Footer Pages

Stealing Palestine

Creeping annexation, ethnic cleansing and ‘the politics of fragmentation’ inflicted by criminals who strut the world stage and thumb their noses at international law

As the international conspiracy to rob Palestinians of their freedom and homeland is exposed a little more each day, observers and activists still puzzle over the duplicity of the United Nations in the decades-long illegal occupation and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian Territories, not to mention the true intent of Palestinian leaders. So when Richard Falk, professor of international law at Princeton and UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in Occupied Palestine, visited Norwich recently, I took the opportunity to put some questions to him.

SL – Can we start with the so-called peace process, please? Does the resignation of the Palestinian negotiation team, and the reasons given, effectively end the already discredited ‘peace talks’? Should the Palestinians walk away or carry on playing a pointless game for another 6 months?

Richard Falk – It is difficult to know how to assess the current suspension of peace talks. The Palestinian Authority seems always ready to bend to pressure, although with some outer limits. In this respect, the future of this phase of ‘peace talks’ will be determined not in Ramallah, but in Washington and Tel Aviv. It should be evident 20 years after Oslo that the peace talks serve Israel’s interest in ‘creeping annexation’ of the West Bank and ethnic cleansing in East Jerusalem, while diminishing Palestinian prospects, and even harming the Palestinian image by disinformation that blames the Palestinian side for the breakdown of the process when and however it occurs. It would be a welcome sign of PA independence if they come forth and denounce this peace process for what it is.

The sad reality is that this is almost certain not to happen, and more likely than not the period of negotiations will be extended beyond the nine months set aside, on the entirely false claim that the parties are on the verge of resolving all their differences, and with a little patience, the prospects for a deal are quite bright.

SL – The negotiators said they were resigning because of the ‘unprecedented escalation’ of settlement building and because the Israeli government wasn’t serious about a two-state solution and had failed to fulfill commitments given before the present talks were resumed. I now read that Erekat has already been back to Washington for more talks with Tzipi Livni (Israel’s lead negotiator), Kerry and US envoy Indyk. Far from denouncing the process they are once again endorsing it, which makes your point.

In any case, how acceptable is it for a weak, demoralised and captive people like the Palestinians to be forced to the negotiation table with their brutal occupier under the auspices of a US administration seen by many people as too dishonest to play the part of peace broker?

Richard Falk – Even if the United States was acting in good faith, for which there is no evidence, its dual role as Israel’s unconditional ally and as intermediary would subvert the credibility of a negotiating process. In fact, the US Government signals its partisanship by White House appointments of individuals overtly associated with the AIPAC lobbying group as Special Envoys to oversee the negotiations such as Dennis Ross and Martin Indyk. It is hard to imagine the fury in the West that would exist if the conditions were reversed, and the UN proposed a one-sided ‘peace process’ biased in favour of the Palestinians. The unsatisfactory nature of the current framework of negotiations is further flawed by weighting the process in favour of Israel, which enjoys a position of hard power dominance.

“Palestinians’ main grievances are all reinforced by an objective interpretation of international law”

SL – There can be no peace without justice, so is it right for final status ‘negotiations’ to be held before competing claims are tested in the courts and the many outstanding rulings under international law and UN resolutions are implemented? In any case, shouldn’t a neutral UN peace commission be supervising the final settlement of this long struggle, rather than the US or the Quartet?

Richard Falk – Yes, if the priority were to attain a just and sustainable peace, a framework would be developed that had two characteristics: neutral as between the two sides and sensitive to the relevance of rights under international law. Such sensitivity would favour the Palestinians as their main grievances are all reinforced by an objective interpretation of international law, including in relation to settlements, Jerusalem, refugees, borders, water.

SL – How much legitimacy does President Abbas enjoy, having overstayed his term of office?

Richard Falk – This question of political legitimacy of President Abbas turns on the subjective mood of the Palestinian people. Because the PA is a political entity so vulnerable to pressures and manipulation, the status of its presiding leader seems to be widely seen as a secondary matter of limited significance. When President Abbas has articulated the case for Palestinian statehood during the last three years at the United Nations he gained considerable personal respect among most governments and for many Palestinians. He seems a leader caught between the realities of his compromised position and the occasional opportunities to express the national ambitions and support the rights of the Palestinian people. The division with Hamas, and the failure to find a formula to restore Palestinian unity in relation to the West is a further source of weakness for PA claims to represent the Palestinian people as a whole. The failure to hold scheduled elections highlights the insufficiency of PA and Palestinian leadership.

SL – Do you believe a two-state solution is still feasible?

Richard Falk – No. I think Oslo has been dead for some years, primarily due to Israeli policies designed to encroach upon the remnant of Palestinian territorial and symbolic rights, especially by the continuously expanding settlement archipelago, the unlawful separation wall built on occupied territory, and the demographic manipulations in East Jerusalem. The pretence that Oslo plus the Roadmap point the only way to peace serves American and Israeli purposes in quieting growing complaints about the persistence of the conflict. It represents a diplomatic attempt to deflect criticism, and to divert attention from Palestinian grievances and a growing global solidarity movement.

SL – The 1947 UN Partition was unworkable as well as immoral. Shouldn’t the whole territory (of historic Palestine) be returned to the melting pot and shared out more sensibly? Shouldn’t Jerusalem and Bethlehem become an international city, or ‘corpus separatum’, as the UN originally intended?

Richard Falk – For me the fundamental flaw with the partition proposals contained in GA Resolution 181 was the failure to consult the people resident in Palestine at the time. A secondary flaw was the unfairness of awarding 55% of the territory to the Jewish presence as represented by the Zionist movement, which in 1947 accounted for only one-third of the population, owning around 6% of the land *. This idea of determining the future of Palestine by outsiders, even if well intentioned, which seems not to have ever been the case, is incompatible with the historical trend toward resolving the future of peoples by way of the dynamics of self-determination. In Palestine’s case, at least from the issuance of the Balfour Declaration onward, this effort to control the future of Palestine has been justly condemned as the last major example of ‘settler colonialism.’ It is a particularly acute example as the settlers have no mother country to which to return, and take a poker player’s high risk posture of ‘all in.’

“There is no authoritative explanation of ICC passivity in face of the Israeli criminal violation of fundamental Palestinian rights.”

SL – Turning to the role of the International Criminal Court, this is an organ of the UN. So why doesn’t the ICC initiate its own prosecution of Israeli crimes based on UN reports and the mountain of evidence available to it, especially in view of Palestine’s upgraded status?

Richard Falk – There is no authoritative explanation of ICC passivity in face of the Israeli criminal violation of fundamental Palestinian rights. As a matter of speculation it is plausible to assume an absence of political will on the part of the prosecutor’s office to initiate an investigation that would be deeply opposed by Israel and the United States. The ICC has been recently criticized for its Western bias, and its failure for instance to consider whether the United Kingdom and the United States violated the Rome Statute’s enumeration of international crimes by initiating and conducting the Iraq War. The African Union has complained about the seeming focus on the criminality of African leaders, and the bypassing of grievances directed at Western behaviour.

SL - We hear you and others calling for intervention to prevent humanitarian catastrophes, e.g. the Gaza water crisis. Who exactly are you calling on? What is the chain of responsibility for intervening.

Richard Falk – There has been evolving within the UN and in international society more generally a sense that there is a ‘responsibility to protect’ peoples subject to severe threats of humanitarian catastrophes or natural disasters. Such sentiments are part of a process I have described as ‘moral globalization.’

In fact, R2P diplomacy has been discredited by being used as a geopolitical instrument, most dramatically as the normative foundation for the UN endorsement of the NATO 2011 military intervention in Libya. With respect to Libya the justification was protection against a feared massacre of civilians in the city of Benghazi, but the actual military operation from its outset seemed designed to achieve regime change in Tripoli. When it comes to Gaza where the present crisis has passed into a zone of desperation, the UN and world community are silent as if stone deaf to this deepening human crisis of survival.

“So long as it is useful for Israel and Washington to treat Hamas as ‘a terrorist organization’ the UN will be limited in its role to being a provider of a subsistence existence for the Gazan people…”

SL – We have just seen the UN intervening to bring fuel into Gaza as it teetered on the brink of a full-blown public health crisis. There are many such emergencies thanks to Israel’s continuing blockade. Why doesn’t the UN take over the supply of fuel full-time? And indeed the supply of medicines, drugs, medical equipment and spares?

Richard Falk – The tragic situation in Gaza cannot be understood without taking account of the political context, above all the split between Fatah and Hamas, and the Israeli posture toward Gaza after its ‘disengagement’ in 2005 and the imposition of a punitive blockade in mid-2007 after Hamas took over the governance of Gaza. The UN has no capability to override geopolitical priorities, and so long as it is useful for Israel and Washington to treat Hamas as ‘a terrorist organization’ the UN will be limited in its role to being a provider of a subsistence existence for the Gazan people, long victims of unlawful Israel policies of ‘collective punishment’ unconditional prohibited by Article 33 of the 4th Geneva Convention.

After the Egyptian coup of July 3rd of this year, the subsistence regime evolved in Gaza is itself in jeopardy. The tunnel network has been substantially destroyed by Egyptian military action and the Rafah crossing from Gaza to Egypt has been mainly closed, isolating the people, and creating emergency conditions due to fuel shortages that have made electricity only available in very limited amounts.

The results are horrifying: sewage in the streets, insufficient power to run machines needed to keep the terminally ill alive, fuel shortages that virtually preclude economic activity, and closed borders that seal the fate of 1.6 million Gazans. Long before this dramatic further deterioration of life circumstances, observers were calling Gaza the largest open air prison in the world.

“The wrongful appropriation by Israel of Palestine’s water, land, and energy resources has been a massive crime against the Palestinian people…”

SL – What is the UN doing to protect Palestine’ s precious aquifers and offshore gas field from being plundered by the Israelis?

Richard Falk – Again, the UN has no independent capability, or ever will, to challenge Israel or to protect Palestinian rights. It is a case of geopolitical manipulation and Palestinian victimization. The wrongful appropriation by Israel of Palestine’s water, land, and energy resources has been a massive crime against the Palestinian people that has been continuous with the occupation that commenced in 1967.

“Israeli military dominance, as politically reinforced by American geopolitical muscle, overrides all of these Palestinian claims of right…. Such injustice and suffering can only be challenged by Palestinian resistance and international solidarity.”

SL – Why is the requirement, often repeated, to allow Palestinians free and unfettered movement in and out of Gaza not implemented? Gaza and the West Bank are supposed to be a contiguous territory but, for example, Palestinian students in Gaza are prevented from attending their excellent universities in the West Bank. And why are Gazan fishermen still restricted to a mere fraction of their territorial waters, despite agreements to the contrary, and regularly fired on? Why is Israel not prosecuted for acts of piracy in international waters against humanitarian traffic to Gaza?

Richard Falk – As earlier, the hard power realities of Israeli military dominance, as politically reinforced by American geopolitical muscle, overrides all of these Palestinian claims of right. In this respect, such injustice and suffering can only be challenged by Palestinian resistance and international solidarity. The specific abuses can and should be delimited to raise public awareness and contribute to the mobilization of support for the Palestinian struggle, but it is pointless to expect the UN to do more than its capabilities allow. The whole structure of the Organization, combined with the method of funding, gives geopolitical pressures great leverage in relation to specific situations. The veto power given to the permanent members of the Security Council is a major expression of this weakness that was built into the constitutional structure of the UN from the moment of its establishment.

“Nuremberg Promise has not been kept”

SL – People reading what you say here will be alarmed that US geopolitical power and Israeli military might can so easily override international and humanitarian law. After Nuremburg our legal institutions were strong enough to bring Nazi era criminals to book, but present-day war criminals walk free and thumb their noses. What hope is there for mankind and our brave new world if this is allowed to continue?

Richard Falk – The Nuremberg experience was based on ‘victors’ justice,’ holding the defeated leaders after World War II criminally accountable, while exempting the crimes of the victors from accountability. There was a promise made at Nuremberg that in the future the rules by which the Germans were judged would be applicable to all who committed state crimes in the future. This Nuremberg Promise has not been kept. The political and military leaders of the main states enjoy impunity while the leaders of defeated countries (e.g. Saddam Hussein, Slobodan Milosevic) or sub-Saharan African countries are prosecuted by international tribunals. Double standards prevail, and it is questionable whether an international criminal law that punishes the weak and exempts the strong is to be treated as legitimate even if those accused receive a fair trial and are convicted and punished only if they were guilty of grave misconduct.

The bottom line is that we live in a world in which the primacy of hard power prevails in the relationship among states. Geopolitical leverage enables Israel to defy the most basic principles of international law, and yet their leaders are not held accountable. There are only two paths available that challenge this result. National courts can be empowered by what is called ‘universal jurisdiction’ to investigate, indict, prosecute, convict, and punish anyone accused of state crime that can be personally delivered to the relevant court. In 1998 the Chilean dictator was detained in London after the Spanish Government requested that Pinochet be extradited. After lengthy litigation is was found that Pinochet could be extradited for torture committed during part of his reign, but in the end he was sent back to Chile because of health reasons, and never faced trial in Spain. Yet such a possibility exists in relation to Israeli political and military leaders, and seems to have discouraged their travel to countries whose criminal law contains the authority to invoke universal jurisdiction.

The other possibility is by convening a peoples tribunal of the sort constituted in the past by the Bertrand Russell Foundation in Brussels and the Lelio Basso Foundation in Rome. The Russell Foundation sponsored four sessions devoted to various allegations of criminality attributed to the government of Israel. It produced convincing documentation of the charges, and issued judgements that called for civil society initiatives. Such a tribunal, although acting on evidence and in accord with the relevant provisions of international criminal law, possesses no formal authority and lacks implementing capabilities. Its role is limited to documenting the case against a government, and providing symbolic support to those who contend that there have been violations of international criminal law. Such outcomes may influence public opinion, and help change the balance of political forces by undermining the legitimacy of an established order of oppression as exists with respect to Israel’s relationship to the Palestinian people and the denial of their collective right of self-determination.

“The ‘politics of fragmentation’ designed to undermine Palestinian unity… has been alarmingly successful.”

SL – What are the chances as you see them for achieving unity between Fatah and Hamas, and how should the Palestinians play their cards in future?

Richard Falk – There is a near unanimous belief among Palestinians and their supporters that unity is needed to move the struggle forward. Such unity existed throughout the early decades of the Palestinian National Movement, despite many ideological differences relating to tactics and goals, but within a shared resolve to achieve national liberation. The unifying image provided by Yasser Arafat’s uncontested leadership was also important.

Israel has pursued a policy I describe as ‘the politics of fragmentation’ designed to undermine Palestinian unity, and it has been alarmingly successful. Oslo contributed to this end by dividing up the West Bank into Areas A, B, and C, by splitting the administration of Gaza off from the rest of Palestine. The emergence of Hamas highlighted Palestinian fragmentation, a result welcomed by Israel even as it was condemned. Fatah appears to have been inhibited in reaching some kind of functional unity with Hamas by pressures to refrain from such moves mounted in Israel and the United States. So long as Hamas is treated as a terrorist organization, even in the face of its turn from armed struggle and entry into the political process back in 2006, there will be strong opposition to moves toward unity, which were attempted in the Morsi period of leadership in Egypt, and seemed on the verge of success.

SL – Finally, Richard, your robust defence of Palestinian rights has ruffled many feathers and led to demands from ‘the usual suspects’ for your dismissal. Should the people you speak up for be concerned about this?

Richard Falk - The attacks on me, and others who have tried to bear witness to the directives of international law and political justice, are part of a deliberate campaign by Israel, and its cadres in civil society, to deflect attention from the substantive grievances of the Palestinian people. It is what I have described as ‘the politics of deflection,’ go after the messenger so as to deflect attention from the message. The media has been largely compliant as have Israel’s powerful governmental friends, including the United Kingdom, US, and Canadian governments. Of course, many NGOs and elements of the public push back against such tactics. In my case the defamatory efforts of UN Watch, in particular, have been unpleasant, but have not altered my effort to do the job of witnessing to the best of my ability and in accordance with the canons of truth telling.

“Those of us living in comfort should not turn our gaze away from the children of Gaza this Christmas.”

SL – Thank you for being so generous with your time and sharing your assessment of the situation. But before you go, what sort of Christmas can the children of Gaza look forward to?

Richard Falk – We can only imagine the horror of Christmas this year in Gaza for young and old alike: from life amid raw sewage to freezing cold, scarcities, desolation, and a sense that the world is elsewhere, indifferent to such acute suffering, such sustained injustice, such blind hate.

And yet also knowing many Gazans makes me believe that even in such dire circumstances there remains space for some laughter, and much love, and that such a spirit of resistance lives on among the children of this place haunted by the evils of our world. If present these days in Gaza it would likely make me feel a mystifying blend of sadness and inspiration.

At the very least those of us living in comfort should not turn our gaze away from the children of Gaza this Christmas: we should demand empathy from our leaders and be as personally attentive as possible, whether by commentary, prayer, donations, a compassionate scream! We should not allow these days of celebration and renewal to pass this year without moments of reflection on selfish joys and cheerful carols, as contrasting with the miserable destiny bestowed upon the innocent and abused children of Gaza

Let us look the children of Gaza in the eye if we can. And if we can’t, as I could not, seize the moment to reflect on what it means to be (in)human during this holiday season.

Stuart Littlewood
16 December 2013

* [As Richard Falk afterwards explained, "Jewish land ownership is usually put at 5.8% or 6% in 1947, a figure somewhat misleading as the bulk of Palestinian owned land was categorized as 'uncultivated' at the time. As far as population is concerned the best estimate seems to be 33% or slightly lower, with some reliable estimates at 31%."]

Share Button

, , , , ,

27 Responses to Stealing Palestine

  1. Cosmo December 17, 2013 at 11:12 am #

    “A secondary flaw was the unfairness of awarding 55% of the territory to the Jewish presence as represented by the Zionist movement, which in 1947 represented an estimated 7% of Palestine’s population.”
    Is he really that clueless or did you quote him wrong?

    • Cosmo December 17, 2013 at 11:37 am #

      Or does he only talk about people who had Israeli national inspirations ahead of their religious ones in that case the Palestinian national movement probably represented less than %5 of Palestine’s population.

    • Stu December 19, 2013 at 9:08 pm #

      Cosmo, it was a mistake and has been corrected if you read that para again (Richard Falk’s reply to sixth question). See also asterisked footnote at end. Apologies all round.

  2. Cosmo December 17, 2013 at 11:21 am #

    “Gaza and the West Bank are supposed to be a contiguous territory but”
    Why ? Not according to international law you keep talking about.

  3. Ariadna Theokopoulos December 17, 2013 at 12:19 pm #

    Cosmo: ““A secondary flaw was the unfairness of awarding 55% of the territory to the Jewish presence as represented by the Zionist movement, which in 1947 represented an estimated 7% of Palestine’s population.”
    Is he really that clueless or did you quote him wrong?”

    Explain your problem with the stats that makes you feel clueful, Cosmo

    • Cosmo December 17, 2013 at 1:56 pm #

      Well I assume that in order to manipulate readers he decided that Jews who were not part of a nationalist movement shouldn’t be counted. In those times there were hardly any Palestinian nationalists, who didn’t consider themself part of a seperate Palestinian nation rather than part of greater Arab nation. I assume you shouldn’t count them either right?
      Anyway almost all the land the Jewish side got was pretty worthless Negev Desert. And the most important point is that the Jews were the majority of the land they got in the partition plan.

  4. Ariadna Theokopoulos December 17, 2013 at 2:44 pm #

    You either cannot understand his points or pretend not to, cosmo.
    He is saying first that the partition itself was decided without taking into account the wishes of the INDIGENOUS population: neither those of the Palestinian Muslims and Christians nor of the small minority of Palestinian Jews who had lived there together for centuries, and neither of which, by all credible accounts, would have agreed to it.
    Second, he is saying that on top of this outrage (my word, not his), they added the unfairness of rewarding the recent zionist invaders — European jews brought there by zionism — with a larger portion of the territory.
    To make it easier for you understand, think of partitioning Syria (a fond zionist wish) to reward the recent mercenary invaders with a large share of Syrian land.

    • Cosmo December 17, 2013 at 3:09 pm #

      It shames and discredits the entire UN to have a person like Richard Falk representing it. I think it is laughable that he complains about USA pro Israel bias in negotiations while he represents the UN and hold such biased one sided twisted views.
      As for partitioning of Syria. That would be the best way forward in order to stop the violence. The Alawites are the minority why would they get a bigger share? If Assad wants to continue to rule he should only get an area in which his people are the majority and wish him to continue to rule. I am no an expert on Syria Demographics and geography. Perhaps borders could be drawn where the state under Assad is the largest one of the 2,3,4… states.

  5. Ariadna Theokopoulos December 17, 2013 at 2:57 pm #

    And another thing, cosmo:
    Your estimate of how many Palestinians had national “inspirations” [sic] comes from… where? Do you get IDF lectures on Palestinian (no, you call it “Arab” because the Palestinians do not exist, right?) history?
    Palestinians do not need any national aspirations because they ARE a nation. They only have freedom aspirations.
    I realize that the concept of ‘nation’ is still nebulous to you since ‘Israel as nation’ is still work in progress, laboriously patched together with bits of stolen Palestinian traditions (culinary, vestimentary, etc), Romanian folk dances brought by the Romanian Jews (the “hora” as an … ‘Israeli dance’) and all this precariously perched on myth-as-history, fabrications and outright lies.
    I found out recently from a trustworthy source (a Hebrew-speaking Palestinian-born ex-Jew) that the words “civilization,” and “civilized” do not exist in Hebrew.
    I find it interesting. An ethno-religious group that works on being a nation and civilizing itself (the zionist dream) has use for words unique to Jews, like ‘chutzpah” but not for “civilized”….

    • Cosmo December 17, 2013 at 3:23 pm #

      Well starting with the end civilized is מתורבת civilization תרבות.
      But I guess people would say the Hebrew version of civilization which is ציביליזציה like they do on many other words.

      As for my estimates it is based on the fact Palestinians only defined themselves as a people to seperate themselves from Jews. In 1964 the PLO said they have no desire to make the West Bank and Gaza part of Palestine. They only consider historic Palestine parts where Jews live. Eventhough older maps show Palestine including parts of Jordan Lebanon and without the Negev.
      Up to these days Palestinian figures like Azmi Bishara say Palestine is south Syria. The whole concept of Palestinian nationalism began in order to counter the Yishuv.

  6. Ariadna Theokopoulos December 17, 2013 at 3:34 pm #

    cosmo: “It shames and discredits the entire UN to have a person like Richard Falk representing it.”
    Actually he is doing what he is supposed to be doing and what, sadly, not many do in that zionist-bent organization: tell the truth.
    He is also doing Jews wordlwide a favor by demonstrating that just because you are a Jew you are not doomed to live your life in the mental shtetl of Jewish supremacism and reflex support of the criminal Jewish state. You can liberate yourself and become a fully rational and ethical human being.

  7. Ariadna Theokopoulos December 17, 2013 at 3:39 pm #

    cosmo: “biased one sided twisted views.”
    I heard that spiel before and always took it for just a hasbara slogan to fool the Goyim and deflect any criticism of your racist and terrorist state, but you apparently bought it and seem to believe it.
    Trying to see things from your side, I imagine that an ‘unbiased” view would be to apportion blame to the Palestinians as well because, after all, who can deny that they obstinately refuse to vacate the premises coveted by the Jews?

    • Cosmo December 17, 2013 at 7:25 pm #

      “So long as it is useful for Israel and Washington to treat Hamas as ‘a terrorist organization’ the UN will be limited in its role to being a provider of a subsistence existence for the Gazan people…”

      This is a professor of international law ? Hamas broke every law in the book and he expects the West to reward them for that?
      If Hamas are not terrorists there is no such thing as a terrorist.

  8. Ariadna Theokopoulos December 17, 2013 at 3:44 pm #

    cosmo: “the fact Palestinians only defined themselves as a people to seperate themselves from Jews.”
    It’s a “fact,” no less, eh?
    Hope you don’t mind if I save it for future quotes (with full attribution, I assure you). It is one of the most blatant judeo-centric statements that show the complete unmooring from reality of the judeozionists. It also reflects the dark ignorance of history and lack of understanding of basic concepts like “nation,” “state,” “people.”

  9. Ariadna Theokopoulos December 17, 2013 at 3:47 pm #

    cosmo: “Up to these days Palestinian figures like Azmi Bishara say Palestine is south Syria.”
    Don’t tell me you did not understand what he really meant by that. Are you serious?

    • Cosmo December 17, 2013 at 3:55 pm #

      I understand what he said very well. did you?

  10. Ariadna Theokopoulos December 17, 2013 at 3:51 pm #

    This was another howler:
    ” I am no an expert on Syria Demographics and geography. ”

    But… as a jew you can tell us exactly what needs to be done:
    “As for partitioning of Syria. That would be the best way forward in order to stop the violence. The Alawites are the minority why would they get a bigger share? If Assad wants to continue to rule he should only get an area in which his people are the majority and wish him to continue to rule.Perhaps borders could be drawn where the state under Assad is the largest one of the 2,3,4… states.”

    It never crosses your mind why you are so hated by all of your neighbors, does it?
    I mean aside from what you have been raised to believe: that you are envied for being superior and irrationally hated, etc….

    • Cosmo December 17, 2013 at 3:57 pm #

      How about this I stop telling you what should be done in Syria and you should stop telling me what should be done in Israel?

  11. Ariadna Theokopoulos December 17, 2013 at 5:07 pm #

    Only one problem with that: Syria is Syria while “Israel” is Palestine

    • Cosmo December 17, 2013 at 5:44 pm #

      Syria isn’t just Syria it is also Kurdistan and soon to be a few other countries. It is a place struggling for freedom from a murderous ruthless dictator.

  12. Ariadna Theokopoulos December 17, 2013 at 6:54 pm #

    Since you said yourself that you’re no expert on Syria, we’ll not bother with your predictions on Syria.
    I’d be more interested in your predictions as an Israeli and an expert on ‘ruthless” (as an IDFfer) about the State for Jews, described (Veterans Today) as follows by a visitor:
    “What has always intrigued me was how and why Israelis from top to bottom (with the exception of a small minority) could be so brutal, uncaring and unashamed about what their country was doing’. My visit gave me the answer. Israel is a garrison state with a garrison mentality. Israelis see themselves as victims because there are powerful forces (mainly internal but also external) that help create, sustain and embellish the myth about the perpetual victimhood of Israel and of the Jews. A state constructed on the principle that it alone provides a safe haven for Jews can only justify its brutality and oppression of resident non-Jews ~ that is, the Palestinians in the Occupied Territory and those having Israeli citizenship ~ on the grounds that they are actually or potentially the dangerous ‘enemy’ who must be controlled, subordinated and monitored…Israel has been accused of violating the Oslo Accords by repeatedly and illegally expanding its settlements in the occupied territories, as well as violating innumerable UN resolutions….It should now be obvious to anyone that those Oslo accords were basically Israel’s way of partially subcontracting the occupation to the Fatah-controlled Palestinian National Authority, and for giving itself time to carry out more land grabs in the OT, that is, create new “facts on the ground”…. Israel demands recognition from the very people whom it occupied and ethnically cleansed in 1948.”

    • Cosmo December 17, 2013 at 7:17 pm #

      My predictions is that Israel will continue to be flourishing country it is today. As for the Palestinian question my prediction is that with in the next 10 years Israel will make a unilateral withdrawal from parts of the West Bank and cut itself off the Palestinians. Israel will keep control over security in the Jordan valley, keep the settlement blocs part of Israel and keep all desired parts of the Jerusalem municipality. There will be Palestinian under Israeli control who will no have the possibility of an Israeli ID. Of course most of those Jerusalemite Arabs left on the Palestinian side would try to move to the Israeli side before the withdrawal. The state of perpetual conflict the Palestinians desire will remain. Every few year the IDF would have to remind the Palestinian forces in the West Bank that violence is not in their best interest much like it has to do so now in Gaza.
      What I don’t understand is why would you support Assad when you know he butchered in a few short years more civiliand than Palestinian civilians killed by Israel since it’s creating. How could you be so uncaring and unashamed?

  13. Ariadna Theokopoulos December 17, 2013 at 8:46 pm #

    It’s pathetic for you to play the high and mighty here, IDFfer.
    Despite the carnage you inflicted on the Lebanese people in the end you had to run with your pants soiled when you encountered Hezbollah–fighting MEN, not the defenseless civilians, women and children you are used to killing in Palestine.
    You are cowards who need others to do the fighting for you.
    And despite you and your coddlers and accomplices inserting your poisonous proboscium in Syria, the Syrian people still stand united under Assad.
    It is nobody’s business whom the Syrian people choose to rally around, least of all yours, a rogue nuclear expansionist state, a racist apartheid and a parasite on the backs of the American people.
    Your opinions about just how Syria should be smashed into pieces are the delirium blabberings of a judeozionist who realizes the Odded Yinon plan is behind schedule and the tsunami of world opposition is rolling towards them.
    I realize that due to your thorough brain washing and indoctrination you are incapable of feeling shame but you are clearly capable of rote memorization so memorize this:
    Your hasbara slogans –stinking lies from the get-go — are also now well past their sell date, so save yourself the effort and stop trying to peddle them here.

    • Cosmo December 18, 2013 at 8:50 am #

      There was never a plan to stay in Lebanon after the 2006 war. So no matter what you would be saying the IDF had to run. The IDF achieved a lot more in a few weeks than Assads army achieved in years of fighting with much less organized equipt or trained rebels. Despite the carnage he inflicted on the Syrian people. At the end of the day Hezbollah learned their lesson from that war well, and are too scared to fire a single bullet across the border despite claiming Israel killed people in their high command and the fact that their weapon storages tend to blow up every now and then and unknown jets take out their weapon supply in Syria.

  14. Ariadna Theokopoulos December 18, 2013 at 12:13 pm #

    “There was never a plan to stay in Lebanon after the 2006 war. So no matter what you would be saying the IDF had to run.”

    I enjoyed this a lot — made me laugh out loud. Of course, they (you) had to run. The commander looked at his watch and exclaimed: “Oy, look at the time! If we don’t hurry I’ll miss my appointment with the proctologist. Let’s run, boys! Don’t walk, RUN!
    The IDfers in the video below, enjoyed by the world, must have also said to each other as they had to run: “Let’s leave! No, make that run! It is too noisy here. Let’s run to some place quiet.”

    There is so much assbackwards in your comparison with Assad that I won’t bother to touch that pile with a stick.
    But this:
    “At the end of the day Hezbollah learned their lesson from that war well, and are too scared to fire a single bullet across the border…”
    shows your hardwired belief that lack of aggression is only explained by fear: you project from the way you function.
    And this:
    “despite claiming Israel killed people in their high command and the fact that their weapon storages tend to blow up every now and then and unknown jets take out their weapon supply in Syria.”
    It is a good example of that unique Israeli combination of compulsive in-your-face-lying (“unknown jets”… Oh, sure, they could be the Aleutian air force) fighting with your need to boast about carnage and mayhem achievements: assassinations: check! terrorist attacks: check! unprovoked acts of war: check!
    Mind you: your acts — to use your phrase — “tend to blow up” cyclically if you look at history. Bears pondering on.

    • Cosmo December 18, 2013 at 3:24 pm #

      Israel was under international pressure to end the war and was pushed into a ceasefire agreement. The IDF was pushing forward until the deadline of that ceasefire (which was a mistake).
      So explain to us why hasn’t Hezbollah attacked Israel so far. They always talk about defending Palestine as a big part of their mission. Gaza was at war a couple of times and I didn’t see Hezbollah coming to their aid.

Leave a Reply