Target Centermass

Day: December 15, 2004

  • Hamas, Jihad Slam Abbas Call to End Armed Attacks

    Palestinian terrorists are dissing PLO chairman and interim terrorist-in-chief Mahmoud Abbas as not being enough of a terrorist.

    Hamas and Islamic Jihad on Wednesday dismissed PLO chairman Mahmoud Abbas’s call for an end to armed attacks, saying such statements don’t serve the interests of the Palestinians.

    Farouk Kaddoumi, who has replaced Yasser Arafat as chairman of the Fatah Central Committee, also rejected Abbas’s call, saying there would be no cessation of violence until Israel withdraws to the pre-1967 borders.

    Trust me, even a withdrawal to pre-Six-Day-War borders would not bring peace to the Palestinians and Israelis. Instead, it would only bring about a fixation on the next excuse for murder, probably the right of return. The problem is not Israel’s borders but its existence.

    In an interview with the pan-Arab London-based daily Asharq al-Awsat published on Tuesday, Abbas called for an end to violence against Israel.

    “The intifada should be kept away from arms because it is a legitimate right of the people to express their rejection of the occupation by popular and social means,” he said.

    “The use of arms has been damaging and should end,” Abbas added.

    Abbas, who arrived in Qatar on Wednesday, suggested that some people might have misunderstood his comments.

    “All I meant is that we, at this stage, are against the militarization of the intifada because we want to negotiate,” he told reporters shortly before leaving Saudi Arabia on his way to Qatar. “And because we want to negotiate, the atmosphere should be calm in preparation for political action.”

    Abbas said the Palestinian Authority wants to “stop the military aspect of the intifada, especially by Hamas and Islamic Jihad, in order to achieve our objective of a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital and a just settlement for the refugee problem.” He said the PLO is working towards achieving an agreement with all the Palestinian factions leading to a cease-fire and Israel’s withdrawal from Palestinian cities and villages.

    The PA-controlled media highlighted Abbas’s interview with Asharq al-Awsat, but did not comment on his statements. PA officials in Ramallah also refused to comment on his remarks, noting that Abbas had simply reiterated his long-standing position that the Palestinians had made a mistake by resorting to terrorism over the past four years.

    Of course the terrorism of the Intifada was a mistake if the goals were independence and prosperity for the Palestinian people. With Arafat pulling the strings, however, those were never the goals.

    Also, note that even Abbas calls for Israeli concessions on two of the key sticking points, a Palestinian capital in Jerusalem and the refugee problem (code for right of return).

    Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhari said Abbas’s remarks are in contravention of the Palestinian consensus over the legitimacy of the “resistance.” “The problem is the occupation and not the resistance,” he said.

    Asked if his movement would agree to lay down its weapons, Abu Zuhari said “We hope that any dispute [over this] would be solved through negotiations between the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian factions,” he added. Otherwise, he warned, there could be a clash between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas.

    Muhammad al-Hindi, a senior Islamic Jihad leader in the Gaza Strip, also rejected Abbas’s statements against the militarization of the intifada. “The resistance groups have the right to keep their weapons and to strengthen themselves as long as the Israeli occupation and the aggression continue,” he said.

    Hindi too stressed that his group would nevertheless avoid a confrontation with the PA and said the two sides should resort to dialogue to solve their differences.

    It should be quite obvious from these statements that neither Hamas nor Islamic Jihad recognize the authority of the Palestinian Authority, demanding to be negotiated with as equals.

    The Palestinians have spent decades twisting entire generations of children. Is it any surprise that no Palestinian with any real voice is speaking of the concept of peacefully promoting their own people?

  • U.S. Fears Iranian Influence in Iraqi Elections

    The Iranians, along with the Syrians, have been promoting and assisting the instability in Iraq, knowing the danger of a successful democracy next door. Now, it seems that Iran is also working on an insurance plan — pouring people and resources into Iraq to influence the elections they seem unable to stop.

    Kicking off his country’s first democratic election campaign Wednesday, Interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi declared his own candidacy, saying the country can handle the challenge.

    But as Iraqis register to vote, the United States worries that the real winners could be the ayatollahs in neighboring Iran. U.S. intelligence sources tell NBC News that 1 million Iranians have already poured across the border to register to vote in Iraq. And Iran is spending as much as $100 million to elect its favored slate of candidates in Iraq — and may have thousands of spies in Iraq.

    “They’re putting money into Iraq,” says Danielle Pletka, an Iraq expert at the American Enterprise Institute. “They’re promoting candidates. They’re sponsoring terrorist groups that are pressuring people in Iraq. They’re doing everything they can.”

    And while Iraq’s defense minister warned Wednesday that both Iran and Syria are cooperating with Iraq’s No. 1 terrorist — Abu Musab al-Zarqawi — the United States has no proof of that.

    On Wednesday, President Bush, after a White House meeting with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, told Iran and Syria to stay out.

    “We will continue to make it clear to both Syria and Iran — as will other nations in our coalition, including our friend, the Italians, that meddling in the internal affairs of Iraq is not in their interest,” said the president.

    But, it is not clear what the United States can do.

    The United States says Iran is funding the leading Shiite candidate Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, who is expected to emerge as the country’s most powerful figure. A new Shiite government could oppose controversial military operations, like Fallujah, or even demand a rapid U.S. withdrawal.

    “I think we have to accept it might not be an outcome that we particularly desire, but if it’s a free and clear election, then that’s what our policy has been all about,” says Geoffrey Kemp, an Iranian expert at the Nixon Center.

    U.S. officials hope that Iraqi voters will resist Iran’s influence and remember that less than 20 years ago, Iran was their enemy in a brutal war.

    The rulers in Iran know they are sitting on a powderkeg next to an open flame. A sizable and restless portion of their country’s population stirs with a desire for democracy. The thought of a successful democracy taking root in neighboring Iraq without strong Iranian influence could only mean a growing threat of instability at home.