Netanyahu's government had announced a ten-month freeze on the construction of settlements, expiring at the end of this month. This is while President Mahmoud Abbas had announced that he would not continue the negotiations if settlement is resumed. As we approach the zero hour, the question is whether President Obama will be able to conjure something, such as pulling a rabbit out of a hat, and find an exit that suits both the Israelis and the Palestinians. The negotiations began on the second of this month in Washington, and resumed in Sharm el-Sheikh and then in Jerusalem. There is a scheduled meeting before the end of this month between chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat, and chief Israeli negotiator Yitzhak Molcho. All this did not prevent Netanyahu from saying at a meeting of the Israeli cabinet this week that he did not pledge to extend the settlement freeze, or the Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman from following suit and clarifying that the Prime Minister is "clear" in his stances, but that there are people who do not want to hear. The brothel bouncer from Moldova came up with a solution to the conflict involving the rejection of the principle of “land for peace” and the swap of lands and people. He wants to transfer the Palestinians from their lands in Palestine which became known as Israel, into the territories controlled by the Palestinian National Authority. He specifically mentioned the Member of Knesset Haneen Zoabi and Sheikh Raed Salah, as he believes that anyone who declares their rejection of Zionism and that they are Palestinian must be deported from Israel. But the same logic of swapping requires Lieberman to leave to Moldova; there must still be some brothels left there where he can work. It also requires that the war criminals and thieves who came to Palestine leave. Palestine was and still is the land from the sea to the river, and the acceptance of the Palestinians of a state on 22 percent of their country does not alter the facts of history and geography, and merely reflects the Palestinians' military defeat, and that of the Arabs and Muslims, against the Khazari Jews. Furthermore, there are Jews in Israel and around the world who seek peace and publicly oppose Zionism, so does Lieberman want to transfer them to Moldova as well? Given all the above, logic dictates that we say no peace is possible with a fascist government that murders, destroys and continues to steal since 1948. This government is so arrogant, or indecent, that after Russia signed an arms deal with Syria to supply it with P-800 cruise missiles, Netanyahu said that this deal is very problematic and troubling, and that Israel is preparing a military response to it, while Lieberman claimed that the deal hampers the efforts to bring peace to the Middle East. Netanyahu and Lieberman and their ilk among the extremist neo-Nazis are the ones hampering the efforts to bring peace to the Middle East. However, I want the reader to think the meaning of their statements over. They are now threatening Russia (and Barack Obama through the Congress and the lobby), and saying that Israel alone must have military capabilities, lest we forget its nuclear arsenal and the war on Iran which does not possess a nuclear bomb, all in order to impose the Israeli terms on the Palestinians, dominate the region by force of arms, and threaten the rest of the world after the Middle East. In such circumstances, negotiations are futile, or are negotiations for the sake of negotiations, even with Netanyahu misleadingly promoting their success and pledging a referendum on these talks. The Obama administration is seeking negotiations because it needs an achievement on the eve of the midterm elections. This is while Israel seeks them as a way to counter the worldwide efforts to delegitimize Israel because of its ongoing crimes against the Palestinians, and President Mahmoud Abbas seeks them because the option of armed resistance does not exist, and so as not to be accused of missing the opportunity for an independent state that was present on the negotiation table. President Mubarak proposed a three-month extension of the settlement freeze so negotiations are not halted, and was supported in this bid by the Israeli Minister for Minorities Affairs Avishay Braverman, who is from Labor. However, there were those who proposed another exit: There was talk in Washington and Tel Aviv about swapping the spy Jonathan Pollard, who is imprisoned in the United States, with an extension of the settlement freeze. This suggestion costs the Americans nothing except to lose some face, something that is not quite existent at any rate. Pollard, who is American, betrayed “his country” and gave Israel scores of official classified documents, and Netanyahu can justify the extension of the settlement freeze, otherwise opposed by the right-wing political factions that make up his government, with the release of Pollard. But the most important point here is that the focus of the negotiations is on the occupation, not the settlement which the Netanyahu government exploits to delay the solution. Let's assume for a moment that the Pollard solution or something else did indeed create the exit that everyone wants; I ask, what will happen after that? I say nothing, nothing at all. There can be no peace with this Israeli government, but only more American helplessness, Israeli hypocrisy (settlement never truly stopped during the declared period), and Palestinian and Arab impotence. [email protected]
