The so-called “prisoner’s plan” that Mahmoud Abbas has been touting as the latest and greatest scheme is being falsely declared a two-state solution, or implicit recognition of Israel, when it is neither. It is simply the reiteration of the same things we’ve been hearing for decades: “right of return,” UN resolutions, seperation wall, yadda yadda yadda. And Hamas has rejected it, in any case. But what’s so special about this eighteen-point plan?
Let’s look at the first point:
1. The Palestinian people at home and in exile seek to liberate their land and realize their right of freedom, return and independence, and their right to self-determination, including their right to establish an independent state with Jerusalem as its capital on all the land occupied in 1967, guaranteeing the right of return for the refugees, liberating all the prisoners and detainees, drawing upon our people’s historic right in the land of our ancestors, the U.N. charter, international law, and what international legitimacy guarantees.
Same things we’ve been hearing forever. The second point reaffirms the meeting in Cairo in March 2005, wherein the palestinians all agreed to work together for the common cause (the destruction of Israel, unsaid, of course). In point 3, we return to the meat of the matter:
3. The Palestinian people’s right to resistance and upholding the choice of resistance by all means, and concentrating the resistance in territories occupied in 1967, alongside political action and negotiations and diplomatic work, and continuing popular resistance against the occupation in all its forms, places and policies, and giving importance to expanding the participation of all sectors, fronts, groups and public in this popular resistance.
In other words: They’re not going stop the killing. In fact, this is a call to expand terrorist attacks. This is a typical palestinian sleight-of-hand trick. They claim the right to “resistance” (read: Terrorism) in “territories occupied since 1967,” and then when something slips over the border, they say that it’s an attack made by terrorists out of their control, or by a rogue faction, or in retaliation for some IDF operation. Hamas’ fingerprints have now been found on kassam rocket attacks from Gaza. Terrorists lie. They always lie. They’ve been lying since the world decided to pretend that Yasser Arafat wasn’t a murdering, Jew-killing, Jew-hating bastard whose only aim was to destroy Israel. They have no interest in peace with Israel, nor in the two-state solution. They regard all of Israel as occupied territory, and dream of a Jew-free state called “Palestine.”
This is what the prisoner’s document is about: It’s spelled out in plain (translated) English.
4. Devising a Palestinian plan for comprehensive political action, unifying the Palestinian political discourse based on the Palestinian national consensus program, Arab legitimacy, international resolutions fair to our people, which are represented by the PLO, the PA _ its chief and government, national and Islamic factions, civil society groups, public figures _ to be able to reactivate and develop and mobilize Arab, Islamic, and international political, financial, economic and humanitarian assistance to our people and national authority and in support of our people’s right to self-determination, freedom, return, independence, and confronting the Israeli plan to impose the Israeli solution on our people, and stand up to the unjust siege on us.
The prisoners are trying to prevent a civil war. They’re trying to stop Hamas and Fateh from clashing. They’re trying to unify the PNA so that it can act against Israel. It’s merely the next step in the war.
Lucky for Israel, they’ll never get the factions to agree. Hamas has already rejected the plan, refusing to bend even a millimeter from their goal of destroying the Jewish state (check their charter again if you’ve forgotten).
So ultimately, what is the prisoner’s plan? It is a plan that will coordinate the war against Israel. It is a plan that will lessen intrafactional fighting, and hopefully prevent a palestinian civil war. It is a plan to bring all the palestinians together for their one aim: The “resistance” against “occupation.”
Hamas cannot accept this plan, because it uses the language “1967 borders.” Hamas will not accept this plan because their intent is to destroy Israel and set up an Islamic state where Israel used to be, not live side by side in peace. The ultimatum was a foolish move by a man who hasn’t got the power to make one. It was stillborn the moment the ink was dry on it.
But it’s a great PR piece. Editors the world over are calling it a “peace plan” and pretending that it would be the next major step towards peace with Israel. It isn’t, and it won’t. (Although such shoddy editorial and reporting practices make me think even less of world media, a feat I thought was impossible.)
The plan is simply another smokescreen that Mahmoud Abbas uses to pretend that he’s a moderate — and the world uses to pretend that the palestinians want peace.
More lies. More distractions. But at least they can’t blame Israel when Hamas rejects the “peace” plan.
Actually, they demand all land “occupied in 1967”. This does not mean land that Israel occupied from 1948 to 1967 will be allowewd to be Israeli. After all, that land was occupied in 1967 as well. What they mean is that any land that was in the borders of Israel in 1967 will be demanded by the Arabs. Any land not occupied by Israel in 1967 (such as the east bank of the Jordan) is still not occupied by Israel so they will leave it alone.
Perhaps, the land west of Tel Aviv and Haifa (the ocean bottom that is) will be allowed to be Israeli. However, the land uncovered by the tide will be considered “disputed territory”.
Sabba Hillel
“But at least they can’t blame Israel when Hamas rejects the “peace†plan”
Sure they will. It’s not like they ever tried to make sense.
In many ways, it’s nothing more than a fresh declaration of war. I certainly don’t see how it contirbutes anything positive to the conflict, even for the Palestinian side. If it accomplishes anything, it simply exaserbates other problems. This is a great post, Meryl, and I’m going to try to write something longer on this on my site tomorrow.
When terrorists propose a two-state solution, what they really mean is a one-state, zero-Jew solution.