Israel Celebrates Independence Day; Terrorists Carry Out Rocket Attacks

Israel is busy celebrating its 64th Independence Day, while terrorists in Gaza and Sinai carried out terror attacks in the form of rocket fire against Israelis in Ashkelon and Eilat.

An air raid siren was sounded on Wednesday night and one rocket exploded in the region. There were no reports of injuries or damages.

Residents told Ynet that at around half past midnight, at the height of an Independence Day party, a siren sounded. Some of the residents said that they also heard an explosion.

The rocket was most likely fired from the Gaza Strip and exploded in an open area within the regional council.

The Eilat attack was carried out from the Sinai, which has been a wild west free-for-all since Hosni Mubarak was deposed last year.

Terrorists fired at least one rocket at Israel's southern resort city of Eilat Wednesday night. No injuries or damage were reported.

Reports of large explosions had security forces canvassing the city. The remnants of a grad rocket were eventually found on a residential construction site.

The defense establishment believes the fire emanated from Sinai, although no terror group has claimed the fire so far.

Egyptian security hasn't been able to keep the region secured allowing terrorists to repeatedly attack the gas pipeline leading to Israel as well as rocket attacks and infiltrations in and around Eilat.

Meanwhile, in a bit of good news from the Palestinians, Palestinian Leader Mahmoud Abbas is trying to convince Arab leaders that visits to the Dome of the Rock and al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem's Old City atop the Temple Mount is not a tacit recognition of Israel's territorial claims to the city.

Muslim faithful visit Mecca and Medina with the permission of Saudi Arabia. But seeking Israel's consent to get to al-Aksa is seen by some Muslims as acquiescence in Israeli occupation.

But this month, two Jordanian princes visited the mosque and adjacent Dome of the Rock, and Jordanian intelligence official Hussein al-Majali was seen at the sacred compound on Monday.

Their trips to Jerusalem must have been coordinated with Israel. Access to al-Aqka is guarded by Israel security forces, who protect all of Jerusalem's holy sites.

Abbas said there was a "long controversy with several prominent Arab and non-Arab figures, on visiting al-Aksa and Jerusalem". Some were saying "this visit is forbidden", he told an Arab youth delegation in Ramallah.

"There was an intense and important dispute between us and some of our brothers among Islamic scholars whom we respect," Abbas said. "But they mixed the religious with the secular, religion with politics, and partisanship with Islam. The result was that they've lost touch with what's right and just."

When prominent Egyptian cleric Mufti Ali Gomaa visited al-Aksa last week, there were calls for his resignation from the Islamist-dominated parliament in Cairo.

Fact is that before Israel captured East Jerusalem, including the Old City and the Temple Mount, there was a fraction of the religious freedoms now seen. Jews could not visit the Old City, let alone the Western Wall - Judaism's holiest spot on the planet. After 1967, Jews, Muslims, and Christians can peacefully visit the holy sites in Jerusalem under Israeli security.

It's disheartening to see Muslim religious leaders being castigated for visiting the holy sites precisely because some think this is tacit recognition of Israel and its claims on the city, but the fact is that Israel has guaranteed access to the holy sites where the Jordanians did not when they occupied the city from 1948 to 1967. Access is limited when the Palestinians use the holy sites as a focal point for rioting - and attacking Jews praying at the Western Wall.

Abbas needs the foreign leaders and dignitaries to come to help with tourism and building up the society, but he can't go so far as to delegitimize Israel. It's a balancing act but note also that these were Jordanian princes and intelligence officials who came - Jordan has a peace deal with Israel since 1994. That Jordanians are coming to visit the holy sites shouldn't even be notable, but it is a sign of just how cold the peace that Israel has already achieved with Jordan and Egypt.

The Personal Politics of the Middle East Conflict

As this past week's events at the United Nations have once again demonstrated, the Arab-Israeli conflict, and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in particular, are dominated by the personal politics that can overtake the facts on the ground.

This is an area near and dear to my heart. It's a subject on which I've spent the better part of the past two decades thinking and writing about (including my Master's Thesis).

Put simply, the actions of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas shows a level of cowardice to avoid making any concessions or dealing directly with Israel and that the peace process is all but dead as a result of Israel lacking a political leader among the Palestinians willing to put their life on the line to actually cut a deal establishing a 2-state solution.

For decades, Palestinians have bought into the notion that if they can wait out Israel's leadership, they'll not only get a state of their own, but that they will overwhelm Israel through demographics and geopolitical realities to eventually create a Palestinian state on what was once Israel.

Israel will not go quietly into the night, but it has made repeated efforts to make peace with its Arab neighbors. First, Egyptian leader Anwar Sadat made the historic trip to Jerusalem to make the case for peace. The resulting Camp David Accords solidified the notion of land for peace, and Israel withdrew from Sinai (a landmass more than twice the size of Israel proper and which had mineral and oil deposits and dozens of Israeli communities from 1967 onwards). Israel forcibly removed those Israeli settlements in making the case for peace.

Sadat's bravery in the face of overt hate towards all things Israel made him a target for assassination, and he died at the hands of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad (a forerunner for al Qaeda). Yet, for nearly 30 years, there has been a peace between the two countries.

Jordan's King Hussein likewise made peace with Israel, despite a significant Palestinian population within his own country that he had kept under tight reign after the PLO sought to overthrow his government in 1970 (the PLO is the umbrella organization that includes Fatah).

Jordan's King Hussein likewise made peace, and the Palestinian Authority was designated as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. Yasir Arafat, the head of Fatah, was given several opportunities to make a peace deal by and through the Oslo process, but never even gave the consideration of a counterproposal. He simply walked away from the process, opting instead to maintain civil administrative control over the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza all while pursuing the ultimate goal of a 1-state solution.

By the time Arafat died and was superseded by Abbas, the Palestinians have not budged from their ultimate goal of a 1-state solution.

Hamas now controls Gaza after Israel unilaterally disengaged from the region and left Palestinians in full and complete control over their future there. Far from creating an economic and social environment for improving Palestinian lives, Hamas has turned it in to a terror-haven for incessant attacks against Israel, requiring Israel to defend itself against suicide bombers and rocket and mortar attacks. \

Hamas refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist and none of the Palestinian leadership talks of recognizing Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state. That comes as the same Palestinian leadership speaks of making its own territories (at present and looking ahead to a future Palestinian state in the West Bank) - free from Jews. That's ethnic cleansing any way you cut it, and world diplomats consistently ignore that reality.

Abbas not only cannot rise above this, but he actively encourages undermining Israel's rights to exist, and his craven cowardice shows that Israel has no partner in peace.

That's despite an Israeli electorate that has consistently shown itself willing to cede land for peace despite the security risks it posed to Israel. The Israeli public has moved away from land for peace as the Gaza disengagement has shown that withdrawing from land will not mean peace - particularly with the Palestinians. It's led to a hardening of Israeli positions on security, but the Israelis have maintained that a 2-state solution is the only solution.

But for the failures of the Palestinian leadership to actually lead and show courage in adopting a 2-state solution, there would be peace.

That's entirely on the failure of the personal leadership of Palestinians like Mahmoud Abbas who cannot get past his regimes' decades-long goals. When you've spent decades building up towards a 1-state solution, accepting a 2-state solution is untenable; the population has been radicalized into believing that they can ultimately get what they want and will continue using all means at their disposal towards a Palestinian state.

Moreover, they can look forward to seeing Israel being forced into negotiating against itself - it keeps putting forth deal after deal to the Palestinians from which they get no counterproposal. If they were so keen on a state to call their own, they could have accepted either the 2000 or 2007 Israeli proposals establishing a Palestinian state. They have chosen not to do so and have made no such effort to create a functioning state in the territories in which they already have full dominion or civil administrative control. Instead, Abbas, the Palestinian Authority, and Hamas revel in the ability to attack Israel's sovereignty and take no responsibility for the situation of their own making.

Abbas Calls For Statehood At UN; Netenyahu Calls For Restart of Peace Process

Palestinian leaders continue talking right past Israel and towards the international stage, where regimes are more open to the Palestinian worldview rather than the hard task of making peace with Israel - and accepting a 2-state solution.

That's exactly what happened today, when Mahmoud Abbas stepped to the dais at the UN General Assembly to push for Palestinian statehood and membership at the UN, and he was followed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netenyahu who called for a resumption of final status negotiations towards a 2-state solution.

Palestinians, with Hamas in particular, don't want a 2-state solution and their behavior from the past few weeks puts the diplomatic efforts in a different light.

The Palestinians do not have anyone willing to pull a Sadat and make the trip to Jerusalem to pursue peace - a real peace (even if it turns out to be cold). The rhetoric remains the same from Palestinian leaders, whether it was Arafat, or Abbas, or the Hamas/PIJ thugs.

Israel, for its part has gone from Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres to Kadima's Ariel Sharon - a former Likudnik who split to pursue a more moderate course, and ended up going for the Gaza disengagement to not only limit Israel's contact with Palestinians that caused friction in Gaza, but was meant to improve Israel's security situation.

Not only did the opposite occur, with the rocket war ensuing shortly after Israel put in place a more secure barrier between Gaza and Israel, but Sharon was felled by a stroke. That left the incompetent Ehud Olmert trying to carry on with similar policies and his weaknesses were exposed during the rocket war and the Hizbullah war.

The disengagement and the rocket war/Hizbullah war left Israelis realizing that they do not have partners in peace, despite Oslo obligations with the Palestinian Authority.

Netenyahu is from that mold - he doesn't see the Palestinians as a partner in peace and isn't afraid to say that to the consternation of diplomats who would willingly paper over that inescapable fact in pursuit of a deal.

Israel has repeatedly shown a willingness to cede land for the sake of peace, and while it's worked with Egypt (a cold peace at that following Israel's withdrawal from Sinai and the forcible relocation of hundreds of Israeli communities that were on the Peninsula - a landmass twice the size of Israel proper at that), the Gaza disengagement showed the limits of land for peace where one party doesn't want peace.

The Palestinians have to be held responsible for their situation, and Abbas going to the UN for statehood would be rewarding them for their intractable position regarding Israel and further undermines Israel's sovereignty and right to exist.

Palestinians complain about Israel's security measures that thwart their economic opportunities, but ignore that but for Palestinian terror attacks, Israel would have had no need to operate those security checkpoints, build security fences, or use military action against terrorists who operate from the midst of civilian populations in places like Gaza.

Have Palestinians Recanted US Diplomatic Efforts On Statehood Declaration

After reports yesterday indicated that the Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas would not call for a declaration of statehood and that he would agree to negotiations to begin within a month about final statehood discussions with Israel, Palestinian officials have backtracked and appear to be on a collision course with US and Western diplomatic efforts.

The spin about President Obama's (and America's) waning influence globally is not a rebuke of Obama's multilateral approach, but rather a result of the President pursuing a multilateral approach at a time when American leadership is needed. Yet, there are limits to leadership - and the Arab-Israeli conflict is one such area.

The Arab-Israeli conflict is one in which Israel lacks a partner in peace among Palestinians. This has been repeatedly demonstrated in recent weeks, but diplomats are trying their hardest to ignore reality and substitute their own to get a deal done that would avert a Palestinian call for statehood at the UN and a deal done to establish a 2-state solution in Israel and the territories.

It completely ignores that the Palestinians repeatedly indicate that a 2-state solution is not their ultimate goal; it's to completely eliminate Israel and a 2-state solution is a means to that end.

The failure of a peace process isn't on the President as Palestinian Authority critics would have it, it's on the Palestinians themselves - but the President failed to understand that injecting himself into that process was setting himself up for failure and blame regardless of his intentions.

Overlooked Imagery Shaping Palestinian Demands

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is expected to press for a statehood bid at the United Nations this week. That's not unexpected, and it certainly wont be helpful to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

But one thing that has been overlooked is the overarching demands of Palestinians towards Israel. They do not want a 2-state solution, and they do not want to share Jerusalem, despite diplomats claiming otherwise.

Recall the setting in which Abbas made his statements at the Ramallah headquarters.

Here's that photo:

Here's the photo with a map showing that view:

View Larger Map

This photo shows a mural of a Palestinian flag flying over the Old City of Jerusalem - looking not towards the West Bank and a future Palestinian state there, but over Jerusalem and into Israel - areas beyond the Green Line demarcating the 1948 cease-fire line. The mural shows the view of Jerusalem looking to the West - and into Israel itself. The skyscrapers in the distance are in West Jerusalem.

It's akin to this photo of Jerusalem as seen from near the Mount of Olives.

It's an optic that has been overlooked, but which shows the Palestinians' ultimate agenda. It's not a 2-state solution. It's a state upon the ashes of Israel.

It's why the peace process has fallen apart, even between the so-called moderates in Fatah and Israeli diplomats. The goal of the Palestinian Authority, Fatah, the PLO, and Hamas are united in the destruction of Israel. The only difference is the time frame for such an outcome. Hamas seeks an immediate war and destruction of Israel, while Fatah is more content with a long range outlook.

It is quite telling that the PA efforts to get a statehood recognition at the United Nations hasn't exactly been met with open arms, particularly from terror groups and regimes that have always sought a Palestinian state - precisely because the effort doesn't go far enough.

Palestinians Continue Push Towards Declaring Statehood At United Nations

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is expected to declare Palestinian statehood at the United Nations this week, and it's yet another effort to undermine Israeli sovereignty in the process.

We'd just have to ignore all the pronouncements made by Palestinian leaders in the past several weeks to believe that this is about creating a Palestinian state.

Palestinian officials have stated that they want to create a Jew-free Palestine, something that no regime or country has sought to do since Nazi Germany. This is something that would otherwise be considered ethnic cleansing and subject to all manner of hue and outcry from human rights groups around the world, but they have largely remained silent.

Palestinian officials have stated that they do not want to permit Palestinians living outside the West Bank or Gaza the right of return to the Palestinian state and will not resettle refugees living in the dozens of refugee camps scattered throughout the Middle East; they would rather keep these people living in squalor rather than build a productive state.

Mr. Abbas’s plan, made public in a television address, follows months of failed American and European efforts to restart Palestinian negotiations with Israel. Some fear that Mr. Abbas’s move will raise expectations among his people, with nothing changing for them on the ground. Combined with alarmed reactions from Israeli settlers, violent showdowns could erupt.

But the Palestinians say that after decades of occupation and about 20 years of failed talks with an increasingly hawkish Israel, it is time for a new approach in which the borders of a Palestinian state are first recognized globally and then two states, Israel and Palestine, negotiate final details.

The decision to apply for membership through the Council signals a double defeat for the United States. Washington not only failed to dissuade the Palestinians from a unilateral bid for statehood, but also fell short of its goal of confining the application to the United Nations General Assembly, where Obama administration officials believe a vote in favor of statehood would be more symbolic and less divisive.

The Obama administration has vowed to use its veto at the Council to prevent full recognition of Palestine. But it is eager to avoid doing so because that action would likely leave the United States isolated on the issue, weakening its standing with Arab nations at a politically delicate moment.

“We need to have full membership at the U.N.,” Mr. Abbas said in the speech from his office in the West Bank city of Ramallah, which was broadcast live on Al Jazeera and other outlets. “We need a state, a seat at the United Nations.”

He added, “We are going to the Security Council,” as Palestinian dignitaries gave him rousing applause and a standing ovation. Mr. Abbas called it “our decision, which we have conveyed to everyone.”

The borders Mr. Abbas seeks are those of 1967, meaning East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza would be included. More than 500,000 Israelis have settled beyond those lines.

These statements show that Israel lacks a partner in a peace process, and it's little wonder then that Israel has grown more hawkish since the Oslo process began near 20 years ago. What began with so much promise has turned into a nightmare because the Palestinian leaders have been exposed for what they are - they seek a one-state solution that ultimately wants Israel's destruction and all their actions are in furtherance of that goal.

Israel withdrew from Gaza unilaterally, and Palestinians promptly launched a terror war that continues to this day with rockets, missiles, and mortars - precisely because the initial suicide bombing campaign was thwarted with the construction of a security fence. Palestinians complain that the fence thwarts economic activity, but for the terrorism, indoctrination and support for terror activities, Israel would not have had a need to build the fence, maintain a security cordon off Gaza's coast to prevent terrorists from being resupplied, and the economic conditions for Palestinians would be greatly improved.

For the most part, Hamas has been silent about Fatah's Abbas and Palestinian Authority statements, but it has announced that the UN bid is empty of content because it doesn't sufficiently deal with the Palestinian right of return to Israel. That's right folks, Hamas, which is part of the Palestinian government and which controls Gaza, doesn't think that Abbas and the PLO/Fatah are going far enough in their delegitimization efforts. They want the whole kit and kaboodle.

Hamas has never recognized Israel's right to exist, and it refuses to accept any deal that recognizes Israel alongside a Palestinian state.

So, with all that in mind, what is the United States to do with the ongoing situation. Pundits in the US think that Obama has to take a strong stand so as to retain the Jewish vote (and they point to the outcome of the NY-09 House race as proof). But no matter the outcome of the 2012 elections, the UN situation the Palestinian Authority is putting President Obama in the hot seat on how to deal with a major policy crisis. Wording a resolution that somehow raises the status of the Palestinian mission to the UN to something less than a state but more than an observer is a likely outcome.

The Palestinians have done nothing to warrant any kind of support here; they have engaged in terrorism for years on end and have not been a partner in peace. Israel's sovereignty and right to exist are inalienable rights, and yet the Palestinians are busy undermining Israel at every opportunity and with no regard for human rights - Palestinian or Israel.

A peace process requires two partners interested in a peaceful outcome, but the Palestinians refuse to accept any outcome where Israel exists.

Moreover, do the Palestinians really understand what having a state is all about. It's going to put terror attacks on par with acts of war and enables Israel to formally declare war against the Palestinians should they engage in the kinds of rocket battles that have been fought since 2007.


The world's leaders repeatedly chastise Israel when it defends itself from terrorists, but barely shrugs its shoulders when countries like Turkey invade Iraq and kill Kurdish groups that Turkey claims are terrorists or harboring terrorists.

The world's diplomats have no interest in the facts; they are far more interested in their legacy and appearance of signed documents. That's why the Palestinians continue to be advancing their agenda despite an ongoing disregard for the sovereignty of Israel.

This is the quandary facing Israel and the US.

Trying To Salvage Peace Process Means Heading Off Palestinian Calls For Statehood at UN

President Barack Obama and Israel are facing a September deadline. They have to convince the Palestinians that declaring statehood at the United Nations in September would be a train wreck of the worst kind. Yet, the Palestinians are increasingly likely to make that declaration and throw what's left of the "peace process" under the bus. That assessment comes from former Middle East envoy George Mitchell:

"The United Nations does not have the authority to recognize states," Mitchell said. Recognition of a state, especially if passed by an overwhelming margin at the UN, would be "very harmful for Israel, for the United States, and not good for the peace process."

The United States has consistently expressed the opinion that bringing the issue of a Palestinian state to the UN is harmful to the peace process with Israel. Despite this, several countries, have already granted recognition to an independent Palestinian state of their own accord.

In a recent meet with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, German Chancellor Angela Merkel warned against unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state, saying "We do not think that unilateral steps are helpful."

The way the Middle East conflict is going to end, Mitchell said is "by an agreement in which the United States plays an active and substantive role but an agreement that will be owned by, be the property of, and be the result of negotiation by Israelis and Palestinians."

The envoy also spoke about the recent reconciliation between Hamas and Fatah, saying "obviously we hope that Abbas and the Fatah Party will win the election, not Hamas."

Mitchell should know better than most that the Palestinians will more than likely vote along the same lines as the last elections held - Hamas wins Gaza and parts of the West Bank, while Fatah wins elsewhere. Hamas would likely repeat its totals, and again throw the "peace process" into turmoil since Hamas refuses to accept Israel's very existence, which is a necessary condition for any talks between Israel and the Palestinians to be worth more than the paper they're printed upon.

While it's worth noting that other countries are backing the US on seeing that the peace process continue via direct talks between Israel and the Palestinians, no one should hold any parties just yet - Hamas and Fatah continue to reject Israel's existence and any talk of a 2-state solution can't occur until such time when Hamas and Fatah - the elected representatives of the Palestinian people, accept Israel's right to exist.

It seems that every other day Hamas or Fatah spokeshacks declare their intentions to seek liberation of all Palestine and seek Israel's demise. They aren't hiding their intentions, but the diplomats continue working under the illusion that there is a framework for peace to be found.

Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert gets in on the act too, complaining that peace will not come from speeches and polls. That's rather rich considering that he botched not one but two wars with terror groups - the Hizbullah War and the Operation Cast Lead. Instead of fighting both to defeat Hizbullah and Hamas when they lobbed thousands of rockets, mortars, and missiles at Israel, he took half measures and limited Israel's military efforts to dislodge the terrorists from their refuges. Failing to disrupt the terror networks gave the terror groups renewed hope that they could defeat Israel in the long run.

It's worth noting that Prime Minister Netenyahu essentially agreed with President Obama's calls for peace and painful concessions, but only after the Palestinians accept Israel's right to exist. There are no such statements forthcoming from the Palestinians, who hold on to the belief that they can wait out Israel and plot Israel's demise all while forcing Israel into making still more concessions without any reciprocation.

Then, there's the issue of what exactly would happen if the Palestinians declared independence in September? Well, it would mean the end of the peace process as it currently exists, and would then position the territories of Gaza and West Bank into a different category under international law. Gaza would be sovereign territory - and if terrorists launched attacks from Gaza into Israel, it would be a clear act of war to which Israel could respond with force. The situation in the West Bank is more complicated considering that it is carved up into areas of responsibility - A, B, and C zones that give Palestinians and Israelis different levels of control and authority. Jerusalem has been annexed by Israel, but the Palestinians refuse to accept that - or Israel's borders, so it would set the stage for yet another war.

There's no word on whether Palestinian leaders would keep their fellow Palestinians bottled up in refugee camps as they've done throughout Gaza and the West Bank, but that's what they've done to date and there's no reason to believe that they'd end the refugee camps until Israel ceases to exist. That's the ultimate goal under Palestinian demands for a right of return.

Making a Joke of the "Peace Process"

The idiotic coverage of the President's speech earlier this week, and then blowing the context of the speech and the response by Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netenyahu have done nothing to resurrect a moribund and defunct "peace process". Fact is that Israel has not had a partner in peace in the Palestinians, even dating back to the signing of Oslo.

The Palestinian Authority has not been the partner in peace Israel was looking for and Palestinians still refuse to accept a key condition to any deal - accepting a 2-state solution with Israel as a Jewish state. Hamas refuses to accept Israel's very existence, and they're part and parcel of the Palestinian Authority.

That's why President Obama's latest statements show the farce that the entire process has become.

US President Barack Obama said Wednesday that a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was "more urgent than ever." He said that he was "confident" that there could be a Jewish state with "safe and secure" borders alongside a Palestinian state where Palestinians can "determine their fate and future."

Speaking alongside UK Prime Minister David Cameron at a press conference after the two privately met, Obama said that the Palestinians must understand that "they have obligations as well."

The US president said that the conflict rests on four central points: territorial boundaries, Israeli security, the Palestinian refugee issue, and Jerusalem. He said that the last two issues were "extraordinarily emotional" and would require "wrenching concessions."

He stressed that talks were necessary and that without negotiations, there would be no peace. He said that a UN resolution calling for an independent Palestinian state, if passed, would not create a viable Palestine and, in the end, would not "serve the Palestinians."

Obama acknowledged, however, that Hamas was not a partner for negotiations until it renounced violence and recognized Israel. He said Israelis have a right to be worried by the reconciliation between Hamas and Fatah, given that Hamas does not recognize Israel and has not renounced violence.

The US president also thanked Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu for expressing his position, and making recommendations on how to restart the peace process.

Both the UK prime minister and US president expressed unity in supporting Israeli security, as well as a sovereign Palestinian state, in a jointly penned op-ed on Tuesday.

He warns that Hamas is no partner in peace, and yet Israel has to work with the Palestinian Authority. What a way to mangle reality. We have to turn a blind eye to the fact that Hamas is involved in the PA and get Israel to the negotiating table with groups that refuse to recognize Israel's right to exist.

At the same time, the Palestinians keep making the same demands that they've been making for years - an unlimited right of return that would swamp Israel demographically with millions of Palestinian "refugees" most of whom have never actually lived in the area from which Israel was created or which it later captured from Jordan, Syria, or Egypt.

What exactly is so urgent about forcing a peace deal? It is to provide a legacy achievement for any President who works through a deal, but is it actually in the interests of Israel to cut a peace deal that undermines its security? With the Palestinians steadfastly incapable of adhering to the Oslo requirements - including accepting a 2-state solution, we now have Mahmoud Abbas claiming that he's going to the United Nations in the fall to declare Palestinian independence when Oslo requires a negotiated statehood.

Abbas claims Netenyahu's speech shows that Israel is the stumbling block to a deal, but the reality is that the Palestinians view Israel's existence as the stumbling block - not settlements, not right of return. Eliminate Israel and voila - peace.

You want a breakthrough on a peace deal - how about the Palestinians giving up the right of return. How about them actually eliminating all references to an eternal struggle to destroy Israel in their charters (Hamas charter, PLO charter, and incorporated into everyday affairs such as maps that show Israel as being wiped out).

That's the crux of the Palestinian position, and it is in its most extreme form with Hamas. But Fatah, the PLO, and other Palestinians adhere to that line.

Yet Another Reason Palestinian-Israeli Peace Talks Wont Succeed

I can sum up the reason that peace talks will not succeed between Israel and the Palestinians in one word. It is also the one word that diplomats, pundits, and the New York Times refuse to recognize trumps anything else, even as they tout the possibility of a breakthrough for a peace deal.

Hamas.

Palestinian Authority municipal elections scheduled for July 9, 2011, will not be held in Gaza until rival Palestinian factions reach a reconciliation agreement, Israel Radio quoted Hamas as saying Tuesday.

Hamas spokesman Fawazi Barhoum said that the elections, announced by Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad earlier in the day, have no real value because they were declared by a government that has lost its legitimacy.

According to the report, Barhoum also said that the elections were meant to cover up the WikiLeaks scandals and the "Palestine Papers" released by Al Jazeera that exposed the concessions PA President Mahmoud Abbas was willing to make in peace negotiations with Israel.

Earlier Tuesday, Palestinian Authority Spokesman Ghassan Khatib had said that even if Hamas blocks elections in Gaza, they will still be held only in the West Bank.

The last Palestinian elections were held in 2005, and Hamas won handily in Gaza, and won a majority of seats in the Palestinian Parliament. Fatah and Hamas engaged in a civil war, and Hamas threw Fatah out of Gaza. Fatah has no ability to impose its will on Hamas, and Fatah needs Israel to provide sufficient backing to keep Hamas from overwhelming Fatah's operations.

So, while Fatah's Mahmoud Abbas and other diplomats engage in talks with Israel, Hamas continues to reject any and all deals with Israel.

Hamas rejects Israel's existence.

Hamas sees any deal in the context of a hudna - a truce until such a time when Hamas can fight and defeat Israel at the time and place of its choosing. That's a lose-lose situation for Israel and the Palestinians themselves. So any deal that potentially enlarges Gaza in land-swaps would be giving territory to a regime that is antithetical to Israel's very existence and which has shown no interest in peaceful coexistence.

Moreover, Fatah needs a diplomatic breakthrough and success, but it can't impose any breakthrough because the population has been conditioned to accept nothing less than Israel's destruction. Even news reports that Abbas and his negotiators were making concessions brought out the condemnations from the usual suspects because they were seen as collaborating with Israel to give up Palestinian rights to Jerusalem and accepting a two-state solution.

Meanwhile, Gazan terrorists affiliated with Islamic Jihad continue their ongoing attacks against Israel, firing off four mortars today that slammed into the Negev. Thankfully, there were no injuries but the incident shows Hamas and the other terror groups in Gaza have no interest in peace and that they're going to take advantage of the situation to further their own ideological goals, which do not include coexistence with Israel.

Palestinian Authority Blocks West Bank Rally Supporting Tunisian Protests

You really can't make this stuff up. The Palestinian Authority, which in the West Bank is essentially Fatah, has no interest in ceding power to anyone, whether it is Hamas, or allowing demonstrations that might raise awareness about the corruption and failures of Palestinian leadership to accomplish anything since they were given civil administrative control over much of the West Bank.

The PA has banned demonstrations supporting the Tunisian overthrow of the odious Ben Ali government and demands for a house-cleaning of those allied with Ben Ali.

The Palestinian Authority refused to grant permission for a rally to celebrate the overthrow of Tunisia’s authoritarian president on Wednesday in Ramallah, the administrative capital of the West Bank.

The French newspaper Le Monde reported that a few dozen Palestinians who defied the ban arrived in the square in Ramallah where the rally was to take place only to find that they were outnumbered by members of the ruling Fatah party, who chose the same time and place to stage a demonstration in support of Palestinians held in Israeli jails.

According to the Palestinian Maan news agency, “It was not clear whose demonstration was planned first.”

A correspondent for Le Monde, Benjamin Barthe, observed that a police cordon around the square and “the presence among the demonstrators of many mukhabarat (secret police) officers left little doubt about the Palestinian Authority’s intention to prevent any expression of solidarity with the ‘jasmine revolution’ ” in Tunisia, which led the president, Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali, to flee into exile.

The reporter added that just as one young Palestinian began to wave a Tunisian flag, an officer grabbed it, on the grounds that it was disturbing the demonstration in honor of the prisoners. .

Omar Barghouti, a leading Palestinian human rights activist who was present at the thwarted celebration, told the French newspaper: “It’s unbelievable. … The police are in the process of confirming the charge that the Palestinian Authority is on the side of Ben Ali and that it also fears the people and the street.”

The Palestinian security forces have banned all displays of the Tunisian flag or anything that can reference the Jasmine uprising.

This goes back to what I've been saying about the lessons learned from the Tunisian uprising and overthrow of Ben Ali. Middle Eastern regimes and despots have learned that tolerance of demonstrators and protesters may lead to their overthrow so that regimes will now try to nip any protests or demonstrations in the bud before they can blossom into events that they can no longer control or shape.

The PA and Fatah has learned this lesson well, and the Palestinians are worse off for it. Fatah has repeatedly failed the Palestinian people - refusing deal after deal to have a 2-state solution, and isn't a partner in peace. Fatah's Abbas would much rather retain the status quo - where he can profit from the situation without having to actually do any work towards building a civil society that is engaged in constructive activities rather than peddling a nihilistic worldview that sees eliminating Israel as the cure-all for what ails the Palestinian people.

Hamas Up To Old Tricks and Israel Responds; With UPDATES

Hamas is once again up to its old tricks as 2010 comes to a close. The terror group has again been attempting attacks against Israel and Israel has wasted no time in responding with airstrikes. Hamas terrorists have fired rockets and mortars into Israel, hitting areas around Ashkelon and Eshkol. Leave it to the Palestinian Authority spokesmen to claim that Israel's response will be detrimental to the peace process:

Erekat stated that the Palestinian Authority fears Israel will launch a new large scale attack on Gaza, following escalated tensions in the area.

The PA negotiator added that military measures will not solve anything and will only make things worse.

On Tuesday, Israel pounded Hamas targets throughout the Gaza Strip in the most extensive aerial bombardment since Operation Cast Lead two years ago.

At least three Hamas operatives were killed during the bombing of arms storehouses and smuggling tunnels along the border with Egypt, and in the pummeling of tunnels being dug toward Israel.

The IAF strikes came in response to multiple attacks on southern Israel from Gaza.

A Kassam rocket was fired from the Gaza Strip into the Ashkelon area on Tuesday morning, landing in Kibbutz Zikim. The rocket exploded near a kindergarten, as dozens of parents were dropping off their children at school, injuring a 14-year old girl.

The incident followed a spate of attacks emanating from Gaza in the previous days, encompassing the launch of some three rockets and 18 mortars into the regions of Eshkol and Ashkelon. These attacks included the launch of six mortars on Sunday at IDF forces operating near the Kerem Shalom Crossing.

Just ignore the fact that but for the Hamas terror activities, Israel would not have engaged in bombing the Hamas arms caches (which are illegal under the Oslo Accords that call for the disarmament of militias operating in the territories) and various smuggling tunnels being dug across the former Philadelphi corridor.

At least this time the UN Middle East envoy, Robert Serry, says that Israel has a right to defend itself from such attacks. That's progress.

What would signify real progress is that the Palestinians take responsibility for their own culpability and actions that have led to a complete breakdown of whatever negotiations have been ongoing. Hamas refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist, and Fatah double deals - claiming that they want peace with Israel on the one hand, but then pushes revisionist histories that deny Israel's rights and historic Jewish claims to territories, including the Temple Mount. Fatah and Hamas remain at each other's throats - and Hamas is busy accusing Fatah of torturing its minions (which is rather rich considering that Hamas had no problem tossing Fatah thugs from rooftops when Hamas took over Gaza). Hamas and Fatah can't come to a power sharing agreement so how is it that Israel is supposed to make peace - who exactly are they supposed to make peace with?

The media doesn't get a pass on this either. The rocket and mortar attacks have been going on since this past weekend, and the latest terrorist deaths resulted from Israeli reprisals against those terrorists as they were preparing to fire on Israel. Israel's reprisals are the escalation - ignoring that the rockets fired by the terrorists were being aimed at civilian targets in Israel. Hamas escalates by initiating the attacks, but gets a pass by the media. In fact, those attacks included firing on an Israeli kindergarten class.

Then again, diplomats and former world leaders don't get it either. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair doesn't get it. While saying that he wants Israel to reassure Palestinians that statehood is possible, Blair, like so many other diplomats and pundits, ignores that the Palestinians could have had statehood at any point after 1993 if Palestinian leaders had deemed it in their interest to do so.

Yasir Arafat refused statehood. Indeed, Arafat said that the Palestinian leader who would cede any part of Jerusalem to Israel is not yet born.

Mahmoud Abbas has thus far refused. Palestinians can't even agree on a cohesive voice - Hamas controls Gaza and doesn't acknowledge Israel's right to exist. Fatah controls the West Bank and is willing to accept the status quo since their power structure remains intact and assures a steady flow of foreign aid.

Abbas and Arafat both refused to accept a 2-state solution because it would have meant repudiating decades of standing for nothing but the destruction of Israel as the only acceptable solution. That's still the position of Hamas, and until Hamas ends its control of Gaza, that will not change.

UPDATE:
Abbas is now warning that Israeli aggression threatens the "peace process." Where was Abbas when Hamas and the other terror groups were busy firing the kassams and mortars at Israel. That's the threat to the peace process, not Israel's inalienable right to defend itself from terrorists hell bent on inflicting casualties among Israelis (and anyone else who happens to get hit by the mortars and kassams, including fellow Palestinians, foreign workers, and Israelis of all ages).

Palestinian Authority Recommits To Denial of Jewish Ties To Temple Mount

Once again, the Palestinian Authority shows its true colors by claiming that its research concludes that Jews do not have connections to the Western Wall and the Temple Mount (HT: Mrs. Lawhawk).

Meanwhile, the PA officially endorsed the “study.”

The PA’s Ministry of Information posted the results on its official website, and these findings were first published in The Jerusalem Post on Tuesday.

The project was prepared by al-Mutawakel Taha, a senior official with the PA Ministry of Information. He is also a prominent Palestinian poet and writer.

Taha’s “study” concluded that the Western Wall was never a Jewish site, but had always belonged to Muslims. He wrote that the Western Wall, known to Muslims as Al-Buraq Wall, is actually the western wall of the Al-Aksa Mosque.

Gershon Baskin, the joint CEO of the Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information, sent a letter to the Palestinian leadership in the wake of the Post article, calling the findings “a serious mistake” and “a stain on the Palestinian Authority.”

“If the content of the article is correct, you should take immediate action against the author of the report in question (if he is in fact employed by the PA or by the PLO) because his baseless claims are a serious blow to the legitimacy of Palestinian claims and make a mockery of the idea of peace between the Palestinians and the Jews,” Baskin wrote. “This is a most serious mistake, similar to the one of the late President Arafat when he denied any Jewish connection to the Holy Temple Mount (Haram Al-Sharif) in Jerusalem.

“Any observer, even a non-professional archeologist, can discern that the stones used to construct the Western Wall (the Kotel) are from the era of Solomon’s Temple and the Temple rebuilt by King Herod which was hundreds of years before Islam appeared on the world stage.

“The falsification of history, as done in the report by the Palestinian poet Al- Mutawakel Taha, a senior official with the Ministry of Information, is a serious stain on the Palestinian Authority.”

It completely ignores more than 2,000 years of history, but it's completely typical for Mahmoud Abbas and the rest of the Palestinian Authority to engage in revisionist history. After all, Abbas is a Holocaust denier, and has no problem endorsing psuedo-intellectual endeavors if he thinks that it can give Palestinians an advantage in its ongoing war against Israel's existence.

Moreover, it shows that the Palestinians - via their representatives in the Palestinian Authority - have no intention of ever living peaceably alongside a Jewish state of Israel, or accepting a two-state solution. Further, the Palestinian Authority is actively ignoring its obligations under the Oslo Accords to cease and desist from inciting Palestinians to violence and indoctrinating yet another generation of Palestinians to refuse to recognize Israel's rights to exist and Jews' longstanding ties to the region.

It once again highlights the reason that peace talks have gone nowhere between Israelis and Palestinians - the Palestinians clearly have no interest in peace with Israel and are undertaking every opportunity to undermine Israel's rights and historical claims. The Palestinians are hoping to substitute their revisionist history for the facts as they have been for more than 2,000 years.

Carter Continues Trashing Israel, Successors On MidEast Peace Process

Former President Jimmy Carter can't seem to get enough of the spotlight, and still revels in the idea that his foreign policy statements have merit.

He couldn't be more hopelessly wrong.

Carter was a failed presidency who failed to deal with the key issues during his Administration: the Iranian hostage situation was a major debacle, but so too was the crippling economic situation (the misery index) and his inability to get his own political party to buy into his worldview.

The one success he can take away wasn't even really his: the Camp David Accords was the result of Egyptian leader Anwar Sadat going to Jerusalem with an interest in making peace; without which no deal would ever have been possible. Carter was along for the ride.

In his latest book, he think that Democrats Bill Clinton and Barack Obama didn't do enough to pressure Israel to stop building homes in the West Bank. Carter continues to believe in the nonsense that those houses are the impediment to peace.

Carter ignores the Palestinians' longstanding refusal to recognize Israel's right to exist. He ignores that when Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza, the Palestinian response was not to build an economy and utilize the infrastructure left behind as part of agricultural and business improvements, but rather started a rocket war, using those very greenhouses as terror training camps.

Carter ignores that Israel has made numerous attempts to make a peace deal with the Palestinians, but successive leaders of the Palestinian Authority (Yasir Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas) have not only refused those deals, but have failed to make counteroffers to the proposals.

The Palestinian leadership has not fulfilled its obligations under Oslo to stop inciting Palestinians to violence. Indeed, earlier this year, Israel dedicated a new synagogue in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem, and top Palestinian authorities claimed that this was the first step to destroying the Dome of the Rock and al Aqsa mosques on the Temple Mount.

The Palestinian leadership isn't even united in an interest of carrying on talks; Fatah is pursuing talks but doesn't speak for all Palestinians and isn't even legitimate in the eyes of Palestinians given that elections haven't been held and Hamas controls Gaza and has the majority in the Palestinian parliament.

It is necessary to be realistic about the Palestinian intentions, positions, and statements - not just in English, but in Arabic and how they are shaping Palestinian opinions back home and in their disapora. If they continue calling for an unequivocal right of return, that's a signal that the Palestinians aren't interested in peace - or recognizing Israel's right to exist.

If they continue calling for Jerusalem as their capital and produce maps that do not show a two-state solution, that's a sign that the Palestinians aren't interested in peace. If they continue to mount terror attacks at every opportunity, it's a sign that they have no interest in peace and are engaging in their usual triangle offense that allows the Palestinians (Hamas, Fatah, Islamic Jihad, etc.) to cast blame on others for attacks while continuing to make demands at the bargaining table.

Managing Expectations on Latest Peace Process Gambit

While Mahmoud Abbas and Benjamin Netanyahu were in Washington this past week and agreed to continue talks on a biweekly basis, the Israeli Prime Minister was attempting to manage expectations by downplaying chances for a successful outcome.

The prime minister continued, "This year, after many efforts, we jumpstarted the direct talks with the Palestinians. This is an important step in the attempt to advance a peace agreement between us and them. I say this is an attempt because there is no certainty for success. Indeed, there are a lot of obstacles. There is a lot of skepticism and a lot of reasons for skepticism. But we need to try and achieve peace."

"We are trying in good faith, but not in naiveté. We are insisting that any agreement between us and the Palestinians be based on the two principles of security and recognition of the State of Israel as the country of the Jewish people."

"Security," continued Netanyahu, "because no peace will last without strong organs of real security arrangements on the ground. On the ground and not on paper, not some vague international commitment, but real Israeli security arrangements on the ground."

Netanyahu noted that Israel being asked to recognize a Palestinian state, "and it is natural and fitting that we ask from the other side to recognize the Jewish state and the state of the people of Israel. The deep understanding and the belief in our right to live here in this country, our homeland, the country of our forefathers, this understanding is critical for dealing with the challenges of the coming year, of the challenges of the next decade and the future in general."

He has every reason to manage expectations and downplay its chances; his negotiating opponent has no intention of making concessions on any of the key issues - as usual.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas rejected Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's talk about an "historic compromise" and said there would be no compromises on core issues such as Jerusalem and borders.

Abbas also reiterated his rejection of Netanyahu's demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state. "We're not talking about a Jewish state and we won't talk about one," Abbas said in an interview with the semi-official Al-Quds newspaper. "For us, there is the state of Israel and we won't recognize Israel as a Jewish state."

Abbas said that in recent meetings with leaders of the Jewish community in the US, he made it clear that the Palestinians would not recognize Israel as a Jewish state. "I told them that this is their business and that they are free to call themselves whatever they want," Abbas said. "But [I told them] you can't expect us to accept this."

Abbas said that by raising the issue of Israel's right to be a Jewish state, Netanyahu was seeking to "strip" Israeli-Arabs of their rights and turn them into illegal citizens. He said that Netanyahu's goal was also to block any chance of Palestinian "refugees" from returning to their original homes inside Israel.

Abbas is more than willing to demand that Israelis dismantle all the Israeli communities in the West Bank outside the Green Line and resettle those Israelis within Israel's pre-1967 borders. That move would essentially make Palestinian territory Jew-free, all while Abbas refuses to recognize Israel's Jewish heritage, history, and necessity as a safe haven for Jews from all over the world (including the hundreds of thousands expelled from Arab states following Israel's independence in 1948.

At the same time, the Palestinian Authority sends mixed messages in public statements and tailors that message to the audience it seeks to sway. The key, as always, is what Abbas and the Palestinian Authority are promising to the Palestinian people - and on this front, it's business as usual. The PA is not about to give up its claims to Jerusalem and not recognizing Israel's right to exist. They are trying to have it both ways - but they have not done anything to prepare the Palestinian people for the eventuality of a two-state solution.

Newsweek's Idiotic Coverage Of Pending Mideast Talks; NYT Follows Suit

Newsweek has put together a handy dandy list of catchphrases that should be avoided as a means to conducting a successful round of talks.

When President Obama hosts the Israeli and Palestinian leaders in Washington this week for the start of direct talks, he should remember above all that the two sides have been at this for a very long time. Their peace process began when Obama was still in law school. At least a dozen summits have preceded this one with little or no tangible results. As such, Israelis and Palestinians are deeply skeptical about the prospects for an agreement—and worried that another failure will trigger fresh waves of violence. To acknowledge the long odds and to avoid sounding out of step, here are four lofty phrases uttered throughout the era of peacemaking that all sides should do their best to avoid.

The catchphrases are completely and utterly besides the point. Uttering "confidence building measures" does not damn the talks to failure.

Assuming that Mahmoud Abbas has authority to conduct talks in the name of Palestinians, let alone the ability to implement any deal beyond the West Bank, is what will damn these talks to failure.

The two sides have been at war since Israel's founding (that being Arabs versus the Israelis). The PLO (which includes Fatah as its largest faction) seeks Israel's destruction in its founding charter, and subsequent revisions have always referred back to the founding charter as its guiding principle.

Negotiations require having two sides that are willing to make concessions. Israel has always signaled its willingness to make concessions - on land, including around Jerusalem. The Palestinians have always sought more concessions, without making any of their own. Abbas and Fatah have refused to give up the right of return, and claim East Jerusalem (that includes the Old City of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount) as theirs. That's a nonstarter for any talks with Israel.

Abbas isn't willing or able to make those concessions because there's no way that the Palestinians would ever accept those terms because they've spent generations calling for nothing less than Israel's destruction, the right of return and Jerusalem as their capital.

Even more than Abbas' issues within his own organization is the fact that Fatah and the PA don't control Gaza. Hamas does - and they're not only not a party to these talks, but refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist. Fatah and Hamas have already gone toe to toe in a Palestinian civil war, with Fatah losing its presence in Gaza in the process (Hamas remains a threat in the West Bank though).

UPDATE:
The New York Times follows with its own inane analysis, claiming that peace rests on the shoulders of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Right. Just ignore that there's a guy across from him that has no power to actually fulfill any obligations that he might conceivably agree to - Mahmoud Abbas.

No, the pressure isn't on Netanyahu. It's on Abbas. Abbas is the key to any deal here.

Moreover, the analysis is based on the theory that "...the left wants to make peace but cannot, while the right doesn’t want to but, if forced to, can do it". Peace will come when Israel has a partner for peace. That happened when Sadat made his historic trip to Jerusalem and opened the door to a peace deal between Egypt and Israel. Similarly, King Hussein of Jordan entered a peace deal with Israel.

Despite the Oslo Accords (and Labor's efforts through Shimon Peres), the lack of a peace partner in the Palestinians is the main stumbling block.

Land concessions are now seen in a different light, particularly after the Gaza disengagement, which instead of creating conditions for peace, turned into a haven for Hamas, who proceeded to fire thousands of kassams at Israel and fostered a siege mentality among Israelis living within range of the rockets. That move was carried out by then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his Kadima party, which was comprised of former Labor and Likud members.

Now, Israelis have to see concrete actions towards peace and are not going to accept land concessions without something tangible in return.

What Kind Of Direct Talks Can These Be?

The Palestinian Authority doesn't speak for all of the Palestinians, and Hamas still seeks nothing less than Israel's destruction all while being in control of Gaza, but yet media reports will breathlessly state that talks between Israel and the Palestinians will resume in September. MSNBC is headlining that this is a breakthrough.

The United States, Russia, the European Union and the United Nations formally invited them to talks that are to begin Sept. 2 in Washington, NBC News reported.

The breakthrough marks a small but important step toward easing tensions in the Middle East. The goal is to agree on arrangements for two sovereign states, Israel and an independent Palestine.

"As we move forward, it is important that actions by all sides help to advance our effort, not hinder it," Clinton said. "There have been difficulties in the past; there will be difficulties ahead. Without a doubt, we will hit more obstacles. The enemies of peace will keep trying to defeat us and to derail these talks. But I ask the parties to persevere."

Clinton said the face-to-face talks are to begin Sept. 2. She said the hope is that a comprehensive peace agreement can be reached within one year.

I have no expectations for these talks. Israel cannot and will not make an agreement with the Palestinian Authority because Mahmoud Abbas cannot speak for all of the territories, and Hamas will not let Abbas do so for Gaza. What authority does Abbas have to speak for the Palestinians when the Palestinian Authority can't operate in Gaza? Hamas controls Gaza and but for Israel's assistance, Abbas and Fatah would have been tossed from the West Bank as well.

Abbas needs some kind of diplomatic breakthrough in order to maintain support among those living in the West Bank, but if that comes, it will be yet another sign that a 2-state solution is dead and that we're looking towards a 3-state solution, with Gaza and West Bank having separate futures.

This is yet another sign that the diplomats are living in their own fantasy world where they think that they can impose and substitute their own reality for the world around them. The reality is that Hamas and Fatah have no interest in ceding power to the other, and Hamas retains full control in Gaza despite the Israeli blockade and Fatah's own efforts to undermine Hamas. Hamas will not accept any deal that recognizes Israel's rights to any land - whether it is in the West Bank, Jerusalem, or Israel proper. It simply doesn't accept Israel's right to exist.

Palestinians Still Refuse Israel's Existence Or Two State Solution

Fatah's new charter is very much like the old charter; it still calls for Israel's destruction and refuses to accept a two-state solution.

The new charter excludes reference to Israel's destruction or Zionism. In fact the new document is devoid of any references at all to the Jewish state of Israel.  But (and you knew that there was a but), the new document explicitly references and subsumes the old charter.

Here's what the old charter had to say:

Article (7) The Zionist Movement is racial, colonial and aggressive in ideology, goals, organisation and method.

Article (8) The Israeli existence in Palestine is a Zionist invasion with a colonial expansive base, and it is a natural ally to colonialism and international imperialism.

Article (9) Liberating Palestine and protecting its holy places is an Arab, religious and human obligation.

Goals

Article (12) Complete liberation of Palestine, and eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence.

Article (13) Establishing an independent democratic state with complete sovereignty on all Palestinian lands, and Jerusalem is its capital city, and protecting the citizens' legal and equal rights without any racial or religious discrimination.

So, what does the shiny new document have to say? This:

This internal charter has been adopted within the framework of adherence to the provisions of the Basic Charter.

Throw in the fact that the new Fatah document still calls for revolution and what we have is something that the media might hail as a significant breakthrough, yet the actual facts on the ground reflect that Fatah has not renounced its ultimate desire to see Israel eliminated. It's simply hidden its ultimate agenda better.

Then, there's the matter of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and his decision not to hold new elections. He's basically taking on the role of the former despot Yasir Arafat, who refused to hold elections once he gained power.

In other words, the current political situation for the Palestinians is no different than the old situation. It's just more of the same.

PLO Extends Abbas' Reign Indefinitely

Elections? Who needs elections when you're a bunch of terrorists who have tried for decades to eliminate Israel and have instead created terror havens on territories from which Israel unilaterally withdrew from in 2005? The PLO has indefinitely extended Mahmoud Abbas' presidency.

The decision, which was expected, nonetheless gave an important vote of confidence to the embattled president. Abbas's inability to reconcile with Hamas or wrest concessions from Israel has hurt his popularity among many Palestinians.

Abbas has repeatedly threatened to step down in frustration over the impasse with Israel, while simultaneously hinting that he could be persuaded to remain in office. Wednesday's vote by the PLO's Central Council gives Abbas more time to work out his problems.

The vote endorsed Abbas's earlier decision to call off presidential and parliamentary elections, which had been set for January. Abbas says it is impossible to hold the election due to Hamas' refusal to allow voting in its Gaza Strip stronghold.

The extension, which also applies to parliament members, ensures that Abbas's government continues to function until elections can be held in "the entire homeland," said Central Council member Saleh Rafat. It did not set a date for a new vote.

Entire homeland? That's all of Israel and the territories, including the West Bank and Gaza. Fatah can't do anything in Gaza because the even more homicidal terror group Hamas controls matters there and the two terror groups cannot agree on a power-sharing arrangement.

Under those circumstances, Israel has no one to discuss a peace process with when Hamas doesn't recognize Israel's right to exist, and certainly doesn't recognize Israel's right to any of the territories between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. Fatah has at least paid lip service to negotiations, but they engage in more than a few preconditions of their own - using the bogus issue of settlement construction as a cudgel to force concessions from Israel, even though Israel has repeatedly shown itself capable of transferring homes to Palestinians (see Gaza's 2005 disengagement as proof).

Hamas calls Fatah a sell-out for even trying to discuss a peace deal that would ultimately create a two-state solution.

Abbas is playing games with all this, and the end result is that he gets to stay in power indefinitely, using a situation of the Palestinians' own making to retain power and do nothing to further the peace process, such as it is.

Israel Contemplates Settlement Freeze As Palestinians Ponder More Attacks

It should come as little surprise that Israel's efforts to show that it is interested in peace are met with indifference or outright terrorism. The Palestinians do not reciprocate with peaceful gestures, but instead show their dedication to the ultimate goal of a one-state solution without Israel's existence.

The Obama Administration has been pressuring Israel to freeze construction of housing for months, and the Netenyahu government finally relented.

Israel has announced a settlement freeze in East Jerusalem, despite the fact that housing never was an impediment to peace. Housing (which is derisively called settlements) was never an impediment to peace with the Egyptians, and Israel has repeatedly shown itself capable of uprooting Israelis to trade land for the possibility of peace.

Israel withdrew from Gaza, uprooting dozens of communities, and the Gazans returned the favor with Hamas coming to power and starting a rocket war, and Gazans continue firing rockets into Israel even after the end of Operation Cast Lead in January 2009. They continue smuggling weapons into Gaza in an effort to restock their weapons and equipment for the next phase of their conflict with Israel. Any peace deal has to reflect the fact that Fatah and Mahmoud Abbas aren't even in control of all territories involved; Hamas doesn't recognize Israel's right to exist.

The Palestinians don't even see the settlement freeze as legitimate. They think it's a deception. The only ones deceiving here are the Palestinians who don't recognize Israel's right to exist even within the 1948 border, let alone the border from 1967 and thereafter.

Hamas continues holding Gilad Shalit and the terms are as they have been since he was captured; the release of hundreds of Palestinian terrorists for Shalit. The terror group has frozen talks, and despite the reports claiming that a deal is imminent, don't hold your breath. The terrorists have strung the Shalit family along for more than three years, and aren't going to be satisfied until they get Israel to bow to their demands. If Israel does relent, more Israelis will be put at risk and Hamas gets to enhance its power by showing that they can get Israel to submit to Hamas demands.

Now comes word that a Palestinian attacked two Israelis as they were trying to reach the Jewish enclave in Hebron. Hebron has been a flashpoint of contention for 90 years - while Arabs outnumber Jews by nearly a 10-1 margin, the Arabs and now Palestinians want to completely eliminate the remnants of a once vibrant Jewish community there. They aren't merely satisfied with a Jewish minority; they want a total elimination and they want it as an internationally sanctioned ethnic cleansing. The same goes for Israel's withdrawals from the West Bank and mirrors what happened in Gaza in 2005. So, while Palestinians want a right to overwhelm Israeli with demographics via the right of return, they refuse to allow Israelis to live among the Palestinian controlled territories.

Fatah's Troubles Highlight Obvious Problems With "Peace Process"

You can't have a peace process unless you have two sides committed to having a lasting and durable peace agreement. That isn't the case with Israel's enemies. The Palestinians, whether they are Hamas or Fatah followers simply do not recognize Israel's right to exist.

One of Mahmoud Abbas's close associates publicly states what I've been saying all along; Fatah is not interested in peace with Israel.

Meanwhile, Azzam al-Ahmed, a prominent Fatah figure closely associated with Abbas, declared that Fatah had never recognized Israel's right to exist and would never do so.

"Fatah is a liberation movement," he said. "Fatah cares only about the interests of the Palestinian people."

Ahmed's remarks came in response to charges by Hamas and other Palestinian factions that Fatah had not gained anything after its leaders signed the Oslo Accords with Israel.

There are also concerns that various factions in Fatah are fighting for supremacy in the wake of Abbas' announcement that he would not run for the presidency again. While I believe that it was a ploy to get Israel and/or the US to make further concessions, Abbas would have to carry through with his threat to make it actually work, and hardliners are concerned that Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salaam Fayad may be attempting a takeover, a bloodless coup, while giving up the ghost of Israel's destruction. In fact, Fatah's thugs are busy engaging in threats and claiming Fayad is in the employ of the US or Israelis to discourage further support for even his most modest of proposals, which have gone no where because Fatah is no more interested in a peaceful resolution of issues with a 2-state solution than Hamas is. They've lived with the indoctrination for generations, and they will not give up that ghost anytime soon.

Even if Fayad's position is to be believed as genuine, he would face immense pressure from his fellow Fatah members, let alone the extremists to embark in a two-state solution.