PA On Verge of Collapse

[drdon326]

The statement Saturday by PA foreign minister Nasser al-Kidwa, that Arab terrorists should remain armed, signals a crisis for the PA, according to defense expert Moshe Elal. He said that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon should immediately demand that PA chairman Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas) reject the comment, which contradicts the American roadmap plan and the Sharm el-Sheikh summit accord.

"Al-Kidwa is trying to bypass Abu Mazen and hints that there will be a more militant leadership," Elal said. "His words are very harsh, and we must take him seriously because of his past and his importance," referring to his being the nephew of former PLO leader Yasser Arafat.

Elal pointed out that Abu Mazen is dealing primarily with internal Arab issues such as elections. "The matters that interest Israel are being dealt with by ministers Nasser Yousef and Mohamed Dahlan. The PA is paralyzed and cannot execute any decision. Abu Mazen should resign because he is not in control."

The PA chairman, successor to Yasser Arafat, recently has surrendered to Hamas and Islamic Jihad terror leaders' demands. After they refused to speak with PA chairman Abu Mazen this past week, the PA agreed to release two terrorists from a Jericho jail who had been charged with involvement in the February suicide bombing at The Stage nightclub in Tel Aviv, which killed five Israelis. The Islamic Jihad has demanded that the other five also be freed.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=83762

................................................................

Abu's shell game is about to come to a tragic end.

[Trajan]

1. Always one to toss poison into the well ....

yet MORE Nationalistic Likudnik crap ? ...

[Behind the Aegis]

4. Amazing

Israel is to blame for this?!?! You are incredible! The PA is NEVER to blame. :eyes:

[Trajan]

6. What are you talking about ? ..

I said THIS story was nationalistic CRAP, from a Likud source, and expressed here as the viewpoint of the OP ... HENCE my reference to poisoning the well AGAIN ...

Do I think the PA is a perfectly GOOD organisation ? .. HELL NO ! ...

Do I think the Likud is a fair minded organisation ? .. HELL NO ! ...

I agree about these concerns, but I DONT agree with the alarmist and cynical tenor of the statement, or this thread ....

Amazing how Likud, armed to the teeth and proven to disregard palestinian human rights, would expect someone else to have NO arm whatsoever ...

The PA is a favorite whipping boy of the Nationalists, and the original poster ....

It sure would be nice to find some actual LIBERALS in I/P, instead of rightists .....

[drdon326]

7. SO TRUE

The PA is a favorite whipping boy of mine for a good reason.....they deserve it.

The PA has been spineless when dealing with hamas and ij.

The PA made promises with regard to control terrorism and failed to do so.

The PA, with the release of terrorists ( see STAGE CLUB release of suspects) AND the 2 hamas members stopped with a car full of explosives, have in essence AIDED terrorists.

The PA has now begun to execute so-called "collaborators" with the use of laughable kangaroo courts thereby doing the work that hamas has been doing.

Gee, remind me whats the progressive viewpoint here ?

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Coastie for Truth]

10. Well then, I guess I know you----

You posted

I dont need to 'know you', beyond the gist of what you post ... THAT is enough to come to some basic conclusions about someone's political leanings ... Here: you are what you post .. and if you post support of RIGHT WING policies, then you deserve the appellation 'Rightist' ... your civic efforts and philanthropic endeavors are irrelevent ... Bush promotes civic efforts through his faith based nonsense: should I applaud him for this ? ... absolutely not ...

So, first I "know you" from your conflating Red Cross and Habitat and AI and ACLU with Bush's faith based nonsense.

And, second I know from your attitude of and and , and in active forums and in few archives (I didn't go into all of the Archives) nothing on "Energy and the Economy" and a "Me Too" on "Economy, Budget and Taxes", nothing on "Choice and "Reproductive Freedom" and a cold response in "GLBT Issues".

I think I "know you."

You are not invited to have a beer with me - even if you show up at our county Democratic club meeting next Monday.

But, I guess if you had shown up for the luncheon referred to in my append , you would have had a nice San Francisco lunch.

BTW - who elected you DNC Chair with the power of defining who is ;liberal enough or democratic enough.

Posting doesn't make a Liberal or a Democrat - nor does 100% congruence and total agreement - it's sweat equity.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Colorado Blue]

16. OK. A note on Bolton: Coastie said SELECTED ACTIONS.

A very important one of which, was the rejection of certain parties who wish to conflate the Zionist cause - ie, the Jewish state, with apartheid.

That's a very important distinction and the UN rightly acknowledged that.

The EU has recently reaffirmed it.

[not systems]

17. That is obvious. No?

Actions taken by Bolton for Israel double plus good.

I love the way posting that link to Coastie's "glib" post
is some how out of bounds but post #9 is fine.

That is very funny.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[not systems]

23. Spare the lecture...

A "modicum of respect" should at least preclude a full on
tirade about antisemitism but it doesn't. Why do you think
your post is anything other than an accusation?

I feel I have some sensitivity for your point of view, but I
do feel that it is myopic.

When you post this rant about antisemitism following my post
about Bolton, should I assume that you are not accusing me of
the same?

That is what it looks like to me.

I don't care if Bolton is double plus good for Israel,
and you know what I don't have to. Because there is no
rule that Israel comes first or that caring more about
his other actions is antisemitism, stage four or not.

He is bad for the USA and bad for the world.

If you like him for "certain" things fine, don't expect that
I should not find it a marriage made in hell. The marriage
of far right war neocon mongers like Bolton and the Israel
first crowd.

[Behind the Aegis]

11. What I am talking about.

I said THIS story was nationalistic CRAP, from a Likud source, and expressed here as the viewpoint of the OP ... HENCE my reference to poisoning the well AGAIN ...

"Nationalistic?" Which nation? I believe Israel is the nation we are discussing. Therefore, when you say "yet MORE Nationalistic Likudnik crap," it sounded like you were saying "yet MORE Israeli propaganda crap." That inspired my post. Because, rather than discussing the problem, it was dismissed as "Nationalistic Likudnik crap."

Do I think the PA is a perfectly GOOD organisation ? .. HELL NO ! ...

Do I think the Likud is a fair minded organisation ? .. HELL NO ! ...

Well, we seem to agree on a few points.

I agree about these concerns, but I DONT agree with the alarmist and cynical tenor of the statement, or this thread ....

Then, why not just state that? Instead, you just say it is "yet MORE Nationalistic Likudnik crap." Seeing their was no disclaimer, it appears you are saying there is no merit to the concerns. It wasn't until the post to which I am responding that you merely disagree with the way it was stated, the source, and the OP.

Amazing how Likud, armed to the teeth and proven to disregard palestinian human rights, would expect someone else to have NO arm whatsoever ...

The PA is a favorite whipping boy of the Nationalists, and the original poster ....

It sure would be nice to find some actual LIBERALS in I/P, instead of rightists .....

See, I find it amazing that we are supposed to support the PA, yet they refuse to crackdown on the terrorist groups. Instead of cracking down, they are bowing down, and I find that appalling. I also find it amazing that Hamas and other terrorist organizations, who also have no regard for Palestinian human rights, only their own agendas, would expect someone (Israel) to demand they stop their terrorist attacks!

As for your statement about the "whipping boy," I think DrDon has explained himself. I find it interesting that when I say the same about people who use Israel as their "whipping post" (whipping boy has some racist connotations, in my opinion, so I don't use it), I am shouted down as being "oversensitive" and "playing the anti-Semitism card." How is making your statement any different?

And, your final insult is just drivel. There are plenty of LIBERALS in this forum, on BOTH sides of the issue. What I find so insulting is the insinuation that because you support Israel, you must be anti-Palestinian, and, therefore, "un"liberal. I don't think all people that support the idea of a Palestinian state are anti-Israel, anti-Semitic, or "terrorist supporters." Why do I think this? Because I support the creation of a Palestinian nation! I just don't support the idea that Israel should be the ONLY one making concessions and meeting demands. So, why is it the supporters of Israel on this forum are treated as if we hate all Arabs or called names like "rightists?" In my opinion, demanding/expecting we all share the same opinion is more of a "rightist" quality, then a liberal one!

[drdon326]

12. Well, apparently Amnesty Int'l disagrees with you.

Since the establishment of the PA in 1994, Amnesty International has frequently expressed concern about trial proceedings that did not comply with international fair trial standards, arbitrary detentions and torture by PA security forces, and other abuses. The PA has also systematically afforded impunity to those responsible for killing Palestinians accused of collaborating with both Israeli intelligence services and security forces to assassinate other Palestinians.

"There is much that the PA can and should do to establish the rule of law and to end impunity for those responsible for killings and other abuses. Executions, including of people who were not granted a fair trial, is not the answer," said Abdelsalam Sidahmed.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE210052005

[Tace]

2. Nelson Mandela Sat In Jail For 20 Years Because He Refused To Denounce

armed resistance to aparthide. Look where it got him, and his people.

[still_one]

5. I don't agree with you assessment to compare Israel to apartide

unless of course you do NOT believe Israel has a right to exist as a seperate state next to a Palestinian state

Arafat stole millions from the Palestinan's which his "grieving" widow does NOT want to give back to the Palestinians

Both sides have major issues, but name calling is not going to help the process go forward

If bush would have continued where Clinton left off when he first took office, things probably would have been a lot different, for the better, unfortunately, that is NOT what this administration wanted

[still_one]

3. I would NOT trust that source

They represent an extreme right wing point of view who would like to see any potential peace process break down

A more reliable source is:

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/

Even http://www.debka.com/ has less of an axe to grind

[al_solanki]

14. Provide some other credible source of info.....

[bpilgrim]

18. what, has sharon bomb'em all?

or locked up the rest :shrug:

peace

[Colorado Blue]

21. Another pointless insult.

Sharon is doing his damndest here. And, I believe, Abu Mazzen is as well. Hamas, Hizbollah, and Islamic Jihad are on the verge of trashing the whole process. Every day without a catastrophe is a blessing.

The whole situation is VERY fragile, very fraught. People's lives are at stake here. The whole cease fire is at stake. If anything happens to threaten the stability of the P.A., I shudder to think what could happen to the people in Israel and the OT.

This has happened so many times over the past few decades: every time meaningful steps are taken to reach another step closer to peace, violence breaks out. Terrorism rose astonishingly AFTER the Oslo Accords were developed.

The express, written goal of Hamas and these other outfits isn't peace. It's the destruction of Israel. So they are greatly to be feared. And greatly to be hoped for: the possibility that, given the opportunity to grow into statesmen and citizens, they will reach out and grab that brighter future.

I would personally be very grateful if a SMIDGEON of comprehension of the danger and the stakes, would maybe illuminate this discourse.

If you have a moment, please read this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x93570

I realize it might take some time and effort but it has actual INFORMATION to impart, which might be valuable to you in your quest for wisdom.

Thank you.

[bemildred]

20. This makes me think of what Halevy said:

This bit:

It was none other than Martin Indyk, the former U.S. ambassador to Israel, who not long ago raised the idea of establishing an American trusteeship regime in the areas of the Palestinian Authority, if it should turn out that the Palestinians are not ripe for self-rule. That arrangement would require an American operational military presence along Israel's border with the Palestinian territories.

---

And this is cute too:

In a visit to the United States two weeks ago, I was told by several well-informed observers that should one of the more severe scenarios come to pass, the United States will have no choice but to deepen its presence in the Middle East. To that end, it will have to renew the draft, to ensure that there are enough forces to deal with developing situations in countries like Saudi Arabia.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=568076

If the PA collapses, does that mean the US sets up a "trusteeship"?

[Colorado Blue]

22. Hopefully the P.A. will not collapse. But it is inevitable that

Egypt and the US and probably Jordan will be involved in the Peace Process from this point forward.

It's not the the Palestinians aren't able to govern themselves - absent the militias. But they do have the militias. Hamas apparently is trying to integrate itself politically but the rockets keep flying. Three people were killed just a few days ago. And what about outside agitators? What if something happens to Abu Mazzen or Sharon?

Frankly I think the UN, or Nato, or SOMEBODY, should have been helping out here long before now. Instead, Israel and the Palestinians, Jordan and the Lebanese, Syria and Egypt have all been on the receiving end of Great Power proxy wars - for decades now - on top of their own political and military shenanigans. Instead of getting help to solve their problems, they've actually been getting hurt. And they're smack in the middle between the West, and people in the region who really don't want change - like the Wahabi - not to mention the jihadists.

This has become the focal point of a global struggle for dominance. It's the fulcrum in a great and fragile moment in history.

As far as the greater Middle East is concerned, I think it would be naive to assume the US will go away until the bright day when something is invented to replace oil. The global economy is utterly dependent upon the petroleum industry and its related spin-off and support industries. That's just reality.

Of course, peace could break out all over, rational trade and commerce could ensue and everybody could go home.

[bemildred]

24. I don't think anything is "inevitable" in the Middle East, or elsewhere.

Large forces are at work.

It is certainly true that the Middle East has always been a crossroads, smack in the center of EurAsiaAfrica, with people going back and forth and fighting over it for the last ten millenia or more.

Imperial powers do not "help", although they always claim to. They are just fighting over the last of the oil. Think "Road Warrior" and you have the right idea, although it will be couched in more civilized language and the perps will all be wearing suits.

[Colorado Blue]

25. True, the concept of "inevitability" implies predestination.

And I tend to believe in free will. And I agree, of course this region is a crossroads, spiritually and historically as well as politically and physically.

But, I think that we need to start looking outside the ideological box when we discuss the global economy vis a vis oil. And, I don't think we should oversimplify issues either, concerning global interest in the region.

Political and social reform ARE factors. The planet is just too small anymore, for non-stop violence in a huge swath of geostrategic real estate, to be fostered indefinitely.

Dealing with the threat of jihadism is also a factor. Minority rights in the region are certainly a factor and can't simply be swept under the rug of "Arab nationalism" when women, children, religious and ethnic minorities are threatened.

Supporting democracy IS a valid ideological concern and so is supporting local economic growth - both for altruistic reasons and as the BEST means for helping individuals while simultaneously providing a reason for stability to take hold in a war zone. Meanwhile, booming populations MUST grapple with the fact that marginal dryland farming and ancient pastoral nomadism or seminomadism just won't support enormous populations. Starvation and catastrophic drought are very real concerns. ONLY modernization can help. Civilizations have fallen here before. We've grown beyond the point, I hope, where we can simply say, oh too bad.

Although, when it comes to Africa, I wonder. I really, really wonder why we aren't talking more about THAT. Because it's really part of the same gigantic puzzle.

But, I digress.

Simply labelling hi-tech and industrialized societies' manifest need for oil as "imperialism" doesn't really cover the situation. This is more of a survival situation, and indeed includes a growing number - if not the majority - of the world's population. Very few societies anywhere on this planet are not, in some way, linked to the petroleum industry. Whether you drive a car, fly in a plane, hook up to an electrical grid, heat a house, use plastic, paint or fertilizer - you're a consumer.

I'll give you an example: leaving apart their dependence upon the tourist industry, which has obviously changed their economy, the Native Americans of the Hopi tribe are among the oldest living societies on our side of the "pond" - at least, north of the Rio Grande. They're thought to be the descendants of the vanished Anasazi, also agricultural, peaceful, sedentary and artistic. The Hopi continue to practice their ancient crafts and their religious rituals continue to bring rain to the desert.

AND, they paint with acrylics.

[bemildred]

26. Imperialism has nothing to do with oil as such.

There were empires long before anybody cared about oil.
The oil is about modern warfare, modern war machines run on huge
quantities of oil, so the first fellow to run out loses.
That's what all the anxiety about oil is over.

[Colorado Blue]

27. LOL!!! Of course, imperialism long predates the oil industry.

But - my thinking is, war machines are only a tiny portion of the global economy - huge though those might be. And no doubt, you're correct that military powers want to maintain their advantage.

However, there are also serious humanitarian issues at stake at well.

There is real concern, especially with the "3rd world" rapidly developing and becoming more and more dependent upon petroleum, and the global population expanding bigtime, especially in the poorest regions of the world, that shortages will result - shortages of oil mean also, shortages of food and everything else down the line. And of course this is already impacting trade. The increase in the price of oil, as it did in the '70's, is impacting the global economy.

The good things about this in the short term: ethanol is becoming attractively priced. And, hybrid cars will almost certainly become more popular. Human ingenuity might rear its head!

The obvious BAD thing: more and more money and therefore, power, is thus accumulating in the hands of the oil industrialists AND the producers - some of whom are bigtime enemies of the West, of change, liberalism, secularism, feminism, and modernization. Personally I don't find either of those developments cause for celebration:)

Naturally, an intelligent species would be developing alternative fuels as rapidly as possible - indeed, this process would have begun in the 1950's at the very latest.

However, homo not-so-sapiens have elected to continue slurping, whilst the enormous power of the petroleum-based industrialists and their associates have managed not only to create need - ie, the perception in America that a car is a birthright like legs - but also to deny investment funding to people who would research or produce alternatives. This even extends to the lack of funding for railroads and mass transit. There hasn't been a nuclear plant built in America since 3 Mile Island.

True, there have been great advances in solar technology and wind technology. Hi-tech architecture is becoming a fine art.

But - these are drops in the bucket compared to the saturation of the global economy with petroleum and its byproducts - plastics, fertilizers, medicines, chemicals, synthetic fabrics - not to mention light, power and transport.

So, I submit that the global economy, and thoughtful people in government, industry, academia and "private practice", are concerned about far more than just the military machine.

We're really worried about how a burgeoning global population, living in an increasingly challenged environment, is going to cope in the coming decades.

In Japan, they're working on a huge tower called Sky City. It will rise nearly a mile - ONE MILE - into the sky. This will house many people and business and free up a great deal of precious farm land. But - it will be completely reliant upon electrical power. Fire control will come from enormous water-bearing helicopters. Brave and intelligent steps into the future, like this one, are de facto dependent upon SOME kind of fuel source, or combination of sources.

Even today, the huge city where I live is totally dependent upon trucks, trains and ships for its food supply. We'd be in deep doo-doo if something happened to the fuel that transports this basic necessity. And, what would we do for heat?

These are the kinds of problems confronting us. Down the line, I am sure alternatives will be found and developed. But for now, we're stuck.

Your thoughts?

[bemildred]

28. I don't disagree (much) with what you say.

The question is who is "they" in "They are just fighting over the last of the oil"? Now, "they" there is all the various people who want the oil for all and any of the various reasons you state. But how do you dominate the Middle East and get control of the oil? Why, with military force. So there is a certain circularity in it. But I maintain the military need comes first, since the fulfillment of all those other needs follows on the successful control of oil, which follows on the means to control the oil, i.e. military force. Or so the argument would go, and so politics is practiced today.

[Colorado Blue]

29. Ideally, I suppose it would be a straight-up commercial

proposition, not necessarily oil for money, because some things are more valuable than cash - perhaps oil for technology, for free education in Europe or the States, or for agricultural training in situ. This assumes mutual tolerance of course, and respect for each other's religion, etc.

In other words, both parties would retain their dignity and their humanity. Neither would be trying to force the other into a transaction. People wouldn't be forced out of their traditional economies, but would be allowed choice. Pigs would be flying:)

But seriously, in Iran, that's already happened in many ways. The Shahsavan, a Turkic-speaking tribe, are not unique in using tractors as well as camels and horses to move their heavy gear when they travel on migration. I've seen pictures of Turkmen doing it too. So, I don't see why overlapping economies can't survive together - but that of course depends upon tolerance and respect for cultural differences as well as an awareness that transhumanance, for example, is sometimes the very best use of the resources available, that ancient human skills have value even in an industrial age; and that Western inventions aren't always the direct spawn of The Great Satan.

Unfortunately, as you say, it always seems that people start fighting. It's going back to the caves already and it's going to be our downfall.

On the other hand, I was encouraged by the recent conference in Jordan, and also by the enterprise zones that are being set up in the M.E. These are ways to foster both jobs and cultural interaction. One example is the Egyptian cotton industry, which will now be cooperating with the Israeli dye manufacturers. The Muslim Brotherhood isn't overjoyed but the project will create several thousand jobs in a hungry market, provide the Israeli concerns with much-needed business and foster cooperation.

Another is the DOBAG project, which has revived traditional vegetable dyes and handspun wool. This has given the village and tribal weavers of Turkey a new lease on life. The impetus for this project actually came from textile scholars and collectors in the West, people like me, who love the ancient traditional designs and the quality of the antique dyes. The success of DOBAG has spawned imitators all over the weaving world and resulted in some fantastic woven art and some serious, much-needed money for the weavers. Needless to say it's also - literally - woven people together, East and West. Since the sanctions were lifted on Iranian products, such interaction between our worlds has only increased, along with understanding and mutual respect. In Israel, a love for Arabian horses has been bringing people together. So art, science, and commerce CAN occur peacefully, even between groups of people who'd previously or traditionally been at odds.

Shouldn't this should be our goal, our long-range design: to foster the arts of peace? If I were the President, I'd have a Department of Peace, to study language, culture, religion, and foster knowledge and tolerance in the international community. Pigs would fly!:)

In any case, regardless of what the big boys are doing, we each have the ability to affect meaningful commerce with people in other cultures. All we need is the will, the desire. Little people working directly with little people can move mountains. The future isn't just about war and hatred and it isn't just about Big Business! So, I never give up:) I make a painting, I sell it, I buy an embroidery from Uzbekistan or a Bedouin headpiece - woman power.

As far as Dominance of the Oil is concerned, I think that's always been an Anglo-American thing. The oil companies really have been running our respective governments, via friendly politicians, to a very large extent. Intervention in foreign governments has been common. Now it's not even hidden. We have actual oil company executives in the very White House. Russia has its own supplies of course - another target for Hitler - as we were speaking of WWII on another thread. And that also has become part of the battle for political dominance within Russia.

Engdalh suggests that WWI was actually fought - not for dominance of Europe - but for dominance of the M.E. This actually makes a lot of sense to me - the slaughter in the trenches, on the other hand, always struck me as utterly irrational.

Germany had built a rail line all the way to Mosul and wanted to extend it to Kuwait. This would have brought oil into the Ruhr Valley, through Anatolia, and westward straight into Germany. They asked the British for financial assistance but instead, all hell broke loose. Apparently Britain felt threatened by Germany's growing industrial prowess. The financial punishment of Germany after WWI was brutal and served only to set up Hitler.

( A side note: it is interesting to me now, to see the EU under strain, its outlook challenged by the voters of France and the Netherlands. I don't really understand that, I can't help but feel it's partly straight-up nationalism?)

Who knows how the 20th century would look from here, had cooperation occurred instead of war?