Palestine: Hamas Rejects Elections in Gaza

Palestine: Abbas Gambles on January Elections
Israel-Palestine: Clinton to Obama “Little Progress”

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

Hamas has responded harshly to Friday's decree by Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas that general elections for the Presidency and Parliament will be held in the West Bank and Gaza Strip on 24 January.

Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri declared that no vote can be held in Gaza, "This announcement means that elections will take place only in the West Bank, cementing the Palestinian split instead of fixing the problem."

Palestine: Abbas Gambles on January Elections

Israel-Palestine: Clinton to Obama “Little Progress”
Israel-Palestine: Space for a US-Brokered Solution Narrows
Bring It On: Israel Counter-attacks UN over Gaza Enquiry

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



Despite Hamas' objections and warnings, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said Tuesday that he will set 24 January as the date for presidential and legislative elections. At the time, appearing with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, Abbas claimed, "Fatah completely supported the Egyptian proposal [for Palestinian reconciliation]...but then Hamas put down obstacles."

Abbas, who has faced difficulties not only with Hamas but also with Palestinians in the West Bank and with Israel, has now used his two cards: The threat of a third intifada and the a re-submitted proposal endorsing the Goldstone Report on the Gaza War. Now, it is Hamas' turn, as it ponders whether to warn Washington that the tension may increase in Palestine or to enter the electoral process in the expectation that it can defeat Abbas.

The question is: can Abbas, looking for an exit strategy from the pressure on many fronts, really make the declaration of elections come true, especially in the wake of the recent failed initiative for renewed talks between Israel and Palestine? Or is he bluffing?

Israel-Palestine: Space for a US-Brokered Solution Narrows

Bring It On: Israel Counter-attacks UN over Gaza Enquiry
Palestine: Suffering Life at Israeli Checkpoints

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

Is there any space left for the US as the "honest broker" of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks?

On Tuesday night, President Obama declared, on the eve of Israeli President Shimon Peres's Facing Tomorrow Conference in Jerusalem, that Israeli-US relations were "more than a strategic alliance." In a speech full of praises on Peres, he added:

Our moment in history is filled with challenges that test our will and invite pessimism. We can choose to defer action, to sustain a dangerous status quo, or we can meet the challenges of our time head-on. Like you, I believe now is the time to act.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhQaubxx6Rw[/youtube]

Obama's speech was undercut, however, by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Ostensibly, he was calling for "peace", by putting the burden upon Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas:

Now it is your turn to say the truth about peace, the need for it and the true way to achieve it. What is important is to do it publicly, not just behind closed doors; to say the truth about peace publicly, to our people and to the Palestinian people.

The problem is that Netanyahu's demands comes in the context of a series of Israeli conditions on the talks, including the dispute over expansion of settlements and Tel Aviv's insistence on addressing of specific economic and security issues rather than the general recognition of a Palestinian state. So PA negotiator Saeb Erekat, who happened to be in Washington, pointedly said, "There's no agreement" and accused Israel of feigning interest in negotiations while claiming the Palestinians were preventing progress.

Israeli representatives were unable to reach common ground with Palestinians over three demands put by the latter: the start of the negotiations would be accompanied by a statement saying the goal was to reach an agreement within two years; the goal would the establishment of a Palestinian state with permanent borders based on an Israeli withdrawal; and there would a complete halt to construction of settlements, including in East Jerusalem. Late Tuesday, Israeli sources stated that negotiations failed.

Still the US persists. On Wednesday, the US Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice told Israelis to "relaunch Middle East talks now" At Peres's conference, she said: "As President Peres always reminds us, being serious about peace means taking risks for peace. Being serious about peace means understanding that tomorrow need not look like yesterday."

That is enough for now, it appears, to keep the idea of a negotiation alive. After the message of the Obama Administration, One Israeli official said, "There appears to be a meeting of the minds and hopefully the Israeli-Palestinian dialogue will be able to re-start in the near future." Another explained under the prospective deal, on which Palestinians have not yet commented, the negotiations could be held on the basis of two UN Security Council resolutions, 242 and 338, from the 1960s and 1970s.

The resolutions call for "withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict"; however, each party interprets this in its own way. For Palestinians, it obliges Israelis to withdraw unconditionally to pre-1967 borders, whereas Israel interprets this as a partial withdrawal.

So far from making Washington's task easier, the border issue may bring talks to a critical stage. Unless Israel is willing to drop its step-by-step approach in favour of a grand resolution, or conversely the Palestinians are willing to compromise on a de facto Israeli occupation while other issues are considered, there will be a stalemate, if not a dramatic collapse. Saed Erekat's words, as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton prepared her detailed report on talks to Obama, laid the foundation for blame rather than agreement, "The report would identify the spoiler in the talks."

Palestine: Abbas Goes on Offense, Criticises Hamas, Israel, and the US

US to Egypt: Stop the Fatah-Hamas Reconciliation Talks

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

Facing increasing internal pressure and Washington's intervention in Fatah-Hamas talks, Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas has tried to take the political offensive. On Tuesday, he implicitly threatened that he could not control the masses if a "Third Intifada" arose in response to Israeli restrictions in East Jerusalem, announcing the re-submission of a motion to the UN condemning Israel's offensive during the Gaza War, and accused Hamas of unwillingness to reach a reconciliation agreement.

The UN Human Rights Council announced that the Goldstone Report on Gaza will be discussed on Thursday, and the UN Security Council will discuss the matter today. Ibrahim Khraishi, the Palestinian Authority's UN ambassador in Geneva, said the two-day debate would also examine recent incidents of violence in Jerusalem.

However, Abbas is trying to secure his position by moving attention to his negotiations with Hamas and Israel. He said that Hamas was using the Goldstone report as an "excuse to run away from reconciliation and, for the first time, criticized Washington clearly and harshly. According to the Associated Press, an internal Palestine Authority memo says:

All hopes placed in the new U.S. administration and President Obama have evaporated... Obama couldn't withstand the pressure of the Zionist lobby, which led to a retreat from his previous positions on halting settlement construction and defining an agenda for the negotiations and peace.

Facing elections and amidst the reconciliation talks, Abbas's challenge to Washington is a risky game. At the end of the day, it is not clear how the Obama Administration will react to a man "shouldering all the troubles of the West Bank".

US to Egypt: Stop the Fatah-Hamas Reconciliation Talks

Middle East: Israel’s Troubles with a Turkish Ally
The Results of the Mitchell Israel-Palestine Trip: Nothing

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

Washington has told Cairo that it does not support a reconciliation agreement which does not include the principles of the Quartet (US, UN, European Union, Russia): recognition of the State of Israel, acknowledgement of earlier agreements, and renunciation of terrorism. The Obama Administration believe the current agreement, which is supposed to be signed by both parties by October 15 , could undermine negotiations with Israel.

The Fatah Party, which leads the Palestinian Authority's West Bank Government, has already agreed with the draft of the reconciliation agreement, while Hamas has not made its position clear because of the recent PA support for deferral of the United Nations Human Rights Council vote on the Goldstone Report on Gaza.

With the pressure on Egypt to pull back from the reconcilation agreement, Fatah can concentrate on repairing its position. Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said that on 16 October 16 the PA will ask the Human Rights Council to forward the Goldstone report either to the UN Security Council or to the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

Which only leaves a question: if the Obama Administration really that a peace settlement between the Palestinian Authority and Israel can come true without an agreement between Fatah and Hamas....How?