US funding Blair as envoy?

Probably Blair will toe the US line whether or not the US pays his salary. It has already been made abundantly clear by the US that his mission is to build up Palestinian authority institutions..i.e. further isolate Hamas. No doubt the US just wants to get their running dog up and running and the details of funding can be worked out later. Anyone who thinks the peace process is objective between Palestine and Israel has rocks in their head. In fact it is so biased it will be a wonder if even Abbas will able to bend enough to attain a deal.


US state department 'funding Blair'
By Mark Seddon, diplomatic correspondent





Blair's appointment provoked outright
hostility from Russia [AFP]




There are questions emerging over Tony Blair's appointment as the Quartet's [the United Nations, the European Union, the United States and Russia] Middle East envoy.

The uncertainties start with funding, who is paying the bills for the former British prime minister's new job as special representative for the diplomatic grouping?




This is a hugely sensitive position. It is also a position that Blair had his eyes on for some time.

In this, he had the whole-hearted backing of George Bush, the US president, and the US state department.

However, it appears that it was not just political support that was on offer.






Trust fund

Tony Blair's seemless transition from prime minister to special representative for the Quartet last month was accompanied by raised eyebrows at the UN and within the British foreign office.

It also provoked outright hostility from the Russians.

Now, senior UN and British officials have told Al Jazeera that the US state department has been paying Mr Blair's bills, either directly or indirectly, via a trust fund. The amount remains undisclosed.

Marie Okabe, a UN spokeswoman, said: "I don't think I can get into the legal position of the Quartet but as you know the UN is one of the four members of the Quartet, Tony Blair is representative of the Quartet, I think the question of resources for him, his staffing, that kind of thing, is an issue that is under discussion."

Meanwhile, Blair's office said: "These issues are still being discussed. Our focus has been on Tony Blair's trips and getting the office up and running in September.

US puppet

Discussions may well be taking place within the Quartet, with a view to sharing the expense of Tony Blair and his offices, likely to be situated in London and Jerusalem.

But for some, the involvement of the state department puts Mr Blair too close to the US administration and confuses the role of the Quartet.

And that's hardly the image Tony Blair wants to project

Although there are some who argue that Tony Blair's close relationship with Bush could be beneficial to the Palestinians, there are others who believe that Tony Blair has seriously compromised himself.

They say: 'he who pays the piper, plays the tune'.

US denial

Jon Alterman, director of the Middle East programme at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington said: "Tony Blair is close to Washington, he has always argued that being close to Washington is the way to get some thing from Washington.

"The onus will be on him to deliver, to be able to move the Bush administration, move the Israelis, so that they can come together and make the deal with the Palestinians that he is trying to make."

In a statement on Friday, Karl Duckworth, a US state department spokesman, said: "Neither the US government nor the Quartet pay a salary to Quartet representative Tony Blair.

"We are working out the details of funding and support with our Quartet partners for Blair's staff as well as the costs associated with their mission."

As the controversy continues, and as if bridging the divide between the various actors on the Middle East stage was not hard enough, Tony Blair may now have to go out of his way just to prove that he does represent all the Quartet members, not just the US.

A long hot summer of negotiations beckons.









Source: Al Jazeera

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.