Hamas and Fatah leaders hold reconciliation talks with President Mursi in Cairo

Leader of Fatah and president of the Palestinian authority Mahmoud Abbas, and Hamas head, Khaled Meshal, met separately with Egyptian President Morsi in Cairo. They then held reconciliation talks with president Morsi mediating.

The two Palestinian factions signed a reconciliation pact in Cairo in May of 2011 but the main points in that agreement are not yet implemented. Officials from Hamas and Fatah said that the talks will focus on a unity government. This would make it possible to hold parliamentary and presidential elections that are long overdue.

Hamas won a majority of seats in elections in 2006 and took over the Gaza strip in 2007. Hamas recently allowed Fatah to hold rallies in the Gaza Strip controlled by Hamas. Fatah has reciprocated by allowing Hamas rallies in the West Bank. The Hamas delegation is also slated to meet with Egyptian intelligence representatives to talk about the ceasefire with Israel in the Gaza Strip. Hamas was formed in 1987 as an offshoot of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood and hence has historical ties with the group associated with Egyptian president Mursi.

Egypt was instrumental in negotiating the truce that ended an 8-day military offensive launched by Israel last November. More than 150 Palestinians and 6 Israelis were killed in the conflict. Hamas has refused to renounce violence and also does not recognize Israel's right to exist. However, the present leader Khaled Meshal has said that he would agree to a settlement with Israel based upon the 1967 borders but with the right of return of all displaced Palestinians. Israel, US, and the EU all designate Hamas as a terrorist group, although Iran, Russia,Turkey, and Arab nations do not. A unified Palestinian movement would give more power to the Palestinians in negotiating with Israel. However, both Israel and the US are opposed to a unified government with Hamas given the stance of Hamas on Israel and the use of violence.

Abbas threatens to dismantle Palestine Authority as he declines to run in upcoming elections.

This article makes it clear that Egypt as well as the US is now singing a tune of no preconditions before starting peace talks. Abbas has been politically damaged by both and no doubt is extremely disappointed that his co-operative stance has won him nothing in return. However, holding elections without the agreement of Hamas is also going to land him in hot water. Maybe Abbas just wants to retire for a while and take a rest!


Abbas threatens to dismantle PA

Nov. 8, 2009
Khaled Abu Toameh , THE JERUSALEM POST
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is considering dissolving the PA and declaring the failure of the peace process with Israel, PA officials in Ramallah said over the weekend.

Abbas was now waiting to see if the US and other parties would exert enough pressure on Israel to stop settlement construction and recognize the two-state solution before he makes any decision, the officials said.

In his televised speech on Thursday, in which he announced that he has "no desire" to run in the upcoming presidential election, Abbas said that he would also consider taking "other measures" in the future, but did not elaborate.

He was "threatening" to dissolve the PA in protest against Washington's failure to support his demand for a complete freeze of settlement construction as a precondition for the resumption of peace negotiations with Israel, the officials said.

Over the weekend, Abbas instructed the Palestinian Central Elections Committee to continue preparations for holding presidential and parliamentary elections on January 24.

....

It remains unclear, however, how the vote would take place in the Gaza Strip, where the Hamas government has already announced that it won't allow the balloting to take place. Moreover, it's not certain that Israel would permit the vote to take place inside the municipal boundaries of Jerusalem.

Abbas has come under pressure from some world leaders and his loyalists to withdraw his decision to drop out of the race, his aides said. "In light of the growing pressure," Abbas may have to reconsider his decision, they said.

....
"The president is waiting to see how much support he has before he makes any decision," said a Fatah official closely associated with Abbas. "If he does not feel that he has enough backing, he might even step down and announce the dismantlement of the Palestinian Authority."

Another Fatah official said that Abbas's decision not to run for another term was primarily aimed at sending a message to the Americans and Arabs.

"Abbas is trying to tell the US administration that its bias in favor of Israel is sabotaging the peace process," the official told The Jerusalem Post. "He's particularly upset with [US Secretary of State] Hillary Clinton, because he feels that she's the one who convinced President Barack Obama to soften his attitude on the issue of settlements."

Abbas, according to one of his top aides, is also "deeply disappointed" with the Egyptians, who seem to have endorsed the Israeli and American standpoint according to which the Palestinians should return to the negotiating tables unconditionally.

Abbas, he added, was "shocked" when he heard that Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit, had agreed with Clinton that the peace negotiations should be resumed without preconditions.

Abbas was quoted by the aide as having accused the Egyptians of "failing to keep their promise to support his demand that Israel halt all construction in the settlements as a prerequisite for the resumption of the negotiations.

Azzam al-Ahmed, a senior Fatah official who also serves as an adviser to Abbas, said that he and his colleagues were working hard to persuade the PA president to participate in the elections.

Ahmed said that there was a consensus in Fatah that Abbas was the most suitable candidate to run in the presidential election, "because he enjoys the backing of the Palestinian people."

He said that Fatah leaders were scheduled to hold a series of meetings in Ramallah this week to discuss the repercussions of Abbas's move.

Hafez Barghouti, editor of the PA mouthpiece Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, said that any other leader in Abbas's place would have resigned a long time ago.

"The president's decision should not be seen as an escape from national responsibilities," Barghouti explained. "Instead, it's the product of the absence of an international will to find a peaceful and just settlement after 16 years of negotiations, blood and tears."

Tayeb Abdel Rahim, a senior aide to Abbas, urged the international community to take Abbas's latest decision seriously.

"We hope that the president's message has arrived to all the international and concerned parties," he said. "We hope that they will take this message seriously to salvage the peace process in the region."

Meanwhile, UAL MK Ahmed Tibi said Sunday that the PA president had told him in advance of his decision.

"I knew from Abbas himself, I was with him when he formulated his speech, and I was familiar with the content of the announcement [in advance]," he told Army Radio. "There was a limited number of people who knew, and I was one of them."

Tibi said he knew first hand about Abbas's recent discontent, especially after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's speech hailing Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's settlement policy. At the end of October, Clinton said she approved of Netanyahu's decision to issue a moratorium on new construction permits, calling it "unprecedented in the context of prior to negotiations."

....
Tibi claimed that when Abbas asked the Americans why they seemingly changed their demands on Israel concerning settlement activity, they had cited Netanyahu's fear of his coalition government falling apart.

"That's outrageous," said Tibi.

US Palestine strategy in doubt as Abbas loses popular support.

Israel may think it has scored a double victory. It successfully managed to shelve any attempt to carry out the recommendations of the Goldstone report that there should be further action re Israel's alleged war crimes in the Gaza incursion. Earlier Abbas had supported further action. Israel's second victory was to ensure that a developing attempt to create a unified opposition to Israel with Hamas has been scuttled.
However, at the same time Abbas has lost whatever meagre credibility he had with the Palestinians. He may very well end up being thrown out or having to resign unless he changes tune again. Furthermore, the peace process will be going nowhere. The Israelis may not mind this however. But the worst possibillity is that the Intifada will start up all over again.


Antiwar.com

US Strategy in Doubt as Abbas Loses Popular Support
Posted By Helena Cobban
Just two months ago, many western commentators were jubilant that Mahmoud Abbas, the U.S.-supported head of both the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the interim Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority (PA), was making a comeback and reducing the influence in Palestinian society of the Islamist movement Hamas.
But a series of events in recent weeks has sent Abbas’s level of support from his people into a nosedive. The most serious has been the reaction among Palestinians to a decision Abbas or someone close to him made to postpone any further U.N. action on the recommendations of the Goldstone Report into the atrocities committed during last winter’s Israel-Gaza war.
Richard Goldstone, a very distinguished South African jurist and war-crimes prosecutor, presented his report to the U.N. Human Rights Council (HRC) in Geneva on Sep. 29. It contained a recommendation that the HRC forward the report’s lengthy and detailed findings regarding wrongdoing by both sides to the Security Council for possible further action.
But when the HRC discussed Goldstone’s report on Oct. 1, the PLO’s representative requested that the HRC sit on the report until next March before doing anything further.
Most Palestinians, both within and outside their historic homeland, were outraged. They demanded to know who took that decision, and why. Suspicion rapidly settled on Abbas himself- and it was not allayed by his speedy declaration that the Fatah movement, which he heads, would set up its own internal investigation into how the decision had been made.
Palestinian media came out with two, perhaps overlapping, explanations of what had persuaded Abbas – or someone very close to him – to block any speedy action on the Goldstone Report.
One focused on economic incentives that Israel held out to a well-connected Palestinian company eager to acquire the bandwidth that it needs to set up a new cell-phone service.
The other report, from Shahab news agency, concerned a different, even more insidious form of Israeli blackmail.
Shahab reported that PA/PLO representatives here in Washington were persuaded to drop their support for speedy action on Goldstone after they were played a videotape and an audiotape, reportedly recorded during last winter’s war, in which Abbas and a key security aide, Tayyib Abdul-Rahim, both urged Israel’s leaders to continue and even escalate their attack on Gaza.
Those allegations struck a chord with many Palestinians who, during the war, had noted the refusal of most members of the PLO’s far-flung diplomatic corps to say or do anything to oppose Israel’s lengthy and very harmful pounding of Gaza’s overwhelmingly civilian population.
Inside the West Bank, meanwhile, the PA’s security forces (commanded in part by Abdul-Rahim) suppressed many of the demonstrations that erupted against the war, and arrested scores of Gaza solidarity activists.
It is not clear whether the Israeli government sees the political pummeling Abbas has taken as a result of his Goldstone decision as welcome, because it reduces his ability to negotiate peace in the name of the whole Palestinian people, or as regrettable, given the strength of his opposition to Hamas; but nonetheless necessary, as a way for Israel to ensure the blocking of the process Goldstone recommended.
One thing that is clear is that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been very serious about blocking any Security Council consideration of the Goldstone Report. Government spokesmen have launched nasty personal smears against Goldstone, who himself is Jewish, and whose daughter describes him as a committed Zionist.
Netanyahu’s ambassador in Washington, Michael Oren, said Thursday that the Goldstone Report is more insidious than the Holocaust denial of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. If Goldstone’s recommendations are accepted by the international community, Oren said, this would paralyze western democracies from defending themselves against terrorism.
He also noted the "intense cooperation" his government had received from the Barack Obama administration in fending off the "danger" it judged the Goldstone Report posed to Israel and the west.
Oren and Netanyahu might be feeling good about fending off this "danger". But the hardball way they – and apparently also U.S. officials – treated Abbas over this affair have considerably complicated the diplomatic game-plan that the Obama administration previously seemed to be following, which relied strongly on building up Abbas’s and Fatah’s political weight relative to that of Hamas.
It is that political balance that has now been tipped – perhaps decisively.
This is a big change since early August, when Abbas won many plaudits from western leaders for having organized a successful "General Conference" for Fatah – the movement’s first such gathering in 20 years.
The combination of that successful Fatah conference and the continued infusion of western funding into the PA, where it is controlled by both Abbas and the technocratic, pro-western Ramallah Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, encouraged some western governments to think that these two men could now marginalize Hamas from having any real impact on peace negotiations.
Now, that plan looks far less feasible. Abbas’s standing has been reduced not only by the decisions he most recently made regarding Goldstone, but also by the compete stasis in Washington’s peace diplomacy, Washington’s failure to win a settlement freeze from Netanyahu, as it had promised to do – and by the humiliating way Abbas was forced to engage in a "three-way" meeting with Netanyahu and Obama at the U.N. General Assembly in late September.
Obama’s special envoy George Mitchell is back in Jerusalem Friday on the seventh or eighth of his quick shuttle tours around the Israeli-Arab region. On Saturday he will be in Ramallah.
Al-Jazeera’s Sherine Tadros reported from occupied East Jerusalem that the city’s Palestinians "are very upset and angry and becoming increasingly disappointed with this new U.S. approach, which is bringing nothing new to the table".
Meantime, there is increasing talk amongst both Palestinians and many Israelis of the possibility of a new intifada. If this does occur, it is most likely to be sparked by the massive wave of colonization and linked activities the Israeli authorities have been undertaking in East Jerusalem.
Senior diplomats from neighboring Arab states have warned that, given Jerusalem’s intense significance for Arabs and Muslims everywhere, the effects of a new, Jerusalem-focused intifada could be felt far beyond Palestine.

6 dead in battle between Hamas, Palestinian police

This is from Philstar.

It seems that Abbas is not interested in any unity deal with Hamas but rather with extending his influence with the US by acting as a good cop and reigning in militants and helping out Israel defeat Hamas. This will certainly weaken the Palestinians' power. Being disunited gives Israel the upper hand.



6 dead in battle between Hamas, Palestinian police
QALQILIYA (AP) – Top Hamas fugitives lobbed grenades and fired automatic weapons Sunday to push back Palestinian security forces storming their hideout, leaving six dead in the bloodiest clash since the Palestinian president launched a crackdown on Hamas in the West Bank two years ago.
Two top Hamas militants — on the run from Israel for years — were among those killed, along with an unarmed Hamas supporter and three Palestinian policemen.
After the hours-long battle, hundreds of spent bullet casings, puddles of blood and tear gas canisters were visible at the hideout, a two-story building in the northern West Bank town of Qalqiliya. Parts of the walls were burned down.
The Islamic militant Hamas immediately hurled angry accusations at the Western-backed president, Mahmoud Abbas, accusing him of betraying Palestinians resisting Israeli occupation and threatening revenge. Relations have been sour since Hamas seized Gaza by force two years ago, leaving Abbas only in control of the West Bank.
The arrest raid underscored Abbas' determination to rein in militants as part of his obligations under the US-backed "road map" peace plan.
The shootout came just three days after Abbas met at the White House with President Barack Obama and renewed a pledge to honor these commitments. The US has been training Abbas' elite forces to help him affirm his control of the West Bank and prepare for eventual statehood.
Despite Hamas' threats of reprisals, it was not immediately clear whether it would change its tactic of lying low in the West Bank while it weathers Abbas' crackdown. Since Hamas' Gaza takeover, Abbas' security forces have detained hundreds of Hamas supporters in the West Bank and closed the group's institutions and charities.
The Qalqiliya clash began late Saturday when Palestinian troops surrounded a hideout of Mohammed Samman, a leader of Hamas' military wing, Izzedine al-Qassam, and his assistant, Mohammed Yassin. Both had been on Israel's wanted list for six years, Palestinian security officials said.
Initially, about two dozen officers stormed the house, breaking down the door, said a policeman who had participated in the raid, but spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to reporters. The Hamas men lobbed a grenade and opened automatic fire, killing three officers and wounding two critically, he said. Other officers fled, then brought in reinforcements.
The ensuing battle lasted until midmorning Sunday. Police say they found bombs, suicide belts and bullets in their search of the house.
Qalqiliya, which elected a Hamas mayor several years ago, was tense Monday. Women gathered near the scene heaped insults on policemen. Sporadic gunfire erupted in other areas of town, and police said the shots came from Hamas loyalists targeting officers, though there were no reports of injuries.
Security officials seized the bodies of the Hamas militants, fearing a public burial would turn into angry protests against the Palestinian Authority. Muslim tradition demands the dead should be buried quickly.
Hamas officials in the West Bank said that some 40 loyalists of the group had been arrested in Qalqiliya in the past week as part of the search for the top two fugitives.
In Gaza, Abu Obeida, a spokesman for the Hamas military wing, threatened "tough and harsh reprisal."
Ehab Ghussein, a spokesman for the Interior Ministry in Gaza, said Abbas' security forces have betrayed those fighting Israeli occupation.
But Abbas aide Nabil Abu Rdeneh said going after militants is key to one day setting up a Palestinian state. "To build our country and our state, we need to have one authority, one gun, one law," he said.
Hamas opposes Abbas' policy of trying to negotiate a peace deal with Israel. In recent months, Abbas and Hamas have tried to reach a unity deal, but talks have run aground over Hamas' refusal to recognize Israel and renounce violence, a precondition for joining a coalition with Abbas supporters.
Last year, 26 Palestinians were killed during Fatah and Hamas attempts to crack down on their rivals, said the Gaza-based Palestinian Center for Human Rights.

Israel to free 150 prisoners to boost Abbas in peace talks

This is from AFP.
There are still over 11000 Palestinians in Israeli jails. Rather surprisingly Abbas even asked for the release of some prisoners who are not part of Fatah. The article does not say if any Hamas prisoners were released. It is unlikely. Hamas prisoners could be a bargaining chip in obtaining the release of an Israeli captured by Hamas.


Israel to free 150 prisoners to boost Abbas in peace talks
JERUSALEM (AFP) — Israel will release more than 150 Palestinian prisoners later this month as a goodwill gesture to president Mahmud Abbas as part of US-backed peace talks, officials said on Wednesday.
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's spokesman Mark Regev said the release came in response to a request by Abbas.
"We hope this gesture will help the peace process," he told reporters after the latest meeting between the two leaders, referring to US-backed talks formally relaunched at an international conference in November.
Senior Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat said the meeting was "successful" and that Israel had agreed to release more than 150 Palestinian prisoners.
"We agreed with the Israelis there will be a new batch of prisoners released on the 25th of August," Erakat told reporters after the meeting.
Erakat declined to give names but said Abbas urged Israel to release several prominent and long-serving prisoners, including Marwan Barghuti, a popular leader in Abbas's Fatah party seen as a leading contender to succeed the Palestinian president.
Barghuti, a West Bank leader considered to have masterminded the second Palestinian uprising in 2000, was jailed in 2004 and is serving five life sentences for his role in deadly attacks.
Abbas also wants Israel to release prominent leaders from other factions, including parliament speaker Aziz Dweik from the Islamist Hamas movement, and Ahmed Saadat, the leader of the leftist Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), Erakat said.
There are currently more than 11,000 Palestinians jailed in Israel, including at least 85 women and children, and 11 seriously ill people.

Truce in Gaza holding-for the most part!

This is from Al Jazeera.
As the headline would indicate Al Jazeera is not exactly pro-Israel, although they do point out that there was also a rocket from Gaza since the ceasefire. At least the truce seems to be holding and the incident cited by Al Jazeera is not in Gaza at all. However, the incident in the West Bank will put pressure on Abbas. There seems a definite move towards more accomodation between Abbas and Hamas and also a somewhat more pragmatic stance by Israel in dealing with Hamas. This is surely all to the good in terms of creating conditions for peace.

Israel kills West Bank Palestinians
Olmert, left, is meeting Mubarak to discuss the progress of the Gaza truce [Reuters]
Israeli troops have shot dead two Palestinians in the West Bank town of Nablus, five days after a ceasefire between Israel and Palestinian armed groups took effect.
Israeli troops killed the men on Tuesday in an exchange of fire, an Israeli military spokesman said, adding that one of them was a fighter from Islamic Jihad and the other was a "militant".
Nablus residents said that one of the men was a bystander killed by Israeli troops when he opened the door to his apartment, which lies next to the location of the raid.
The truce between Israel and Palestinian armed groups, including Hamas, does not cover the West Bank.
Lamis Andoni, Al Jazeera's Middle East analyst, said: "The killings are a reminder that the truce in Gaza will remain shaky when it is not extended to include the West Bank.
"Israeli insistence on retaining freedom to conduct arrests and raids in the West Bank further undermines Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas' standing, and makes it difficult for Hamas to demand Palestinian fighters adhere to the truce in Gaza."
Mortar attack
A mortar shell was also fired into Israeli territory from the Gaza Strip the previous evening, the Israeli army said, in the first such incident since the truce came into effect.
No one was hurt by the missile, which landed in the Nahal Oz area after being launched from the central Gaza Strip, officials said on Tuesday.
"We are familiar with a mortar shell that landed near the security fence in northern Gaza on the Israeli side," an army spokeswoman said.
There has been no claim of responsibility for the reported incident on Monday evening, nor any confimation from Palestinian sources that such an incident took place.
Observers have said that both sides do not regard the incident as a violation of the ceasefire.
Gaza talks
Meanwhile, Ehud Olmert, Israel's prime minister, is set to discuss the Gaza truce with Hosni Mubarak, Egypt's president, later on Tuesday.
The talks in the Red Sea resort of Sharm el Sheikh are expected to focus on the fate of an Israeli soldier held by Hamas, as well as a possible prisoner exchange with the group.
Amr el-Kahky, Al Jazeera's correspondent in Sharm el Sheikh, said that the main issue would be the release of certain Palestinian prisoners whom Israel deem to have blood on their hands, but whom the Palestinians see as resistance fighters.
The ceasefire in Gaza between Israel and Palestinian groups including Hamas, the largest Palestinian armed group, came into effect on Thursday.
Israeli forces have not entered the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip since the truce took effect and has started to lift some restrictions there, easing the effects of a crippling economic blockade of the territory.
Egypt brokered the ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas as Tel Aviv rejects direct contact with the Palestinian organisation.
Olmert criticised
Olmert has been criticised at home for not making the truce conditional upon Hamas releasing Gilad Shalit, a soldier captured by them in 2006.
The Israeli prime minister has said that the deal includes a commitment by Hamas to make progress towards Shalit's release.
Regev said: "The issue of Gilad Shalit will be raised.
"Both states have a joint interest in putting this issue behind us. Ultimately, we want to see the situation in Gaza stabilised."
Israel has also called for Egypt to help stop the smuggling of weapons from Egypt's Sinai peninsula into Gaza.
Ismail Haniya, a senior Hamas leader and former Palestinian prime minister, said on Monday that it was premature to judge whether the truce had been a success.
"It is too early to judge whether the occupation is adhering or not adhering to the understandings reached 10 days ago," Haniya said.
Haniya said his Hamas-run administration was "monitoring what is coming into the Gaza Strip and is in daily contact with our brothers in Egypt" to see that Israel eases its Gaza blockade.
El-Khaky said: "The re-opening of the Rafah border crossing [from Gaza to Egypt] is a pressure card that Israel is playing to try to secure and speed up the release of Gilad Shalit."

Abbas calls for unity with Hamas.

This is a sign that Abbas has given up on any peace deal with Israel and is another nail in the coffin of Bush's Middle East strategy. Rice is criticizing Israeli settlement plans. Israel is praising Lebanon''s deal with Hezzbollah and is talking with Syria. Olmert is probably on the way out for corruption. Now Abbas is looking for unity with Hamas. The Bushy mid-east policy is self-destructing. The Palestinians will be much stronger if unified. If elections lead to a unified government that fights for Palestinian rights rather than among themselves the U.S. will be less able to simply support Israel and ignore the Palestinians.



Abbas calls for unity with Hamas
By Tobias Buck in Jerusalem
Published: June 5 2008 17:16 Last updated: June 5 2008 17:16
Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority, has called for unity between his Fatah party and the Islamist Hamas group, one of the clearest signs yet that the Palestinian leadership has lost faith in its peace talks with Israel.
He said he wanted a “comprehensive national dialogue” with Hamas and again raised the prospect of early elections to end the stand-off between the two rival Palestinian factions.
Mr Abbas has long been reluctant to engage Hamas out of concern that such a move would damage his goal of reaching a peace agreement with Israel by the end of the year. Reaching out to the Islamist group may also threaten the international community’s generous financial and political support for the PA.
Yet with Israel’s coalition government teetering on the brink of collapse and with no visible progress in the peace talks so far, Mr Abbas is now hinting at a change of direction. Speaking late on Wednesday, he said he wanted to implement a recent reconciliation proposal drawn up by Yemen – one of several attempts by Arab countries to bridge the divide between the two groups.
Mr Abbas has accused Hamas of staging a “coup” since the group ousted his forces from the Gaza Strip last June. The defeat left the president with only the West Bank to govern and dealt a heavy blow to his political authority. In spite of strong pressure from Israel, Hamas has since consolidated its hold on the territory, which it and other militant groups use as a launch-pad for rocket attacks on nearby Israeli towns. Only on Thursday, a rocket launched from the Gaza Strip killed an Israeli man and injured several more.
According to the Yemeni plan, Hamas would have to hand back power in the Gaza Strip to the PA – a condition that senior Palestinian officials said Mr Abbas was not about to give up. However, unlike in previous interventions, the president did not refer to a Gaza handover specifically in his speech and one of his adviser’s said yesterday that he wanted to show “flexibility”.
Hamas welcomed the president’s more conciliatory stance but insisted on “unconditional” talks.
Mr Abbas said the divide between Fatah and Hamas and the territories they govern had caused the “worst damage ever to our cause” and increased the suffering of the 1.5m Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip. Living conditions in the territory have plummeted since Israel imposed an economic blockade on the Strip last year.
Ali Jarbawi, a professor of political sciences at the Bir Zeit University in the West Bank, said Mr Abbas’s intervention marked the most serious attempt to bridge the gulf between Hamas and Fatah since the Gaza take­over last year. “He is now willing to talk to Hamas while Hamas is still controlling Gaza,” he said.
Prof Jarbawi argued that the shift was triggered by several forces, including the forthcoming anniversary of the Gaza takeover, which had increased pressure on Mr Abbas to close the rift.
Growing scepticism about the prospects of the peace talks with Israel was another reason. “He wanted to give the negotiations enough time. But apparently he has now come to the conclusion that nothing is going to happen,” he said.
TIMELINE
January 2006 Hamas, the militant Islamist movement responsible for dozens of suicide bombings in Israel, sweeps to power in Palestinian legislative elections as the ruling Fatah party, led by Mahmoud Abbas, falls. The incoming Palestinian government faces a financial crisis as external funds are cut off.
April 2006 The US and EU suspend direct aid to the Palestinian Authority.
February 2007 Saudi Arabia secures an agreement between Fatah and Hamas, leading to a unity government. EU nations refuse to recognise the new government, insisting it first agree to recognise Israel.
June 2007 Hamas seizes control of the Gaza Strip after defeating forces loyal to Mr Abbas. The PA president dismisses the national unity government and forms a separate West Bank administration .
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008

Ramallah Govt. pay Gaza Civil Servants not to work.

This is the type of report which you will be unlikely to find in mainstream media. The article shows not only Israeli disregard for the humanitarian needs of Palestinians in Gaza but also the totally callous attitude of Abbas and the Ramallah government. They will pay hospital workers not to care for the sick and injured rather than provide any comfort for the Hamas controlled govt. in Gaza.This article is from http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=9645ecb620103370f8ac4611d870c122.


Ramallah Government Pays Gaza’s Civil Servants Not to Work

Washington Report, News feature, Mohammed Omer, Posted: Dec 26, 2007




A PLUME OF smoke, its scent redolent of roasted apples, wafts out the paneless window into the autumn air. A rhythmic bubbling can be heard as 47-year-old Abu Khaled inhales from the ornate hookah set beside him. As he exhales deeply, his heavy eyes watch the latest snakelike plume follow its predecessor. Once a man of action, today he simply sits, sentenced by political maneuvering to a sedentary existence and lamenting the life he until recently led.

Prior to June of this year, Abu Khaled worked as a security officer at Gaza’s border crossings. Walkie-talkie in hand, he bustled between the operations room, gates and terminals, shouting orders, checking identifications and maintaining order. Today he idles his day away channel surfing his TV and keeping up with current events on the Internet. He would rather work, yet today civil servants in Gaza receive wages from the U.S.-backed Palestinian government in Ramallah on one condition: that they not work.

A few weeks after Hamas came to power in January 2006 elections, Israel and Washington imposed an international boycott on the new, democratically elected government. Eighteen months later, having failed to topple Hamas, U.S.- and Israeli-funded and trained Fatah militia attempted a coup. While Fatah gained control of the West Bank, Gaza remained under the control of Hamas.

The American and Israeli governments began funneling cash and support to Fatah, led by President Mahmoud Abbas, and declared the elected Hamas government illegitimate. Declaring Gaza a “hostile entity,” Israel proceeded to increase its pressure. Tactics have included sealing Gaza’s borders, Israeli military incursions and regular bombings, the cutting off of water and electricity, bank closures, and cutting off aid.

Ramallah’s latest anti-Hamas tactic is to pay government employees not to work, while providing them a small stipend to compensate for 18 months of unpaid wages. Those who continue to work at hospitals, schools, police stations and other public institutions have their wages withheld.

The result of this strategy was quickly apparent. Commerce skidded to a halt, inflation soared, and the most basic necessities of life virtually disappeared from this 23-mile strip of land, home to 1.5 million people, of whom 68 percent are under the age of 18. An atmosphere of fear enveloped Gaza.

“Why should I work?” asked Abu Khaled in a hushed voice, looking around to ensure no one could hear him. “I support our leader, President Abbas. If I work under Hamas, my salary will be cut off by the Ramallah-based government.”

Abu Khaled, who declined to reveal his full name, personifies the anxiety shared by most Fatah loyalists in Gaza. By not working, the idle security guard could get in trouble with Hamas. On the other hand, he at least receives compensation. Officials estimate that 55,000 Gazans currently are being paid not to work. Some do it out of loyalty to Fatah, others out of fear or necessity.

A Life-or-Death Decision

Healthcare providers face a unique dilemma. Their choice whether or not to work can literally be a matter of life or death.

At Al Nasser Hospital’s Intensive Care Unit, 30-year-old staff nurse Hamam Nasman remained on duty, assisting in operations. The Ministry of Health in Gaza falls under the control of Hamas.

“Ramallah’s government deprived me of my salary,” he explained in frustration. “How can I sit at home and just leave children to die? This is a crime!”

In enforcing the salary rules laid down by the U.S. and Israel, the Fatah government in Ramallah has created a severe crisis for public employees in Gaza, forcing them to choose between feeding their own families and serving or saving the lives of others.

“This is my human duty,” Nurse Nasman insisted. “I took an oath to treat patients, not to be a tool used for political purposes.”

Speaking on behalf of Hamas, Palestinian Legislative Councilman Dr. Salah Al Bardawil summarized the purpose of the latest directive from Ramallah.

“The objective in cutting off employee salaries is political,” he stated. “It is designed to cause a failure of democracy in Gaza—the same democracy which is not honored by the American or Israeli administrations.”

Though strapped for cash, the Hamas government manages to sporadically pay approximately 10,000 public sector workers as funds become available. According to Dr. Al Bardawil, however, 33,000 civil employees currently work without pay, and that number is increasing. Gaps in services are filled by Hamas supporters who volunteer by stepping into critical positions in the various municipal agencies, schools and hospitals.

But not all gaps can be filled in Gaza, where today only emergency humanitarian aid is occasionally allowed to enter.



The worsening shortage of necessities resulting from this latest tightening of the screws on Gaza increasingly is pitting friends and families against one another. Abu Khaled knows this pain only too well. Trepidation coupled with discretion has prevented him from spending time with a friend in the Hamas security force.

“I’m afraid that if Fatah agents see me hosting him, the Ramallah-based government will assume I am not loyal and cut off my salary,” he explained nervously.

Even those in positions of authority feel pressured to comply. Abu Waled, a Fatah loyalist and supervisor at the local police station, admitted that he now spends his days like a retiree, visiting friends and sitting at home.

“I’m not going to risk losing my salary by going to work,” he said sharply. “Let Hamas manage Gaza by themselves.”

Mohammed Omer, winner of New America Media’s Best Youth Voice award, reports from the Gaza Strip, where he maintains the Web site . He can be reached at .

US 'declaration' a setback for Maliki

This from Asia Times. THe US does not seem to understand that being seen as a US puppet is not a positive in most areas of the Middle East. Yet the US continually praises Abbas as if this is going to help Abbas rather than make him look like a puppet in the eyes of many Palestinians. The same is true of this declaration of principles agreed to by Maliki. Maliki is likely to be in deep trouble right away.


US 'declaration' a setback for Maliki
By Sami Moubayed

DAMASCUS - Sometimes, frequently nowadays, one doubts the wisdom of decision-makers in Washington. The case was clear, for example, with Syria and Palestine. When President George W Bush comes out to praise political prisoners in Damascus, he completely ruins their credibility in the Syrian Street, projecting them as stooges for the United States. When he embraces Mahmud Abbas of Palestine, the same impression is made on ordinary Palestinians who immediately write off their president as



a puppet for Washington, making it difficult for him - if not impossible - to discuss peace with Israel.

The situation now applies to Iraq as well.

For four years, the Americans have been pushing for a security breakthrough in Iraq. The White House has been desperate for a "success story" to sell on Iraq to the American public. Chances seemed slim earlier this summer as an increasing number of Iraqi politicians walked out on Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki. By October, his government had lost legitimacy, since it no longer included Sunnis from the Iraqi Accordance Front or Shi'ites from the Sadrist bloc.

The Americans held on to Maliki, fearing a vacuum if he left. So desperate was the US administration that it began funding and arming Sunni tribesmen in Iraq to combat al-Qaeda. This caused uproar in the Iraqi street, particularly among Iraqi Shi'ites, who claimed that the Sunnis would train their guns on both the Americans and the Shi'ites the minute they were finished fighting al-Qaeda.

They cited how US support for Osama bin Laden backfired the minute he was finished fighting the Soviets in the Soviets in Afghanistan in the late 1980s. When Bush came to Iraq, he had his picture taken with Abdul-Sattar Abu Risheh, one of the cooperative Sunni tribal leaders. Maliki described him as a "national hero". Seventy-two hours later, Vice President Tarek al-Hashemi announced a "reward" (or as some would say punishment) for the Sunni provinces working against al-Qaeda.

A total of US$84 million would go to the reconstruction of Ramadi, with an additional $50 million in compensation for its residents, along with 6,000 job opportunities. Shortly afterwards, Abu Risheh was assassinated near his home in Ramadi. Maliki blamed al-Qaeda. It was a clear message as to how far the militants were willing to go to punish anybody working with the Americans. Abu Risheh had not only fought al-Qaeda, but lobbied relentlessly with government authorities to amend the de-Ba'athification laws that targeted the Sunni community, and restore senior Sunnis to posts in the Iraqi army. Without him, Maliki - and Bush - have one less friend in Iraq.

And now, the Americans have done the same thing to Maliki. Over the past 15 days, a lot of positive news came in from Baghdad. One was a significant improvement in local security, estimated by Maliki at 77% better. Cafes - abandoned by night since 2003 - were once again swarming with Iraqis, thanks to the improved security situation. An estimated 1,000 Iraqis were returning to Iraq per day from neighboring Syria, thanks to better security.

The reasons varied. One was improved US and Iraqi patrolling of Baghdad. Another was a pledge by Shi'ite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr to bring all military activities of his Mahdi Army to a six-month halt. He had been accused of creating major disturbances in Sunni districts. Also, armed Sunni militiamen (working with the Americans) were able to keep al-Qaeda at bay during the months of September-November. Maliki seemed to be doing increasingly well.

The Iraqi Accordance Front, a Sunni bloc with 44 seats in Parliament (out of 275) agreed to reduce its demands and restore its six ministers to the Maliki cabinet. The Sadrists decided to end their decades-long animosity with the Supreme Iraqi Council (SIIC) that is headed by Muqtada's archenemy, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim. Both groups, who control all Shi'ite militiamen in Iraq, forgot their rivalry for Shi'ite dominance and decided to unite in order to bring stability and security to Iraq.

There was even speculation that Muqtada would restore his ministers to the Maliki cabinet when and if the Accordance Front withdrew its August resignations. Iran, which has been accused by the United States of funding terrorism in Iraq, had seemingly also decided to cooperate and reduce violence.

Things seemed rosy for Maliki, until this week, when Bush convinced him to sign a "declaration of principles" with the United States. Among other things, the declaration pledged to disarm all militias in Iraq, without naming them, and fire all militiamen who had joined the police and security forces under the nose of the Maliki government.

AIPAC and Mahmoud Abbas

Abbas is playing along because he thinks he can defeat Hamas and be the sole "legitimate" leader of the Palestinians. He really does not care that he is in effect a puppet as long as he gets enough crumbs that he can justify himself to many Palestinians who are no doubt exhausted from the violence and deprivation they have been subjected to..However, the Palestinians have usually refused to co-operate for long with a government that simply acts to control the populace in ways that Israel and the US want.

AIPAC and Mahmoud Abbas

The Undemocratic Road to Defeat

By James Brooks

07/18/07 "Counterpunch" -- -- When the current Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) first "met" on March 6, 2006 (via videoconference, thanks to Israel's travel restrictions), the Palestinian Authority embarked on the final phase of its struggle to become a democratic proto-state. This was to be the first government formed under the new Palestinian constitution, the Basic Law passed by the PLC in 1998 and finally signed by President Arafat in 2002.

The government envisioned by the constitution is a dramatic departure from the autocratic days of Arafat. The bulk of practical state power, including "public order and internal security", is expressly assigned to the Council of Ministers, the prime minister's cabinet. The president has the power to hire and fire the PM, approve the cabinet, and declare states of emergency, but is otherwise little mentioned in the document.

When the Basic Law was drafted during the 1990s, Fateh dominated the PA. Its authors may have hoped its democratic processes and responsibilities would reform their party as well as their government. They could not have foreseen that when the Articles finally came to life, it would be too late for Fateh to benefit as expected. Nor could they have known that the constitution would be threatened at birth because Hamas had been elected to lead the government.

The legal obligation facing President Abbas sixteen months ago was to respect the new division of powers enunciated in the constitution. This was also his duty to the people, who had long demanded democratic reform and an end to one man-one clique rule.

But Abbas was given excuses to escape this obligation. Washington forbade him to cooperate with the elected Hamas government. A brutal economic excuse was supplied by the western powers' embargo against the PA. And, since he and his cronies had negotiated away control of the PA's tax revenues in the Oslo Accords, Israel was able to illegally seize the PA's money when the Hamas government took office.

What could he do?

He could have decided that the unity of the Palestinian struggle for self-determination was more important than the immediate needs of his cadres and the diplomatic bluster of Israel and its friends. He could have challenged the US, EU and Israel to support the democratic outcome of the elections, which would have forged a unified Palestinian front to shame the "international community" for its boycott and interference. He could have recognized that this strategy, conducted resolutely, would be more likely to restore the PA's revenues, more quickly, than any confrontational approach he could take with Hamas.

Instead, Abbas has been listening to his old guard while trying to take orders from Washington, beg for crumbs from Israel, defeat Hamas, form a national unity government, and lead the Palestinian people. Who knew the old stiff could be such a contortionist?

We know from people who know him that Mr. Abbas is a "good guy". We understand that the man has principles, but most of the time he seems incapable of acting on them.

He crossed the line when he allowed arch Zionist and former Iran-Contra criminal Elliott Abrams, in the Bush White House, to arm and train his security forces, including those of Mohammed Dahlan, his chief warlord in Gaza. This opened the door to a plot to wage civil war against Hamas in Gaza. When Prime Minister Haniyeh responded by asserting his constitutional control of Gaza's "public order and internal security", the plot was soon vanquished, with brutality on both sides.

Or was it? As if he had expected the outcome, Abbas made his next move with unaccustomed speed. The Bush administration directed it and the EU and Israel broke out in instant applause. The firing of Prime Minister Haniyeh may have been his last legal act as president of the PA. His new prime minister, Salam Fayyad, appeared to have his unconstitutional "emergency" cabinet waiting in the wings.

Abbas, ever the political chameleon, now plays the unlikely role of strong man, directing his "security forces" in the West Bank to round up and detain Hamas members, some of whom are tortured. He and Fayyad are collaborating with Israel's scheme to resume total control over Gaza's borders, enabling it to isolate and starve the people in the futile effort to crush Hamas.

Abbas has now struck an open alliance with Israel and the US against Hamas, despite its continuing plea for dialog to restore the unity government. Abbas is even willing to disgrace himself in front of his own people by making preposterous accusations against the group. 'They were going to blow me up! They are linked to Al-Qaida and are bringing it into Gaza! I won't talk to "murderous terrorists"!' Such talk, ridiculed at home, can only be fodder for the Zionist press and its many readers in Congress.

Now that Palestinian politics is everybody's business, let's put international forces in the Gaza Strip. That's what Mr. Abbas has been urging lately. Employ "peacekeepers" to complete the overthrow of the constitutionally mandated caretaker government and seal its usurpation by Abbas' Group of 13, so (ostensibly) beloved by Israel and the US. Somehow that would solve the "Hamas problem".

Simultaneously, Mr. Abbas claims to be a legitimate partner for immediate negotiations with the occupation. Since Israel traditionally signs treaties with the PLO, which Abbas chairs, these statements are worrisome. If he continues on this course, he could, at the very least, fracture the PLO, just as he is threatening to fracture the resistance by cutting deals with Israel to spare Fateh militants who quit.

AIPAC, Israel's powerful Washington "lobby", has just announced its support for Abbas' moves. The Zionists relish this chance to poison Abbas with their public praise while using him to weaken Hamas. "Divide and conquer" means that they defeat both halves. Why is he still playing along?

James Brooks serves as webmaster for Vermonters for a Just Peace in Palestine/Israel. He can be contacted at jamiedb@wildblue.net.

Divide and Rule Israeli-Style: Jonathan Cook

I found this to be one of the better analytical articles on the situation in Palestine. Cook lives in the area. His articles are usually quite perceptive IMHO.
Cook has his own website. He is a freelance journalist.

Divide and Rule, Israeli-Style
Can the Arab world be turned into
Gaza's jailers?
by Jonathan Cook
The boycott by Israel and the international community of the Palestinian Authority finally blew up in their faces with Hamas' recent bloody takeover of Gaza. Or so argues Gideon Levy, one of the saner voices still to be found in Israel. "Starving, drying up, and blocking aid do not sear the consciousness and do not weaken political movements. On the contrary… Reality has refuted the chorus of experts and commentators who preached [on] behalf of the boycott policy. This daft notion that it is possible to topple an elected government by applying pressure on a helpless population suffered a complete failure."

But has Levy got it wrong? The faces of Israeli and American politicians, including Ehud Olmert and George Bush, appear soot-free. On the contrary. Over the past fortnight they have been looking and sounding even more smug than usual.

The problem with Levy's analysis is that it assumes that Israel and the U.S. wanted sanctions to bring about the fall of Hamas, either by giving Fatah the upper hand so that it could deal a knockout blow to the Palestinian government, or by inciting ordinary Palestinians to rise up and demand that their earlier electoral decision be reversed and Fatah reinstalled. In short, Levy, like most observers, assumes that the policy was designed to enforce regime change.

But what if that was not the point of the sanctions? And if so, what goals were Israel and the U.S. pursuing?

The parallels between Iraq and Gaza may be instructive. After all, Iraq is the West's only other recent experiment in imposing sanctions to starve a nation. And we all know where it led: to an even deeper entrenchment of Saddam Hussein's rule.

True, the circumstances in Iraq and Gaza are different: most Iraqis wanted Saddam out but had no way to effect change, while most Gazans wanted Hamas in and made it happen by voting for them in last year's elections. Nevertheless, it may be that the U.S. and Israel drew a different lesson from the sanctions experience in Iraq.

Whether intended or not, sanctions proved a very effective tool for destroying the internal bonds that held Iraqi society together. Destitution and hunger are powerful incentives to turn on one's neighbor as well as one's enemy. A society where resources – food, medicines, water, and electricity – are in short supply is also a society where everyone looks out for himself. It is a society that, with a little prompting, can easily be made to tear itself apart.

And that is precisely what the Americans began to engineer after their "shock and awe" invasion of 2003. Contrary to previous U.S. interventions abroad, Saddam was not toppled and replaced with another strongman – one more to the West's liking. Instead of regime change, we were given regime overthrow. Or as Daniel Pipes, one of the neoconservative ideologues of the attack on Iraq, expressed it, the goal was "limited to destroying tyranny, not sponsoring its replacement. … Fixing Iraq is neither the coalition's responsibility nor its burden."

In place of Saddam, the Americans created a safe haven known as the Green Zone from which its occupation regime could loosely police the country and oversee the theft of Iraq's oil, while also sitting back and watching a sectarian civil war between the Sunni and Shia populations spiral out of control and decimate the Iraqi population.

What did Washington hope to achieve? Pipes offers a clue: "When Sunni terrorists target Shi'ites and vice-versa, non-Muslims [that is, U.S. occupation forces and their allies] are less likely to be hurt. Civil war in Iraq, in short, would be a humanitarian tragedy but not a strategic one." In other words, enabling a civil war in Iraq was far preferable to allowing Iraqis to unite and mount an effective resistance to the U.S. occupation. After all, Iraqi deaths – at least 650,000 of them, according to the last realistic count – are as good as worthless, while U.S. soldiers' lives cost votes back home.

For the neocon cabal behind the Iraq invasion, civil war was seen to have two beneficial outcomes.

First, it eroded the solidarity of ordinary Iraqis, depleting their energies and making them less likely to join or support the resistance to the occupation. The insurgency has remained a terrible irritation to U.S. forces but not the fatal blow it might have been were the Sunni and Shia to fight side by side. As a result, the theft of Iraq's resources has been made easier.

And second, in the longer term, civil war is making inevitable a slow process of communal partition and ethnic cleansing. Four million Iraqis are reported to have been forced either to leave the country or flee their homes. Iraq is being broken up into small ethnic and religious fiefdoms that will be easier to manage and manipulate.

Is this the model for Gaza now and the West Bank later?

It is worth recalling that neither Israel nor the U.S. pushed for an easing of the sanctions on the Palestinian Authority after the national unity government of Hamas and Fatah was formed earlier this year. In fact, the U.S. and Israel could barely conceal their panic at the development. The moment the Mecca agreement was signed, reports of U.S. efforts to train and arm Fatah forces loyal to President Mahmoud Abbas became a newspaper staple.

The cumulative effect of U.S. support for Fatah, as well as Israel's continuing arrests of Hamas legislators in the West Bank, was to strain already tense relations between Hamas and Fatah to breaking point. When Hamas learned that Abbas' security chief, Mohammed Dahlan, with U.S. encouragement, was preparing to carry out a coup against them in Gaza, they got the first shot in.

Did Fatah really believe it could pull off a coup in Gaza, given the evident weakness of its forces there, or was the rumor little more than American and Israeli spin, designed to undermine Hamas' faith in Fatah and doom the unity government? Were Abbas and Dahlan really hoping to topple Hamas, or were they the useful idiots needed by the U.S. and Israel? These are questions that may have to be settled by the historians.

But with the fingerprints of Elliott Abrams, one of the more durable neocons in the Bush administration, to be found all over this episode, we can surmise that what Washington and Israel are intending for the Palestinians will have strong echoes of what has unfolded in Iraq.

By engineering the destruction of the unity government, Israel and the U.S. have ensured that there is no danger of a new Palestinian consensus emerging, one that might have cornered Israel into peace talks. A unity government might have found a formula offering Israel:

Limited recognition inside the pre-1967 borders in return for recognition of a Palestinian state and the territorial integrity of the West Bank and Gaza.
A long-term cease-fire in return for Israel ending its campaign of constant violence and violations of Palestinian sovereignty.
A commitment to honor past agreements in return for Israel's abiding by UN resolutions and accepting a just solution for the Palestinian refugees.
After decades of Israeli bad faith and the growing rancor between Fatah and Hamas, the chances of them finding common ground on which to make such an offer, it must be admitted, would have been slight. But now they are nonexistent.

That is exactly how Israel wants it, because it has no interest in meaningful peace talks with the Palestinians or in a final agreement. It wants only to impose solutions that suit Israel's interests, which are securing the maximum amount of land for an exclusively Jewish state and leaving the Palestinians so weak and divided that they will never be able to mount a serious challenge to Israel's dictates.

Instead, Hamas' dismal authority over the prison camp called Gaza and Fatah's bastard governance of the ghettoes called the West Bank offer a model more satisfying for Israel and the U.S. – and one not unlike Iraq. A sort of sheriff's divide and rule in the Wild West.

Just as in Iraq, Israel and the U.S. have made sure that no Palestinian strongman arises to replace Yasser Arafat. Just as in Iraq, they are encouraging civil war as an alternative to resistance to occupation, as Palestine's resources – land, not oil – are stolen. Just as in Iraq, they are causing a permanent and irreversible partition, in this case between the West Bank and Gaza, to create more easily managed territorial ghettoes. And just as in Iraq, the likely reaction is an even greater extremism from the Palestinians that will undermine their cause in the eyes of the international community.

Where will this lead the Palestinians next?

Israel is already pulling the strings of Fatah with a new adeptness since the latter's humiliation in Gaza. Abbas is currently basking in Israeli munificence for his rogue West Bank regime, including the decision to release a substantial chunk of the $700 million in taxes owed to the Palestinians (including those of Gaza, of course) and withheld for years by Israel. The price, according to the Israeli media, was a commitment from Abbas not to contemplate reentering a unity government with Hamas.

The goal will be to increase the strains between Hamas and Fatah to breaking point in the West Bank, but ensure that Fatah wins the confrontation there. Fatah is already militarily stronger and with generous patronage from Israel and the U.S. – including arms and training, and possibly the return of the Badr Brigade currently holed up in Jordan – it should be able to rout Hamas. The difference in status between Gaza and the West Bank that has been long desired by Israel will be complete.

The Palestinian people have already been carved up into a multitude of constituencies. There are the Palestinians under occupation, those living as second-class citizens of Israel, those allowed to remain "residents" of Jerusalem, and those dispersed to camps across the Middle East. Even within these groups, there are a host of sub-identities: refugees and non-refugees; refugees included as citizens in their host state and those excluded; occupied Palestinians living under the control of the Palestinian Authority and those under Israel's military government; and so on.

Now, Israel has entrenched maybe the most significant division of all: the absolute and irreversible separation of Gaza and the West Bank. What applies to one will no longer be true for the other. Each will be a separate case; their fates will no longer be tied. One will be, as Israelis like to call it, Hamastan, the other Fatahland, with separate governments and different treatment from Israel and the international community.

The reasons why Israel prefers this arrangement are manifold.

First, Gaza can now be written off by the international community as a basket case. The Israeli media is currently awash with patronizing commentary from the political and security establishments about how to help avoid a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, including the possibility of air drops of aid over the Gaza "security fence" – as though Gaza were Pakistan after an earthquake. From past experience, and the current menacing sounds from Israel's new defense minister, Ehud Barak, those food packages will quickly turn into bombs if Gaza does not keep quiet.

As Israeli and U.S. officials have been phrasing it, there is a new "clarity" in the situation. In a Hamastan, Gaza's militants and civilians can be targeted by Israel with little discrimination and no outcry from the international community. Israel will hope that message from Gaza will not be lost on West Bank Palestinians as they decide who to give their support to, Fatah or Hamas.

Second, at their meeting last week Olmert and Bush revived talk of Palestinian statehood. According to Olmert, Bush "wants to realize, while he is in office, the dream of creating a Palestinian state." Both are keen to make quick progress, a sure sign of mischief in the making. Certainly, they know they are now under no pressure to create the single viable Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza once promised by President Bush. An embattled Abbas will not be calling for the inclusion of Gaza in his ghetto-fiefdom.

Third, the separation of Gaza from the West Bank may be used to inject new life into Olmert's shopworn convergence plan – if he can dress it up new clothes. Convergence, which required a very limited withdrawal from those areas of the West Bank heavily populated with Palestinians while Israel annexed most of its illegal colonies and kept the Jordan Valley, was officially ditched last summer after Israel's humiliation by Hezbollah.

Why seek to revive convergence? Because it is the key to Israel securing the expanded fortress state that is its only sure protection from the rapid demographic growth of the Palestinians, soon to outnumber Jews in the Holy Land, and Israel's fears that it may then be compared to apartheid South Africa.

If the occupation continues unchanged, Israel's security establishment has long been warning, the Palestinians will eventually wake up to the only practical response: to dissolve the Palestinian Authority, Israel's clever ruse to make the Palestinian leadership responsible for suppressing Palestinian resistance to the occupation, thereby forcing Israel to pick up the bill for the occupation rather than Europe. The next stage would be an anti-apartheid struggle for one state in historic Palestine.

For this reason, demographic separation from the Palestinians has been the logic of every major Israeli policy initiative since – and including – Oslo. Convergence requires no loss of Israel's control over Palestinian lives, ensured through the all but finished grid of walls, settlements, bypass roads, and checkpoints, only a repackaging of their occupation as statehood.

The biggest objection in Israel to Olmert's plan – as well as to the related Gaza disengagement – was the concern that, once the army had unilaterally withdrawn from the Palestinian ghettoes, the Palestinians would be free to launch terror attacks, including sending rockets out of their prisons into Israel. Most Israelis, of course, never consider the role of the occupation in prompting such attacks.

But Olmert may believe he has found a way to silence his domestic critics. For the first time he seems genuinely keen to get his Arab neighbors involved in the establishment of a Palestinian "state." As he headed off to the Sharm el-Sheikh summit with Egypt, Jordan, and Abbas this week, Olmert said he wanted to "jointly work to create the platform that may lead to a new beginning between us and the Palestinians."

Did he mean partnership? A source in the prime minister's office explained to the Jerusalem Post why the three nations and Abbas were meeting. "These are the four parties directly impacted by what is happening right now, and what is needed is a different level of cooperation between them." Another spokesman bewailed the failure so far to get the Saudis on board.

This appears to mark a sea change in Israeli thinking. Until now Tel Aviv has regarded the Palestinians as a domestic problem – after all, they are sitting on land that rightfully, at least if the Bible is to be believed, belongs to the Jews. Any attempt at internationalizing the conflict has therefore been strenuously resisted.

But now the Israeli prime minister's office is talking openly about getting the Arab world more directly involved, not only in its usual role as a mediator with the Palestinians, nor even in simply securing the borders against smuggling, but also in policing the territories. Israel hopes that Egypt, in particular, is as concerned as Tel Aviv by the emergence of a Hamastan on its borders, and may be enticed to use the same repressive policies against Gaza's Islamists as it does against its own.

Similarly, Olmert's chief political rival, Binyamin Netanyahu of Likud, has mentioned not only Egyptian involvement in Gaza but even a Jordanian military presence in the West Bank. The "moderate" Arab regimes, as Washington likes to call them, are being seen as the key to developing new ideas about Palestinian "autonomy" and regional "confederation." As long as Israel has a quisling in the West Bank and a beyond-the-pale government in Gaza, it may believe it can corner the Arab world into backing such a "peace plan."

What will it mean in practice? Possibly, as Zvi Barel of Ha'aretz speculates, we will see the emergence of half a dozen Palestinian governments in charge of the ghettoes of Gaza, Ramallah, Jenin, Jericho, and Hebron. Each may be encouraged to compete for patronage and aid from the "moderate" Arab regimes but on condition that Israel and the U.S. are satisfied with these Palestinian governments' performance.

In other words, Israel looks as if it is dusting off yet another blueprint for how to manage the Palestinians and their irritating obsession with sovereignty. Last time, under Oslo, the Palestinians were put in charge of policing the occupation on Israel's behalf. This time, as the Palestinians are sealed into their separate prisons masquerading as a state, Israel may believe that it can find a new jailer for the Palestinians – the Arab world.

The Triumph of US/Israeli policy in Palestine

This is just a part of a longer article available at .Counterpunch
In contrast to some other commentators Loewenstein thinks that US/Isreali policy is triumphing. However, she claims that Fatah and Abbas have not had much benefit from being supported by Israel and the US. By the way it is not long ago that Fatah under Arafat was a terrorist organisation that could not be bargained with. As usual there are the good terrorists (Fatah) and the bad ones (Hamas). Western media just seem to play along changing the wording to meet the new situation. As this article points out at one point references to the fact that Hamas was elected with a majority in the Authority will be less and less mentioned.


Brothers-in-Arms
The Triumph of US/Israeli Policy in Palestine
By JENNIFER LOEWENSTEIN

Contrary to the many claims that the Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip represents the failure of US and Israeli policies in Palestine, the violent civil infighting that has dominated the Gaza Strip over much of the last year and a half and that led directly to the Hamas coup of June 2007, marks yet another major foreign policy victory for the occupiers. Hamas will never be allowed to remain in power in Gaza so we must fear for the future of that tiny, desperately overcrowded strip of land and its 1.4 million inhabitants; additionally, Abbas ­in order to maintain his role as "Good Guy"- will have to accede to the dictates of Israel and the United States or suffer the same fate as his predecessor, Yassir Arafat.

Western nations are standing by in silence as the deadly siege of Gaza and the dismemberment of the West Bank continue unabated. What we are witnessing in full view each day are unprecedented steps taken by the world's only superpower and its favorite client state, Israel, to ensure the death of a nation. While friction between the two key political factions in the occupied Palestinian territories has long undermined the smooth functioning of internal affairs, it was the direct, cynical involvement of US and Israeli policy-makers in these affairs that guaranteed the breakdown of internal stability and paved the way for the Hamas "coup" in Gaza.

Media reports have been careful to leave out important facts leading up to the coup such as that Hamas was the legitimate, democratically elected ruling party in the Palestinian territories following the January 2006 Palestine Legislative Council elections; that it was the US-Israeli dismissal of those election results that fueled the civil infighting between Hamas and Fatah; that obvious US backing of Fatah against Hamas helped create popular mistrust of Fatah increasing Hamas' popularity in Gaza and leading directly to Hamas' takeover of the Fatah military apparatus in the Gaza Strip. In other words, there were real and understandable reasons for the coup. But in the end, Hamas' seizure of the power it should have had in the first place ends up serving the interests not only of Mahmoud Abbas and the warlord Muhammad Dahlan. It also provides the perfect opportunity for US-Israeli policy in the region to move forward with even fewer objections, if that is possible to imagine, than have heretofore been made. Who will stand up for a "terrorist organization that seeks the destruction of Israel"? The line has been beaten into our heads with every mention of the word "Hamas" for years. We should not expect a change in the behavior of the American public or of other western audiences until, when Israel is mentioned, we immediately say to ourselves, "a terrorist state that seeks the destruction of Palestine." Seeks and is succeeding in it.


II.

Watching the barbarous killing between brothers in Gaza, a power struggle between rival factions seething in frenzy like the great prison in which they thrive, Israeli and American political analysts can rest their cases with confidence. Across the spectrum of debate, these experts can expect vindication by the media juries who, in sanctimonious indignation at the brutality meted out by partisans of Fatah or Hamas, have assembled all the "evidence" they need to justify our righteous war against Muslim-Arab terrorists and their internecine blood feuds.

That the US has temporarily chosen a weak, compliant leader, Mahmoud Abbas, and the power thirsty warlord, Muhammad Dahlan, to back during the bitter strife between key Palestinian factions testifies not to a belief that one side is trustworthy and deserves our support, but rather to the ease with which the Americans and their clients pick and choose their pawns in their bitter regional cockfights. Today's statesmen were yesterday terrorists, their titles dependent on the needs of the superpower and its clients: yesterday Fatah was on the US State Department's list of foreign terrorist organizations and its leader, Yassir Arafat, was a declared "terrorist," "irrelevant," and exiled in his presidential compound in Ramallah until his mysterious death. Fatah's military wing, the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades is still listed as a foreign terrorist organization. Neither of these factors apparently bothers the current leadership which understands that power and prestige are most easily acquired and unchallenged when bequeathed from above.

Truth be told, the Abbas/Dahlan alliance elicits far greater contempt in the eyes of the masters than the more independent and genuine resistance faction headed by Hamas. The numerous meetings and photo-ops between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Abbas, and US President George Bush and Abbas, are little more than tactical stunts to make it look as though genuine negotiations are taking place. In fact, Abbas has been repeatedly by-passed and shunned when Israeli and US negotiators make the real policy decisions; decisions that remain one-sided and dismissive of any demands-other than those that are entirely self-serving-that Abbas and his entourage have made. The arms and funding channeled through Abbas' Fatah (for his clique represents only one of the many spin-off Fatahs that emerged during the second Intifada) signify little more than the conduit through which US-Israeli policies can be secured. For all the claims about US backing of Fatah, neither Abbas nor Dahlan have yet to benefit on the ground from this "support". Indeed, the ease with which Hamas was able to wrest control of Gaza indicates just how little US support for Fatah was worth there. Nevertheless, the same pipeline of support for "Fatah" has done a great deal to bolster perceived US and Israeli national security interests in the same region.


III.

The Olmert-Abbas meeting: A Lebanese view

This is from a Lebanese newspaper. It sounds pro-Hamas. Certainly it gives a different slant from the almost universal pro-Abbas effusions in the mainstream Western press. I imagine that Abbas is happy enough that a considerable number of Fatah Israeli prisoners will be released. It will do nothing to help the Israeli soldier held by Hamas.


Olmert's summit gesture to Abbas was more insult than overture
By The Daily Star Tuesday, June 26, 2007






Israeli officials worked hard to play down expectations ahead of Monday's four-way summit at the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert worked just as hard to meet them by sharply limiting what were unconvincingly advertised as his efforts to bolster Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. With Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Jordan's King Abdullah II on hand to lend credibility as Arab "moderates," the best Olmert had to offer was a commitment to put a proposal before his Cabinet to free 250 members of Abbas' Fatah faction held in Israeli jails.

Given the fact that approximately 10,000 Palestinians - including hundreds of women and children - are currently languishing in Israeli custody, many of them without charge, no one should be fooled into thinking that Olmert is serious about peace.

It is true that Olmert's domestic political position is a weak one, but that is because of past failures to understand the direct causal relationship between his country's continued occupation of Arab land and his people's inability to live in peace and security. He will not, therefore, improve his dismal performance in opinion surveys by subjecting Palestinians (and other Arabs) to the insulting spectacle of tangential "concessions" that would be hollow even if he made good on them. On the contrary, by refusing to accept the evidence of the past 40 years that the Arabs will not be beaten into submission, he can only guarantee further conflict.
http://www.dailystar.com.lb

As Abdullah has repeatedly warned, the time to make a full and fair peace is not limitless. The longer Israel substitutes brute force for diplomacy, disguises insult as overture, and treats would-be interlocutors like lesser beings entitled to fewer rights, the more it weakens those Palestinians and other Arabs who believe in a negotiated solution. By refusing to abide by international law and plain common sense, the Jewish state has consistently reduced the number of those willing to risk their credibility by working with it diplomatically.

Now Olmert has only made matters worse, and at precisely the wrong moment. Abbas needed desperately to show that his strategy of engagement has a better chance of achieving Palestinian statehood than the confrontation recommended by his rivals from Hamas. He needed to come home with a trophy for his championing of a two-state solution arrived at by mutual agreement, some kind of evidence that Israel's leaders finally see the errors of their ways. Instead, Abbas returned with a flimsy Israeli undertaking to pursue an almost meaningless gesture. As a result, the Palestinian people received only confirmation that Olmert views their flexibility as weakness, their patience as gullibility, and their suffering as irrelevant. How much longer can this continue before they, in turn, conclude that negotiation with the Jewish state is a fool's errand that can only end in additional frustration and heartache?

Olmert agrees to talk with Abbas

This is a good sign although Olmert seems to not be willing to talk about peace terms until his preconditions are met. Perhaps the Arab peace plan has a chance although Rice is certainly wise not to build up too much hope for any rapid progress.


U.S. official: Olmert agrees to resume open-ended talks with Abbas

By Aluf Benn, Haaretz Correspondent, and Haaretz Service and Agencies

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert agreed Monday to resume open-ended, face-to-face talks with Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas in a possible step toward restarting substantive peace talks, a U.S. official said.

Olmert met with U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for the second time in as many days late Monday evening.

Olmert and Abbas will initially hold low-key confidence-building sessions, the official said. Israel has refused substantive talks since Abbas joined Hamas militants in a coalition government this month.




Advertisement

The talks between the Palestinian and Israeli leaders will be open to all issues, said the U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity ahead of a planned press conference by Rice on Tuesday.

Olmert's agreement to new talks was a small step, since he had held such sessions with Abbas before the Hamas deal, but it still was seen as a sign of fresh and surprising progress toward peace talks.

When Abbas and Hamas formed their coalition government last week, Olmert said he would talk about humanitarian and other concerns if need be, but he ruled out more detailed discussions or negotiations.

Rice said Monday that she has no intention of taking over the negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, saying Washington is helping the sides examine political issues as well as issues related to daily life.

"I don't intend by any means to take control of the Israeli-Palestinian bilateral dialogue," said Rice. "I think it is very important."

Rice made the comments following a meeting with Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni in Jerusalem.

On Sunday, Rice said that the U.S. is planning to hold separate talks with Israel and the PA aimed at achieving an accord that will lead to the establishment of a Palestinian state.

The secretary of state will hold a press conference Tuesday morning in which she will make a statement summarizing her two-day visit to Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

The press conference was to be held Monday evening, but was delayed by Rice earlier in the day. Rice is expected to announce the beginning of talks on the creation of a Palestinian state.

The secretary of state will then depart for Saudi Arabia ahead of the Arab League summit in Riyadh, in which Arab leaders are expected to re-launch the 2002 Saudi peace initiative.

Olmert, however, said Monday that he is not familiar with any new suggestions for negotiations with the Palestinians.

Speaking at a joint press conference with United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in Jerusalem, Olmert said that he maintains ongoing contact with Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, and that the basis for any new negotiations would be the road map.

Olmert said he would continue his contacts with Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas without interruption, but said he had no plans for a major Mideast summit.

"I want to remind you that there is constant contact between the Palestinian president and me, and this will continue without interruption in the future," the prime minister said. However, he denied press reports that a major summit is in the works.

Ban: I have a better appreciation for Israel's security concerns

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon toured Israel from the air on Monday, winding up his first visit since taking office.

The Israel Defense Forces took Ban on a helicopter ride around Israel and the West Bank, in an effort to give him a feel for the close quarters and security challenges.

"Having gone through some parts of Israel by helicopter today, I came to better appreciate the security concerns facing Israel," he said. "At the same time I am deeply troubled by the network of checkpoints, growth of settlements and the barrier where it appears on Palestinian lands."

At a news conference on Monday, Ban urged Israel and the Palestinians to resume peace negotiations, calling Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas a genuine partner for peace.

He said that in his talks in the West Bank, "I impressed upon the Palestinian leadership the vital importance of tackling the security situation, ending violence in all its dimensions and, above all, securing the early release of an Israeli soldier captured by Hamas-linked militants in June."

Ban was hopeful about prospects for peace between Israel and the Palestinians. "I believe we can and must make progress in the coming days and months," he said.

Ban has internal consultations scheduled for Tuesday morning before leaving.

Rice: U.S. to hold separate talks with Israel, PA

Rice said Sunday night that the U.S. will hold separate negotiations with the two sides, present questions and request clarifications regarding their positions, in an effort to reach an agreed-upon agenda for the renewal of peace talks.

Rice is planning to present the two sides with questions on two main issues: territory and security.

According to Rice, it is possible to learn from the experience that has accumulated since the end of negotiations in 2000, particularly with regard to security arrangements. She pointed to the management of the border crossings at Karni and Rafah in the Gaza Strip as examples that should be studied closely.

The secretary of state also said that she intends to request clarifications from Israel as to how it intends to implement the vision of a territorially contiguous Palestinian state in the West Bank.

Rice arrived in Israel on Sunday and dined with Olmert at his home in Jerusalem. Earlier she visited Ramallah and met with Abbas, whom she met again Monday morning in Jordan.

Speaking to U.S. reporters before dining with Olmert, Rice acknowledged her approach was cautious and said the chances for quick dramatic progress were low.

"My approach has been, I admit, careful. It's been step by step. I have not been willing to try for the big bang. I don't think that that's where we are," she said.

"The question here isn't speed. The question is trying to really move forward toward the establishment of a Palestinian state."

Her meeting with Olmert lasted approximately three hours, Israel Radio reported. Rice is scheduled to meet Monday with Defense Minister Amir Peretz and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni.

The Israeli political team held talks with Rice's aides Sunday in an effort to soften the statement.

Israel would like to avoid formulations that will be binding in a final agreement or which deal with issues of serious dispute (most likely, Jerusalem and the refugees).

Rice told reporters Sunday that her earlier visit to the region, five weeks ago, and her tripartite meeting with Abbas and Olmert in Jerusalem took place with the Mecca agreement for the establishment of a Palestinian national unity government as the background.

Unlike that meeting, which Rice hinted had taken place because it had already been scheduled, this visit aims to jump-start a separate negotiation process.

Rice said that she sat for many hours with U.S. President George W. Bush in order to formulate a diplomatic strategy, and that she does not exclude the possibility that a special envoy will be appointed for talks with the two sides.

Olmert calls for continuing boycott of Palestine govt.

US and others talk about democracy is revealed as hypocritical. The US, Israel, and others have tried their best to destroy the Hamas elected govt. and when Hamas and Fatah patch up their feud the reward is continued choking off of funds. Democratic govts. are OK but they must be starved into submission before they are fit to negotiate with.

Israeli PM calls for Palestinian boycott

Jerusalem, March 18: Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert today called for the international community to maintain a year-long boycott of the Palestinian government following the formation of the new Unity cabinet.

"We expect the international community not to fall for the new Palestinian Unity government and to continue with the same line it has taken all along, the way of isolating the government which does not accept the quartet principles," Olmert said at the weekly cabinet meeting.

The quartet of Middle East peace mediators -- the US, EU, United Nations and Russia -- froze aid to the Palestinian authority after Hamas, which came to power last year over the Islamists' refusal to renounce violence, recognise Israel, or abide by past peace accords.

The new Palestinian government unites Hamas and the Fatah faction of moderate President Mahmud Abbas.

Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniya presented the new government programme to Parliament yesterday, but Israel says it fails to meet any of the quartet conditions.

"The government platform includes some extremely problematic elements which can't be accepted by Israel or the international community including the right to resist and the use of terror," Olmert said.

Olmert has vowed to maintain contacts with Abbas, but today said that relationship would be further strained by the latter's agreement to share power with Hamas, a group responsible for scores of suicide attacks against Israel.

"The new government and its platform limits our ability to have dialogue with the head of the Palestinian Authority and also limits the spectrum of topics we could discuss in the near future," Olmert added.

Bureau Report

Palestinians Agree on Unity Government

It remains to see whether this stops violence between Hamas and Fatah. With the US and Israel arming Abbas he might feel he can dominate Hamas but perhaps good sense will prevail.

Palestinians agree on unity governmentSuleiman Nimr and Nasser Abu BakrPublished: Thursday, February 08, 2007featuring news from canada.com
MECCA, Saudi Arabia - Rival Palestinian factions reached a comprehensive deal Thursday on forming a government of national unity at marathon talks in Mecca, officials from both sides said.

Ruling Islamists Hamas and the Fatah party of president Mahmud Abbas also agreed on a political programme, but details were not immediately available. Crucial for the Palestinians is whether it will be enough to convince Western donors and Israel to end a crippling blockade.

"Fatah and Hamas have reached agreement on the division of ministerial posts and on the political programme of a national unity government," a Fatah official said, adding that it could be signed "as early as this evening."

A Hamas official confirmed that the talks had led the clashing factions to reach an accord on a national government and that it was to be "signed soon."

One of the delegates said the two parties would hold a final, closed-door meeting, after which the deal would be signed in the presence of their host, Saudi King Abdullah.

As part of the deal, a major step toward averting civil war, Hamas premier Ismail Haniya will keep his job and the crucial post of interior minister will go to an independent.

"We agreed with Hamas that Ismail Haniya should lead the government of national unity," said Fatah's Azzam al-Ahmed, adding that Fatah would name a deputy prime mininster.

The West and Israel have boycotted the Palestinian government since it was formed in March over Hamas's consistent refusal to lay down arms, recognise Israel or abide by interim peace agreements with the Jewish state.

Under the agreement, a copy of which was obtained by AFP, Hamas would take nine posts in a new government. Another six would go to Fatah and one each to four other parties in parliament. Along with the crucial interior portfolio, independents would also get foreign affairs and finance.

The document confirmed that former culture minister Ziad Abu Amr had been nominated as foreign minister and Salam Fayyad as finance minister.

A Hamas official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Abbas "will choose an independent interior minister from among five names that will be submitted to him by Hamas".

Both parties had pledged not to leave Mecca without drawing a line under a deadly power struggle that has killed around 100 people since December.

King Abdullah invited the Palestinian leaders, including exiled Hamas chief Khaled Meshaal, to Mecca in a bid to end the deadliest internecine violence in the Palestinian territories in years.

Meshaal, who lives in Syria and is one of Israel's most wanted men, urged both sides' fighters to exercise restraint.

Haniya told the opening session there was a need for a "code of honour" banning internal feuding and for a "comprehensive agreement" - not just an interim deal.

Meshaal also said it was vital that any deal reached be respected by world powers.

"The international community must respect our accord, recognise our Palestinian reality and deal with it seriously," he said.

Hamas formed a government last March after trouncing Abbas's long-dominant Fatah in parliamentary elections two months earlier. It is anxious not to surrender the power it won at the ballot box without securing an end to the Western aid boycott that has crippled its administration.

Both the European Union and the United States froze all direct aid when the Islamist movement took power, demanding that the Hamas-led government renounce violence and recognise Israel and past interim peace deals.

Hamas and Fatah have since held protracted negotiations on forming a broad coalition acceptable to Western donors so aid can resume.

In Jerusalem talks with British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett on Wednesday, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert insisted that the West should not give up on the three principles and should ensure that any new Palestinian administration should be fully signed up to them.

"Any government of the Palestinian Authority will have to respect these conditions," he said, adding that he expected to hold a three-way summit with Abbas and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on February 19.

"I hope that by then we will not find that Abu Mazen (Abbas) has partnered with Hamas in a way that is in contradiction of the principles of the quartet

US supports up to 10,000 extra troops for Abbas

Is this the same United States that accuses Iran of meddling in Iraq?


U.S. to support up to 10,000 extra Abbas troops By Adam Entous
Sat Feb 3, 5:36 AM ET



JERUSALEM (Reuters) - The United States will expand assistance to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to include about 8,500 members of his national security forces and possibly 1,000 Fatah fighters based in Jordan, U.S. documents show.


Providing non-lethal equipment and training to units of Abbas's National Security Forces, and possibly the Jordan-based Badr Brigade could increase Washington's role in the power struggle between Abbas's Fatah faction and the governing Hamas movement.

U.S. assistance has largely been limited until now to around 4,000 members of Abbas's presidential guard.

But documents obtained by Reuters on Saturday showed that the U.S. government's $86.4 million security assistance program could cover at least 13,500 troops loyal to Abbas.

The National Security Forces (NSF) is the largest security force under Abbas's control and is viewed by many Palestinians to be the equivalent of an army, though it is poorly trained and equipped compared to the smaller presidential guard.

Under the U.S. security program, $76.4 million will fund "projects to transform and strengthen elements of the Palestinian Authority's security structure, specifically the National Security Forces and Presidential Guard in an effort to improve public order and fight terror in the West Bank and Gaza," the documents said.

"These projects have been developed in coordination with the office of the PA president (Abbas), and the overall plan enjoys the support of the government of Israel," said the documents, marked "sensitive but unclassified."

Another $10 million would fund security improvements at the Karni commercial crossing between Israel and Gaza.

Western officials involved in the program said security service members who participate in the U.S.-funded program will undergo a vetting process to ensure they are qualified and have no ties to militant groups.

Hamas has denounced U.S. security assistance as part of a coup against its government. Hamas gunmen on Thursday attached a truck convey in Gaza that it said was meant to resupply Abbas's presidential guard, triggering a wave of fighting.

U.S. officials say they will only provide training and non-lethal equipment to forces loyal to Abbas. Guns and ammunition are being supplied by key U.S. allies Jordan and Egypt, with Israeli approval, Israeli officials say.

Under the $86.4 million U.S. program, $35.5 million will be used to provide non-lethal equipment, including riot gear and communications equipment, to about 8,500 members of Abbas's National Security Forces.

Another $15 million in U.S. funds would provide at least one NSF unit, estimated to have 668 members, with an initial six months of training to counter "civil disorder," most likely at a facility in Jordan, the documents say.

The funds will be used "in support of NSF deployment throughout the West Bank and Gaza so that the NSF may establish a visible public presence, improve public order and help improve border security," the documents said.

The United States expected other donors to provide extra training, the documents said, but gave no further details.

Palestinian officials estimate that the National Security Forces have as many as 40,000 members. Western diplomats say the number of active members is closer to 20,000.

BADR BRIGADE

The $86.4 million also includes $25.9 million to provide non-lethal equipment to Abbas's elite presidential guard, which is expected to grow to 4,700 members with U.S. help near-term. Palestinian officials say the force could eventually top 10,000.

The documents said up to $8 million of these funds may be used to provide equipment to the Badr Brigade, a Fatah-dominated force, "in the event of a deployment in Gaza." Badr would fall under the presidential guard's operational command.

The United States and Israel have backed a proposal by Abbas to let about 1,000 members of the Badr Brigade, into the Palestinian territories, though no date has been set.

Diplomats say Abbas's military build-up was meant to counter strides by Hamas in smuggling more powerful weapons into Gaza for its fast-growing "Executive Force" and armed wing.

Some analysts have warned that fighting between Hamas and Fatah could turn into a proxy war, with the United States supporting Abbas and Iran backing Hamas.