In the NYT Isabel Kershner reports in Abbas Urges ‘New Start’ at Fatah Conference :
The day was filled with contradictory messages reflecting the disarray in Fatah. A huge poster on the wall bore the legend “Resistance is the legitimate right of our people” alongside a black-and-white photograph from the 1960s of a Palestinian youth with a gun.
Mr. Abbas reminisced about the early years of armed struggle against Israel. But he also stressed the need for new, more appropriate forms of resistance while pursuing negotiations for an independent Palestinian state. He blamed a lack of discipline in part for Fatah’s failures.
A stickler for law and order, Mr. Abbas also proudly noted that Palestinians now wear their seat belts, or face being fined.
I’m not sure what’s contradictory about calls for resistance if Fatah’s platform calls for “restrained violence.” Or does Kershner mean that the call for fastening seat belts was inconsistent with the calls for resistance.
Linda Gradstein reports in the Washington Post
Israeli officials, meanwhile, say they would like to strengthen Fatah as a counterweight to Hamas, which denies Israel’s right to exist.
Both articles play up the “moderation” of Fatah, which Barry Rubin has shown, stretches the definition of the word. Then again there’s a history of re-defining “moderate” when describing Fatah. (Though I give Kershner credit for at least mentioning the presence of the word “resistance.”)
Gradstein also writes:
The Fatah conference opened amid signs that the Obama administration is planning a new push for the resumption of peace talks. A spokesman for Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Tuesday that Barak told a parliamentary committee that the United States will present a new peace plan within weeks and that, in his view, “Israel should accept it.”
Israeli news media say the plan is based on a 2002 Saudi proposal calling for normalized ties between Israel and more than 50 Arab states in exchange for an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem.
How will the supposed “moderation” of Fatah facilitate the Obama administration’s diplomatic efforts when Fatah is teaching its next generation that all of Israel is “occupied territory,” when its leaders are encouraging the Arab states not to engage with Israel and even “moderate” Arab states don’t seem to need that exhortation as the daylight the Obama administration has shown them has encouraged them to avoid normalization.
Or to put it succinctly: how can an American diplomatic effort help when even Fatah doesn’t make peace its priority? (And why would any Israeli politician encourage Israel to join in the American effort unlikely to accomplish anything?)
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.
