

Israel-Palestine: The US Mistake on the Goldstone Report

LATEST Palestine: Pressure on Abbas to Resign in Goldstone Report Furour
Israel-Palestine: More Clashes in Jerusalem
Israel-Palestine Inside Line: Hamas & Syria Criticise Abbas; Israel VP Cancels Britain Trip Over “War Crimes” Fears

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

As EA's Ali Yenidunya updates on the latest fall-out from the deferred UN vote on the Goldstone Report on the Gaza War, Marc Lynch, in his blog for Foreign Policy, raises questions about the Obama Administration's decision to block the report:

I'm still trying to figure out the thinking behind the Obama administration's rapid moves to block the Goldstone report on the Gaza war.  Without even getting into the moral issues involved or the accuracy of the report, the most likely tactical considerations behind the administration's decision seem short-sighted.  Its move likely responded to the intense public and private Israeli campaign against the report, and probably aimed at winning back some positive relations with the Israelis and maintaining momentum on the peace process.

But if the administration's hope was that killing the report would make the issue quietly go away while winning some political capital with the Israelis, it is likely to be disappointed.  Quite the contrary:  the report is becoming a major political issue in the Arab world, badly damaging the legitimacy of the Palestinian Authority, while Obama seems to be getting little credit from Israeli public opinion or the Israeli government.

Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority are already paying a heavy price for succumbing to reported American pressure to drop the report.  It isn't just Hamas criticism, though there's plenty of that.  This has rapidly become a leading issue in the Palestinian and Arab media, and is shaping up into a profound setback for the already weak PA leadership.  Virtually every sector of Palestinian opinion -- from Hamas to Fatah, from Gaza to the West Bank -- has united in harsh criticism of the move.  Even Mohammed Dahlan -- Dahlan! -- is positioning himself in opposition, showing where he thinks the political points are to be scored.  The Economics Minister in Fayyad's government Bassem al-Khoury reportedly submitted his resignation in protest.   Given his key role in pushing the so-called "economic peace" that Israeli and American officials are so keen upon, perhaps that will get more attention than the massive, broad-based criticism across the rest of Palestinian society.

There seems to be little question that Abbas's decision to go along with American pressure will have a significant impact on the popularity and legitimacy of the PA.  He is already backpedaling in the face of the intense public backlash, announcing the formation of a committee to look into the "circumstances surrounding the issue" (gee, wonder what he'll find when he investigates his own decision?), but it's probably too late.  Whatever gains made by Fatah after its Bethlehem conference and by Fayyad with the announcement of his agenda for a Palestinian state are likely to be washed away in this deluge.  The credibility of the Hamas narrative about the PA's collaboration with Israel and unrepresentative nature will be strongly enhanced. And it will not help Salam Fayyad establish authority that he has been fingered by some sources as the person directly responsible for the decision.

Why was the PA leadership put in this untenable situation?  The Obama team has consistently identified building Palestinian Authority legitimacy and capacity as a key part of its strategy.  Did nobody consider the impact that such an important symbolic issue as the perceived suppression of the Goldstone report would have on this supposedly crucial dimension of the strategy?

At the wider Arab level, the American stance on the Goldstone report has galvanized doubts about the credibility of Obama's outreach to the Muslim world and claims to genuine change.  The skeptics who demanded deeds to match words are having a field day.  As much as the inability to prevail in the battle over the settlements hurt Obama's credibility with the Arab world, at least he got some credit for trying, for prioritizing the issue and paying some costs to keep at it.  But the Goldstone report decision looks to most of the Arab public as a straightforward capitulation to Israel and abdication of any claims to the moral high ground. It will further undermine the Cairo promises, which look ever more distant.

Meanwhile, I have searched in vain for signs that the Israeli public or hawkish commentariat have given the Obama administration any credit for its efforts.  Israeli commentators seem to have simply taken the American protection for granted, or grudgingly acknowledged it in passing, without revising their views of Obama. The scornful, dismissive tone of the hawks towards Obama continues, while doves largely ignore it or disagree.  If there's been a concerted effort to leverage the decision to improve his standing with the Israeli leadership or public, I haven't seen it.

I can understand the decision to sacrifice the Goldstone inquiry into the Gaza war to tactical or strategic considerations, whether or not I agree with the call.  It wouldn't be the first time.  But I would hope that such a decision would have seriously anticipated the implications for the legitimacy and efficacy of the Palestinian Authority, for Obama's credibility among Arab and Muslim audiences, or for how to leverage it into real gains with the Israeli public.