Abbas' anti-Israel rhetoric annoys the US and Israel

The US expressed annoyance at the UN speech of Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority. Abbas accused Israel of carrying out acts of genocide during the recent Operation Protective Edge.

Abbas also accused Israel of planning another "Nakba" or "disaster" referring to events before and after Israeli independence: During the 1948 Palestine War, an estimated 700,000 Palestinians fled or were expelled, and hundreds of Palestinian towns and villages were depopulated and destroyed.[2][3] Abbas termed the latest round of conflict in the Gaza strip "a series of absolute war crimes carried out before the eyes and ears of the entire world, moment by moment" and claimed that the devastation was unmatched in modern times. Abbas also accused Israel of undermining any chances for peace during the earlier 9 months of negotiations as well as consistently trying to "fragment our land and our unity." While Israel may very well be guilty of war crimes, Abbas' use of the term "genocide" is hardly accurate.
 Israel has been upset not only by Abbas' rhetoric but by the formation of a unity government with Hamas regarded by both the US and Israel as a terrorist organization. Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman was quite critical of Abbas and suggested he could not be a partner in future peace talks:"Abu Mazen's (Abbas') words at the UN General Assembly sharply clarify again that Abu Mazen doesn't want and can't be a logical partner for a political settlement. Abbas isn't a member of joint government with Hamas for no reason." Senior officials in Israeli Prime Minister's Benjamin Netanyahu's office also denounced the speech.
The US joined the chorus of criticism with State Department spokesperson, Jen Psaki, saying: "President Abbas' speech today included offensive characterizations that were deeply disappointing and which we reject. Such provocative statements are counterproductive and undermine efforts to create a positive atmosphere and restore trust between the parties." Abbas' rhetoric may be designed to show his constituency that he is tough on Israel. Abbas has lost support while Hamas has gained it by standing up to Israel in spite of the devastation wreaked upon the Gaza Strip because of Hamas' continued resistance and firing of rockets into Israel.
Abbas may be strong in his rhetoric but failed to follow through with actions. He did not say anything about joining the International Criminal Courts. His aides have often said he is prepared to do so, an action that would irritate the Israelis. Abbas said:"We will not forget and we will not forgive, and we will not allow war criminals to escape punishment." Abbas failed to indicate how this was to be accomplished and said nothing about taking the issue to the International Criminal Court.
 Abbas' aides also claimed that Abbas would press for a new UN Security Council resolution that would set a three year schedule for Israel to withdraw from all Palestinian territories captured during the 1967 war. The aides said as well that if the UN did not accept the resolution Abbas would seek membership in more international agencies including the International Criminal Court. Abbas could bring to the court not only the war crimes issue but also Israeli construction of settlements in the West Bank that the Palestinians see as part of their future state.
  Hamas and the Palestinian Authority(PA) have reportedly negotiated a "comprehensive" agreement that will see officials of a unity government take over the civil administration of Gaza. The unity government is led by President Abbas. Both groups hope that this agreement will pave the way for easing of the Gaza blockade imposed by Israel with the help of Egypt.
 A recent study by the Palestinian Authority estimates costs of reconstruction in Gaza to be $7.8 billion. Under the agreement, the PA will take control of the border crossings of the Gaza Strip including the key Rafah crossing into Egypt. Abdel al-Sisi the Egyptian president had demanded that the PA and not Hamas control the crossing. The agreement will end Hamas' seven year long sole rule of Gaza after it won elections in 2006. The agreement comes after complaints by each side about the other including Hamas' anger at the PA refusal to pay the salaries of 45,000 civic employees in Gaza. If the new agreement holds and the new government operates smoothly this will be a giant step forward in resolving the constant bickering between Hamas and the PA that continually threatens Palestinian unity and prevents a common front in negotiations with Israel.

Lieberman rules out attack against Iran

This is from antiwar.com.

Of course if you read the article it is clear that Lieberman is ruling out an Israeli attack on Iran. He wants the US to do the job for Israel! At the same time Lieberman has announced the death of peace talks with the Palestinians. The US will probably come into considerable conflict with Israeli policies for the first time in some while. The Obama seems to be encouraging reconiciliation between Hamas and Fatah and is trying to make it possible for aid to flow through a unified Palestinian govt. that would include Fatah.



Lieberman Rules Out Israeli Attack on Iran
Posted By Jason Ditz On April 26, 2009 @ 6:54 pm In Uncategorized
Though only in office for a few weeks, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has dramatically redefined Israel’s official foreign policy on a number of fronts. His first major act was to declare the stalled peace talks with the Palestinians dead, sparking both international and domestic outrage. In his first media interview he announced that he was replacing Iran as Israel’s worst threat, bestowing that honor on Pakistan, and declared that the United States would accept any decision the Israeli government made on the peace process.
Now, having dispatched of Iran’s position as Israel’s gravest threat, Lieberman surprised even further by declaring that Israel would not attack Iran, even if international sanctions fail to convince Iran to abandon its civilian nuclear program.
Virtually the centerpiece of Israel’s foreign policy for the last several years has been its nearly weekly suggestions that they may attack Iran in the near future. Abandoning this policy would be a major change for Israel, and shocking coming from the hawkish Lieberman, whose previous cabinet position as Minister of Strategic Affairs was created specifically to coordinate military, intelligence and diplomatic initiatives against Iran.
Not that the foreign minister objects to the idea of attacking Iran. Instead, while he supports “severe sanctions, very severe sanctions,” and “harsher and more effective sanctions” at the moment, he said Israel should not be expected to “resolve militarily the entire world’s problem,” instead suggesting that “the United States, as the largest power in the world, take responsibility.”