Marching Toward A Palestinian State
While Secretary of State Hillary Clinton tries to smooth the Arab feathers ruffled by her praise of Israel's curtailing of settlement activity ( her response to the criticism is to once again turn against Israel) Salam Fayyad continues his dogged campaign to build a Palestinian State, based on the 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as its capital. Fayyad is not the first to propose a Palestinian State but his plan is unique because it is based on declaring the state in two years whether Israel agrees to it or not. In other words the "State" will be presented as a living fact.
One Jerusalem has learned that Fayyad is a favorite of the Obama White House and The European Parliament. Fayyad has been revealing his plan for statehood to the elites in Europe and the United States. His plan is appealing because it does not require agreement from Israel. And it is likely to win international recognition of the "State" should it come to fruition.
In a recent interview with the
Christian Science Monitor, Fayyad discussed his plan and defended his call for the building of Palestinian settlements in the West Bank. There is no doubt that if Palestinian settlements go up the world will embrace them while condemning Israel's settlements.
Fayyad's plan poses a serious challenge to Israel.In the court of international public opinion it will be difficult to argue against a Palestinian State if Fayyad is successful in building the infrastructure for a state in the disputed areas.
It is vitally important that friends of Israel understand the dangers posed by this Fayyad initiative. The best resource on this matter is work of Dan Diker and Pinchas Imbari at the
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. Below is a summary of their latest findings.
- In August 2009, Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad announced a unilateral plan to establish a de facto Palestinian state in the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem following a two-year state-building process. Fayyad's plan is the first serious Palestinian outline of a state-building effort since the PLO was founded in 1964 and replaces the traditional PLO position of armed struggle to "liberate Palestine."
- The Fayyad plan represents a bold anti-Fatah posture and is seen to pose a direct challenge to Fatah and its leader, Mahmoud Abbas. Fayyad enjoys only limited political backing and his political rivals, such as Tawfiq Tirawi, Abu Maher Gneim, and Mahmud al-Alul, who were recently elected to the new Fatah Central Committee, have already blasted Fayyad's plans.
- Israel supports "bottom up" Palestinian state-building. However, Israeli leaders have voiced legal and security-based concerns over Fayyad's intention that the PLO would unilaterally declare Palestinian statehood in 2011 based on the June 4, 1967, lines. The one-sided establishment of a Palestinian state would contravene a key provision of the Oslo Interim Agreement, according to which: "Neither side shall initiate or take any step that will change the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip pending the outcome of the permanent status agreement."
- Another direct challenge to Israel is that Fayyad's "blueprint" calls for massive Palestinian development in Area "C" of the disputed West Bank, which is under Israeli civil and security control, and which directly challenges the delicate, agreed-upon framework of the 1993 Oslo accords.
- Israel's requirement of "defensible borders" involves its continuing control in Area "C," including the strategically vital Jordan Valley and the high ground surrounding Jerusalem and overlooking Israel's vulnerable cities along the Mediterranean coast. Hizbullah's 4,000 rocket attacks from the north in 2006 and Hamas' 10,000 rocket and mortar attacks from Gaza, culminating in the 2009 Gaza war, both underscore the potential rocket threat against Israel's cities that could emerge from a Palestinian state in the West Bank if Israel were to withdraw to the pre-1967 lines.
There is nothing wrong with Fayyad setting up the apparatuses for running a state, after all that was part of the various Arab undertakings. The problem is that if he proposes to set up Palistan through unilateral actions, instead of through negotiations, his regime would be in violation of all past undertakings. A bigger problem would be if the EU and the USA would support his illegal procedures in forming his statelet, one which would not be bound by any concerns for Israel's sedurity. An equally major problem would be that various nations would treat Fayyad's shell of a state as though it were something real, even if he lacked control in Judea and Samaria and had Gaza as a rival. In that case Israel might be compelled to deal with an Arab entity which would only be a mouthpiece of its supporters. The answer to the proposed Arab unilateral change of the status of territories, violating the terms of the Oslo agreements, is for Israel to do likewise and to annex those territories it deems vital to its security and some vital to its economy and its communications, What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
What is it going to take for Israel to stand up and stop this? Why is Israel
not flooding the West Bank and East Jerusalem with Jewish settlers? If
you stand by the arabs will do whatever they want with obama leading the
way.
I saw recently that a Jewish person had sold a large parcel of land to
some arabs...Why is there not an effort to reach all Jews who have this
amount of land and see if they want to sell to the Israeli government.
obama nor the state department is going to do anything but undermine
all Israel trys to do.
SO Quite pretending that the US is going to help