No Negotiation

The ceasefire today, while desperately needed to get medical and other aid to Palestinians, should not be taken as any kind of compassion on Israel's part.

The unilateral ceasefire reinforces what was already made clear by the pullout of Gaza: there is no negotiation. It is how Israel says, when it says. In 2005, despite the show the Kadima party made for peace, going ahead with the Gaza pullout against much opposition, it was not a sign for peace. It was a sign, among the latest and among the clearest, that this is on their terms. This ceasefire being the latest.

Hamas (and much of the international community) has been trying to get a ceasefire called since the beginning of the aggression, and actually was in favor of continuing the previous ceasefire, which, need it be reminded, was broken by Israel on November 4th.

Why has Israel called the ceasefire? Why now? Not because it has achieved its stated objectives, of destroying Hamas or stopping the rockets, though they are claiming that as of last week, international agreements have been made to stop arming Hamas. Of course, not breaking the previous ceasefire would have been an option to preemptively stopping the rockets (yet with no deaths - strange what diplomacy can do). And actually honoring the terms of that agreement and lifting the blockade on Gaza would have been nice too. But I guess the Palestinians are just supposed to accept whatever crumbs the leaders of Israel are willing to throw their way.

It certainly was that way throughout the Oslo peace process. It lurched from undefined time table to another with the backdrop of increased settlements, as Palestinians accepted limited sovreignty in a limited number of towns, separated from one another by Israeli-controlled roads and checkpoints.

It was that way also during the Israel-Egypt peace, when Sadat acquiesed to all of Begin's demands, giving up any mention of the Palestinians. It should also be noted that this peace was made to avoid the voices that had been calling for a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace.

Just as today the Arab peace offer has been constantly ignored by the Israelis. It is not on their terms. It may offer full recognition and normalization of relations with Arab countries, but apparently Israel would prefer to declare peace on their time, rather than negotiate it. And among the consequences of the Gaza "campaign" is taking the peace talks with Syria right off the table. Whew - that was a close one. Who can blame them really, when as we all know negotiating is an ugly process - one might be forced to give up something in exchange for something else. No, better to rest on the assurance that as long as America has its back, Israel can do whatever the fuck it wants, ignoring the international opprobrium.

I'm glad the Israeli forces are pulling back, and the bombing campaigns are stopping, and maybe the people of Gaza will have some time to breath and start rebuilding. But there will be no peace and there will be no negotiation.

Over 1,000 Palestinian Dead

Since the aggression against Gaza began, we have been watching the numbers of dead and injured climb while hearing the increasingly riduculous and disgusting justifications. I don't even the NY Times articles about Gaza anymore. The best news source by far is al-Jazeera. From the first day they have been in Gaza, reporting live.

But everyday we watch less. The first few days it was constant. Now, we switch to news for updates occaisonally. I can't take more dead and wounded children. Arabic television is much more graphic than American tv; there is no sanitizing war. The cameras show tiny bodies wrapped in shawls, parents wailing, people with horrible injuries.

I haven't written much about Gaza because I really don't feel I can add anything that hasn't been stated more eloquently elsewhere. The information is out there: Israel broke the ceasefire on Nov 4. The climbing dead and wounded. Hamas wants a ceasefire. Israel doesn't, as Kadima wants to look tough before elections. How many dead will be enough? And it's not as if anything I write will convince some one set against it. On the Palestinian issue, it's rare that logic or compassion actually changes anyone's mind. The response to the enormous loss of life is "What if New York / Seattle / Dublin / Toronto / Houston / etc was fired upon daily? Wouldn't you respond if everything you've got?" Of course the counteranalogy, what if your family was forced off of its land 60 years ago into a tiny strip of land, then punished for its democratic choice by months and months of midevil seige while food and medicine ran out and then bombarded by one of the world's most technologically advanced armies? That, apparently, does not occur to American politicians because they can see themselves as Israelis, but not as Palestinians.

I have also seen some criticism of the world response to Gaza, compared to the relative silence on Congo, Darfur, and Somalia. Ideally, media and world should respond to all of these crises, though the intranational nature of these conflicts is much more complicated then: Israel - Stop bombing the fuck out of Gaza! While some of this coverage inequality may be due to racism, as well as the news cycle (Gaza is fresher), as an American I see why American media SHOULD respond to Gaza more - those are our bombs killing Palestinians. It makes me sick to watch the news, then read about American politicians' steadfastness to Israel. We will continue to support the killing of a defenseless population. We will continue giving lip service to "peace" that asks of the Palestinians consessions on top of all they have endured and rewards Israel for its blatant violation of past agreements by excising illegal settlements out of the Palestinian state.

That is all. Tomorrow more amusing anecdotes.

Defending Itself

Why is the blockade of Gaza and military incursions always compared to the damn rockets? As if they are morally equivalent? As if they are anywhere on the same scale? The New York Times describes the bombing as "retaliation for rocket fire from the area".

"The Palestinian groups again launched barrages of rockets and mortars into Israel on Sunday, extending their reach further than ever before, and the Israeli government approved the emergency call up of thousands of army reservists in preparation for a possible ground operation."

and later: "Israeli military officials said that the airstrikes, which began on Saturday morning, were the start of what could be days or even months of an effort to force Hamas to end its rocket barrages into southern Israel."

That makes it sound somewhat similar! In fact, it's as if the Israelis are only responding or even retaliating for this horrible barrage of rockets.

Currently around 280 Palestinians dead, with at least 600 wounded. "Several Israelis were lightly wounded by shrapnel."

Yup, sounds about equivalent.

Car Bomb in Damascus

Imad Mughniyeh, a senior Hizbollah commander, was killed last night in a car bomb at around 10:45pm in Kafer Susseh, a residential neighborhood in Damascus. Hizbollah has accused Israel.

While sayara mufakhkhakha (car bomb) is one of my favorite words to say in Arabic (along with shilaymon - straw) it is only because of the repeated خ , while use of the word itself is tragically limited to events no one wants to happen.

Gaza

Did you know that a few primitive rockets can serve as justification for starving 1.5 million people?

Fortunately, Hamas blew up the border and Palestinians are streaming into Egypt in order to buy... flour.

Bush Comes to the Middle East

Bush came to the Middle East yesterday morning: I was at Manar's house and we happened to catch the pomp and circumstance of his visit to Israel live on every news channel.

Amid the backdrop of the plane and mixed American and Israeli flags, Bush descended, greating Olmert like an old friend. Children waved American and Israeli flags, and Bush and Olmert both gave speeches about the strong friendship between the two states. Because it wa live al-Jazeera had no translation so I translated a bit for Manar.

Why the show? Everyone who has talked to me about the visit, including Manar, immediately rolled their eyes. "And he's going to achieve peace? Yeah, as if we don't know what side he's on." We already knows what side he's on, so why make a big show about it? It only makes everyone on the other "side" all that more certain of the pun my Arabic teacher has repeated nearly daily since Anapolis - ana bolees - Arabic for "I am the police". Bush isn't interested in real peace or in the Palestinian people, just in control and Empire etc. Do we really need singing Israeli children or the image of six-pointed stars and stripes to reconfirm the suspicions of the non-Israel lovin' world?

But maybe I should give Georgie a little credit. Maybe, just maybe the show is a sign to Israelis that America really really supports them and Bush really really loves them, so when (please let it be when, not if) the American president requests difficult sacrifices - like "stop building those settlements that you've been saying you would stop building since Oslo" - the Israelis will oblige, secure in the knowledge that Bush really really loves them and cares about their security and is only asking because these sacrifices are neccessary.

Or maybe the love-fest is just straight-up love for Israel, no matter how it may play on al-Jazeera.

I Really Really Hate the Fucking Ferry

This having been my fourth time on the Arab Bridge ferry between Egypt and Jordan, I feel I am somewhat qualified to comment on it. It is a living hell.

The trip between Damascus and Cairo need not be the ordeal it is, rendered thusly only because of the ferry. I personally love buses. Bus across the Sinai, followed by bus to Amman, bus to Damascus? Sign me up! But that little stretch between Egypt and Jordan, that little sliver of water the Gulf of Aqaba, usually takes close to a day to cross.

Why the ferry? Oh, Israel, you hateful little slice of a country. Seriously, do you need Eilat? You have another ocean for ports and beaches. But no, Israel decides that they need Eilat, necessitating the Arab Bridge.

Eilat is sandwiched between Taba in Egypt and Aqaba in Jordan. But does the ferry make this short route? No! It goes all the way down to Nuweiba on the Egyptian side. This itself is hardly the source of all the misery, as the actual trip takes an hour (by ferry - three and a half by barge).

There is one ferry and one barge a day. Only. Arrive at the Aqaba port at say, 2am, and you have yourself a good 12-hour wait until you kiss the sweet Egyptian soil. Arrive in Nuweiba at 6am, because it is the only real option from Cairo is the 10pm bus, and you have a good 14-hour wait to greet Jordan's dirt.

This is with the ferry. The barge, only 10 dollars cheaper (out of freaking $50 from Jordan to Egypt, and $70 from Egypt to Jordan) seems to be a lower layer of hell that even my cheap ass refuses to descend into. Arriving at Nuweiba at 5am (our driver was crazy fast) there was a line of men boarding the ferry. At 5pm when we started boarding our ferry, the barge was still in Egypt. I think they were going to leave soon. So those poor bastards were on that damn barge all day before it even took off.

Our ferry was supposed to leave at "oh, about 3 maybe, God willing". So we sat down in a little run-down ahwa after waiting around 2, maybe 3 hours to buy tickets, ordered coffee, tea, ate La Vache Qui Rit cheese and bread, and smoked shisha. Met a kid from freaking Mason, Michigan (right next to the old hometown - I believe we are rivals) who lives in Amman. Hung out with a nice Palestinian boy, and met some British dude who I let remain in his delusion that his Egyptian shisha for 200 guinee was "a steal" (the most expensive of my three had cost 60).

Ladies first: I know I have griped about this in the past, but it is nice getting to cut a whole bunch of men for being a lady. However, I really, really hate the foreigners first rule. We're in Egypt, and all the Egyptians are told to stay back while the foreigners buy their tickets, board the ferry, etc. Even worse, it seems as if the western foreigners are pushed ahead of the Arab foreigners. This trip was the worst I have seen this phenomenon, as literally the first bus (buses take you from the terminal to the boat - no just walking the 200 meters allowed) was all westerners. We had stayed back, cause there's no reason to get flustered - boat's gonna leave when it's gonna leave.

Previous times, there has just been a hustling of ladies to the front: Arab ladies, Egyptian ladies, American ladies. I prefer this as it means I don't have to wait long AND I don't have to feel like a giant shit for getting special "Western treatment". I'm getting regular ol' lady treatment.

We finally got into Aqaba at about 8pm or so, and were saved waiting by Rachel. On the boat they take our passports, and then in the arrivals hall we wait. After 20 minutes, Rachel says fuck this and walks into the office, 5 minutes later walks out with our passports and we get out before the rest of the foreigners. "What did you say?" I ask.
"Marhaba," She says. (Hi).

I hate the boat, especially since there's no alternative. How to get from Egypt to the rest of the Arab world? Israel ain't exactly an option for most people. So the shitty service and exorbidant price of the Arab Bridge continues.

There's more to hate, but I have only so much time to dwell on such unpleasantries. I am at Dera'a, on the Syrian - Jordanian border. Somebody's visa expired and we have to wait while a new one is issued. In Sha Allah.

Who Wants Peace?

Obviously not these idiots. Or their government that turns a blind eye to these activities. Quick to demolish Palestinian homes in collateral punishment, but slow to evict illegal settlers (by Israeli definition!), if they are ever even evicted.

Repeat After Me:

Not all Jews are Israelis
Not all Israelis are Jews

Not all Jews are Zionists
Not all Zionists are Jews

Not all Israelis are Zionists
Not all Zionists are Israelis

Now let's talk

Stalling...?

Who is really itchn' for peace? This past weekend Palestinians Say Olmert and Abbas Are Set to Meet (NYT) in Jericho soon. What are they going to talk about? Well, like fall peace conference idea, it's a bit vague, and all parties are saying stating different purposes for the meeting:

An Abbas aide, Nabil Amr, said the leaders must be ready to hold “political” talks that included so-called final status issues for the creation of a Palestinian state, including borders...But an Israeli government official said that Israel was prepared to “mention larger issues in the realm of the future,” but would not negotiate on these issues at such meetings.

This meeting might be another gesture to bolster Abbas/Fatah against Hamas, and might indeed be nothing more than a gesture. The moderate peacenik foreign minister, Tzipi Livni suggests that both sides focus on the "widest common demoninator," presumably instead of Hard Issues. Prime Minister Olmert has floated a "declaration of principles" between the govs. Ooh, can I make some suggestions? How about an accord stating the respective governments' dislike of dead children? Or perhaps their shared admiration of hummus? And people of both sides must also be in agreement that Lindsay Lohan needs to pull her shit together. This is just a start, of course.

Delays benefit the Israeli side more than the Palestinian. The Hard Issues were left off the table in exchange for photo-ops throughout the 90s Oslo peace process, and in the meantime? More Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Stalling benefits the more powerful side, which can continue to shape the status quo to a position it's willing to negotiate from. And it is hardly radical to say that Israel is the massively more powerful party here.

Speaking of settlements, sounds like there was quite a show in Hebron this morning: Israel Removes Settlers in West Bank. No, not all of them, just a bunch of truly gung-hos who had illegaly (according to Israeli courts) set up in the center of Hebron. The "well-advertised confrontation" could be, and is intended to be a sign of the Israeli government cracking down on unruly settlers. But NYT sees some other intended messages behind the show:

In contrast to the way the Israeli army operates quiet arrests of Palestinians at night in the cities of the occupied West Bank, the Israeli government gave the settlers significant notice. A relatively fierce confrontation served both the settlers and the government, creating heroes among the settlers and allowing the government to show to the world that dismantling the nearly 80,000 settlers who live beyond the separation barrier will not be an easy task.

Taking Sides for Peace

After years of a half-hearted "Quartet" Road Map, Bush is gearing up for the Peace Conference to End All Peace Conferences. With Iraq, um, as it is, his only hope to have something not disastrous is this new Fall Peace Conference. The Administration is pulling out all stops on this one - Rice has been meeting up a storm with government officials. There's talk that Syria may even be invited (even Syria!).

All of these diplomatic machinations (like the recent Israeli freeing of Palestinian prisoners and a promised $80 million for Abbas's security forces) are attempts to bolster Abbas and the Fatah-West Bank against Hamas in Gaza. In other words, Hamas should not be expecting an invitation to the conference, despite the fact that Hamas is part of the elected and legitimate Palestinian government. When Israel includes Yisrael Beitenu in its majority coalition, a party that believes even Israeli Palestinians (Israeli Arabs) should be kicked out, that sort of extremism is alright, but God forbid an Islamist party is included in the Palestinian government. The U.S, E.U, and Israeli policy of shunning was certainly a success in any case...

But now that Hamas and Fatah have been conveniently seperated, we can lend our support to one faction against the other. No matter Fatah's horrible corruption- Hamas won legislative elections in 2006 partly because many voted "against Fatah" rather than "for Hamas". The corruption was so bad that it was cheaper to buy goods off the Israeli settlements in Gaza (obviously before their dismantling) than from the marketplace after all the bribes to Palestinian Authority officials (basically Fatah). So Fatah is crap in the eyes of many Palestinians (as is Hamas in the eyes of many others), but Fatah does not wave the green flag so the U.S. supports them wholeheartedly.

But is there a chance that this proposed peace conference will actually achieve anything? There are some hints that it might. Today Saudi Arabia indicated it might take part: Saudi Arabia Says it May Meet Israel. Saudi Arabia put forth their own peace proposal, endorsed by the Arab League, and negotiated the Mecca agreement between Fatah and Hamas, so they are no stranger to the issue. Saudi Arabia says they will only attend the conference if it tackles the big "final status" issues:

the fate of Palestinian refugees who fled or were forced to flee their homes in Israel, mostly before or during the 1948 war; the status of Jerusalem; the borders of a Palestinian state; and the dismantlement of Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

Thus they might actually work on the hard issues, the ones that everyone knows needs to be addressed but are much easier to leave aside (see: Oslo) and then bite everyone in the ass later (see: everything after Oslo).

Then again, maybe not. The Israeli foreign minister Tzipi Livni (about whom there was a massive article in the Times Magazine - sorry it's Times Select so get registered with your .edu address for free already!) responded by saying that sometimes "it's not wise to put the most sensitive issues out first." So what instead? Leave any issue of subtance off the table and have a pretty photo op rather than a serious attempt at solving issues? Livni, by the way, protested back in 1979 against peace with Egypt. She felt Sinai (Sinai!) was part of greater Israel. It'll be interesting to see how she feels about giving up "Judea and Samarra" now.