Edward Said on the Intellectual and the Question of Palestine

"Nothing in my mind is more reprehensible than those habits of mind in the intellectual that induce avoidance, that characeristic turning away from a difficult and principled position that you know to be the right one, but which you decide not to take. You do not want to appear too political, you want to keep a reputation of being balanced, moderate, objective. Your hope is to remain within the responsible mainstream. For an intellecutal, these habits of mind are corrupting par excellence.

Personally, I have encountered them in one of the toughest of all contemporary issues, Palestine, where fear of speaking out about one of the greatest injustices in modern history has hobbled, blinkered, muzzled many who know the truth and are in a position to serve it. For despite the abuse and villiification that any outspoken supporter of Palesinian rights and self determination earns for him or herself, the truth deserves to be spoken, represented by an unafraid and compassionate intellectual."

Edward Said, as quoted by Omar Barghouti.

Cost of Occupation to Israeli Society

Notes from the Alternative Information Center's podcast:

The total cost of the Occupation, since 1967, has been $100 billion.

This sounds small, but in fact the first 20 years of occupation were actually profitable for Israel.

Today, there is a 6% increase in cost of occupation, per year. This is compared to the growth of the overall Israeli budget, which is only about 2% per year. The cost of the occupation is growing, even relative to the Israeli budget, and at the expense of education, health, and welfare spending.

As a result, Israel is now the second most unequal country in the developed world, after only the US. Inequality in Israel has increased faster than any other developed country. The poverty rate is higher than it ever has been.

The occupation currently costs $7 billion a year, 9 percent of the total Israeli budget. This figure does not including the non-occupation defense budget.

The occupation was already morally unsustainable, but this provides further proof that it is also financially impossible to maintain.

Ali Abunimah's Keynote at the Hampshire BDS Conference

Video, too, but in several parts:

Flashpoints - November 26, 2009 at 5:00pm

Click to listen (or download)

Life in Occupied Britain

Saree Makdisi on the Expansion of Israeli Settlements

Amira Haas, Israel's conscience.

Allison Weir at the University of Michigan

Chronicling the daily racism of the Israeli state

Click on the following links to learn how Israel's "democracy" treats its Palestinian minority:

Israel proposes work camps for illegal migrants (who were originally sought to replace Palestinian workers)

Increasing numbers of Israeli Arabs studying at Jordanian universities (due to extreme academic discrimination)

Israel rations Palestinians to trickle of water

Ignoring Arab women, ministry okays 3,000 new foreign workers

West Bank land belongs to Jews, says Israeli army judge

Jerusalem 'chastity squad' branching out

Israel pulls textbook with chapter on Nakba

Netanyahu insists Israel is only for Jews

Israeli judge rules legal system discriminates against Arabs

Another Jewish town adds 'Zionist loyalty' to bylaws

Support the Gaza Freedom March!

This is the definition of solidarity: Indigenous Youth Delegation to Palestine

Defending Israel from Goldstone is very hard work.

Right wing Zionists are out in force these days, defending their state against the findings of the Goldstone Commission, that Israel (as well as Hamas) is guilty of serious war crimes as a result of its actions during the merciless assault on Gaza last winter. But it is very hard for them to defend Israel without simultaneously defending Hamas. The Israeli government is saying that the Goldstone report is unfair because Israel was defending itself, and a people acting in self defense should not have to worry about a few excesses. To expect Israel not to commit war crimes while defending itself is to expect it to fight with one hand tied behind its back.

That's a lot to take in, but there's a parallel logic to it, right? What then might Hamas say? A people under siege have a right to resist don't they? And if their only means of resistance breaks a few roofs, kills a few civilians, and causes some trauma, then so be it. To expect Hamas not to commit war crimes while resisting the siege of its people is to expect it to fight with one hand tied behind its back. If Israel is allowed to defend itself by any means necessary, denying this right to Palestinians is a double standard.

I think we can all agree that its better to have rules in place so that things like un-targeted rocket attacks on communities in southern Israel aren't thought of as "any means necessary." And so that white phosphorous, dime ammunition, rampant drone attacks, child casualties in the hundreds and civilian casualties above a thousand, attacks on UN facilities, bombs dropped on families and civilian police, demolished schools, and bulldozed homes, industries and farmland are not thought of as "any means necessary" either.

One day, a day postponed by the self-absorbed collaborators in the Palestinian leadership, Israel and Hamas will face international scrutiny for their actions. Those actions will be measured up to international standards and shown to be shamefully lacking. Hamas will need to take responsibility for its rockets and Israel will have to take responsibility for a lot more, but the proper thing for both parties to do is accept their transgressions. What they shouldn't do is mock international law and basic moral decency, but such is the way of the ultra right wing Zionists.

Even Hamas has kept its mouth shut this time.

- Update: Larry Derfner, blogging at the Jerusalem Post website, does a great job on this very point. Please check it out.

Olives Under Occupation

I only have two comments about this video:

1. I'd love to see an Israel defender try to explain the systematic uprooting and outright stealing of Palestinian olive trees.

2. Michael Sfard is an incredible defender of Palestinian rights and if Israel ever ends up steering out of its tailspin it will owe him a big thank you.

We must do what the international community will not.

The Goldstone report has landed with a thud. Israel was trashing it before it even came out, and did all it could to stop it from even being carried out. The US immediately called it biased and refused to even consider the allegations of Israeli war crimes contained within it. And now Israel has twisted the arm of the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah to ensure that the Goldstone report's findings will not be considered by the United Nations until at least next year. Justice delayed is justice denied.

Imagine being a Gazan right now. Not an ounce of concrete has entered the Strip. Not one of the three billion dollars that the international community has materialized. Palestinian children are returning to bombed out schools while Israel blocks the UN from reconstructing those schools or even replenishing basic educational supplies. Food, water, electricity are all in short supply due to the ongoing and completely inhumane siege. And now, to add another insult to the injuries of the past 60 years, every single governing body capable of pushing for justice for Gazan civilians has caved to Israel's bluff. Even the Palestinian Authority has abandoned the people it is supposed to serve, dropping a petition to investigate war crimes for the possibility of finally securing a new cell phone service. This is the height of cynicism.

But one could also imagine being a West Bank citizen right now. 5 years after it was ruled illegal, the Apartheid Wall is still being built, still stealing land and water resources, still uprooting olive trees to be sold to Israelis, from discriminatory Tel Aviv to illegal Ariel. The night raids continue unabated, people in wheelchairs are teargassed, non-violent protesters are shot and killed or jailed and tortured, and an entire population is denied the basic freedoms of movement and work and democracy and dignity that we in the west take for granted every day. The acceptance of non-violence has produced no gains, Fatah and the PA have, through their countless capitulations, earned none of the rewards they promised for Palestinians, the Obama administration that had built up such hope with its speeches and phone calls and visits to Cairo, has proven to be as spineless as its predecessor was mendacious. Justice, or even an easing of injustice, is nowhere in sight.

So is it any wonder that people are increasingly frustrated? Israel certainly hasn't changed its behavior, the PA has exposed itself as Israel's subcontractor, international governments have made no effort to help Palestinians, and the United States has literally squashed the possibility of achieving justice through international law. All the regular avenues of justice are closed. Where else is there to turn? Who will stand up for Palestinian rights?

It grows more apparent with each passing disappointment that the only way to put pressure on Israel is to boycott its products and institutions, divest from its companies and financial institutions, and sanction its government. People of conscience around the world, who see all preferred avenues of justice slammed shut in front of them, must now put their money where their mouths are. Not a dollar to support the bombing of civilians in Gaza. Not a dollar to support the blockade, not a dollar to shoot fishermen off the coast, not a dollar to arrest children and torture adults. Not a dollar to enable occupation, land theft, illegal walls and uprooted olive trees or to support discrimination, Jim Crow laws, and the oppression of minorities.

We must not treat Israel as a legitimate democratic state until it becomes one by ending the occupation, accepting its refugees, and engaging in meaningful democratic reforms.

Jeff Halper detained during house demolition in Anata.

I don't have anything to add to this. Jeff Halper is Israel's conscience:

The ethnic cleansing of East Jerusalem

Another Ghandi jailed, another promise unfulfilled, another reason for Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions.

West Bank resident Mohammad Othman recently traveled Norway, asking that country's leaders to divest from companies implicated in and profiting from the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. That's really not much to ask, given that the occupation violates international law and is only one item on the long list of injustices heaped upon Palestinians by the Israeli government. Othman’s visit was part of the new strategy of non-violent resistance that Palestinians have adopted. In fact, many in Israeli society have advocated these types of activities, claiming that the occupation would cease to be justified as soon as Palestinians stopped using violence to resist their oppression. They said to the Palestinians, "put down your weapons and start marching like Ghandi, and then our government won't have an excuse to occupy you, and our fellow countrymen will see the justice of your cause, and like that the occupation will be over.” And so Mohammed Othman did just what they said, and just what makes sense. Like so many others in Palestine, he began to work for his freedom by writing, marching, protesting, and advocating for international pressure on Israel and a non-violent end to the occupation. What they didn’t anticipate is how he and his friends would go about it, and how successful they would be. A few weeks ago, Norway divested from the Israeli military company Elbit because it was in blatant violation of their socially responsible investment guidelines.

On his way back from Norway to his home in Jayyous village, Mohammad was arrested without cause and thrown in an Israeli prison. He’s still there today, awaiting charges and a trial. And he’s not the first non-violent resister to be jailed without cause. Many other peaceful protesters have had their homes ransacked in the middle of the night, or have been arrested and jailed and beaten and tortured and shot and denied medical treatment. And some have been murdered in cold blood while simply marching for their freedom.

How did this happen? Wasn’t the deal that once Palestinians put down their weapons, Israel would finally be able to dismantle the wall, take down the settlements, give Palestinians back their water resources and arable land, and allow them to have economic and political independence? Did Israel dupe Palestinians or did the peace camp wildly misjudge Israeli society’s ability to change course? Even though there is quite a case to be made that Israel is not interested in peace and won’t give up the occupation until it has no other alternative, I also think it’s worth examining the latter explanation. The freedom for peace deal was really a test of both parties. Could Palestinians give up violent resistance to occupation, and given that could Israelis finally put a stop to the occupation and destruction of their lands? Palestinians in the West Bank have passed the test with flying colors, but Israel has failed it miserably.

One reason for this is that the occupation has become institutionalized: the Israeli economy profits from the separation wall, from the flow of relief aid through Israel and into Palestine, from access to Palestinian water and farmlands, and from the lack of regulations in the occupied territories that allow companies to cut costs by polluting and poisoning the land. Another, more depressing reason is that the peace camp isn’t so peace-loving after all. I don't ascribe bad motives to people like Gershom Gorenberg who cry out for the Ghandis that are marching right under their noses, but when Palestinians are jailed and tortured and beaten and murdered, the Israeli left is nowhere to be found. Save a few brave souls, Israel’s left wing has chosen to ignore their end of the bargain by passively allowing their government to continue brutalizing Palestinians long after violent resistance has ended. And when Palestinians proposed Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions as ways of pressuring Israel to grant them freedom, the Israeli left reacted with horror and outrage and charges of anti-semitism. Evidently it is not enough to adopt non-violent tactics; these tactics must be non-effective as well.

The Palestinian turn towards non-violence exposed the hollow nature of the Israeli peace camp and the inability of Israeli society to control the occupation that has become such an ingrained part of its society and economy. The model that was established during the 1960s American civil rights struggle showed that when an oppressed people took the justice of their cause to their good hearted fellow citizens, those citizens would force an end to the oppression carried out in their name. That is clearly out of the question in today’s Israel. Thankfully there is another model we can follow. The South African example shows that an oppressed people can appeal to the world community to use its political and economic leverage to force change onto a recalcitrant regime. That is the theory behind the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions movement and you can tell it works by its long list of victories, as civil society around the world gags at the sight of Israel bombing Gaza and divests from its weapons dealers, checkpoint builders, and settlement financiers. Pressure is slowly growing, not just in economic terms but in public sentiment as well.

Think about that the next time you go shopping. Remember Mohammad Othman, jailed for being the Ghandi Israel encouraged him to be. Put down that Ahava makeup, Sabra hummus, Lev Leviev diamonds, and the rest of the garbage produced by the industries built on the land Mohammad and his compatriots are fighting to liberate. Stop buying goods from companies that profit from occupation, review your investments and sell your shares in complicit firms, encourage your communities to do the same and educate people around you on the need for civil society to intervene on behalf of Palestinians. The evidence is clear that Israel is either unwilling or unable to change its course, so now it is up to people of conscious around the world, like you and me, to make it happen.

Extra: Listen to an interview with Mohammad Othman about the campaign to save his village and the types of repression the Israeli government has used in response to non-violent resistance. (Feb 2009, 12 mins).

Principles

I am not interested in a "solution" to the question of Palestine which does not address the rampant discrimination practiced by the state of Israel against 1.2 million of its own citizens (just the most recent of countless examples). Any resolution of this conflict, in order to be morally just and plausibly long lasting, must produce real democratic reform within Israel. Whether that is more likely to come in the form of one state or two is really a reflection of the willingness of a supposedly progressive democracy to look at its own behavior, see it for what it is, and change it for the better.

Mainstream journalists go to Palestine

Australia's 60 Minutes visits Palestine to report on the issue of settlements. Here's the link to the truly excellent segment, and here's the transcript:

STORY -

LIAM BARTLETT: This is a day in the life of the West Bank. Where neighbourhood disputes are settled at the point of a gun. An Israeli settler has come to confront a Palestinian family in the city of Hebron. So Hosni, when you were shot, you're standing here, the settler is, what? Standing here with the gun? And he shoots you here? Can I have a look? Will you show me? Palestinian Hosni Matrie despises the Jewish settlers who have moved into his town - and the feeling is mutual. His house is a stone's throw from one of the Jewish settlements springing up all over the West Bank.

HOSNI MATRIE (TRANSLATION): The first bullet hit my nephew, it grazed his face. A few seconds later, he shot me in my chest.

LIAM BARTLETT: A third bullet hit Hosni's father in the arm. Hosni, before they attacked, did anyone from this house provoke them at all?

HOSNI MATRIE (TRANSLATION): We have had trouble with these guys since 1973, since the beginning of the settlement.

LIAM BARTLETT: The West Bank is most disputed piece of land on the planet. This is where Palestinians want to establish their new state.

NADIA MATAR: They have here eight couples and 15 singles.

LIAM BARTLETT: But Israelis, like the feisty Nadia Matar, are doing their level best to prevent that by building houses all over it and simply assuming ownership.

NADIA MATAR: Welcome. Shalom.

LIAM BARTLETT: Thank you. Their settlements are in breach of international law, but try telling Nadia that. This is unlawful, this is unlawful.

NADIA MATAR: No. What is unlawful is for you to come to my house and tell me I'm not allowed to build. How would you feel if I came to your back yard in Sydney and tell you your house there is illegal?

LIAM BARTLETT: The UN says this is disputed territory... ..that you captured.

NADIA MATAR: The UN is biased, uh uh uh, pro-Arab - we know that. Leave it and where should we go? Where should we go? Back to Auschwitz? Where do you want us to go? This is our homeland.

LIAM BARTLETT: Israel won this land from Jordan in a war in 1967. And it's been under strict military occupation ever since. It's called the West Bank because it's on the west bank of the Jordan River. And it's tiny, tiny enough to fit into Tasmania 12 times. And without the question of its ownership ever being resolved, the Israelis are moving in and living on it. They're called settlements, from here I can see at least four. There's one over there, two behind me, and another over here, being established on this hilltop. With sworn enemies living side by side, it's little wonder tempers explode. Zev Broude, the settler who shot Palestinian Hosni Matrie and his family, went to trial in an Israeli court. Remarkably, despite the compelling video evidence all charges were dropped and he walked free. So we went to the settlement next door to ask Zev Broude why he opened fire on his neighbours - what brought on his frenzy with a gun? Hello Mr Broude, hello how are you? 60 Minutes, Australia, sir. Can we just talk for one moment please? The fact is, Israeli settlers like Zev Broude have become a law unto themselves. A man who shot three people and was proud of it. Just ask him why he shot three men at point-blank range... ..without provocation?

TRANSLATOR: He says, "Get out, it's my house, please go away."

LIAM BARTLETT: Palestinians believe that the Israelis settlers have closed the door on peace by moving in and occupying their homeland.

DR MUSTAFA BARGHOUTHI: It's like cancer. If you stop at a certain point, then you can remove its effect. But if you allow it to continue to expand, the patient will die.

LIAM BARTLETT: Palestinian doctor Mustafa Barghouthi says Israel is controlling almost every aspect of Palestinians lives. There are now 300,000 Israeli settlers - they look down on Palestinian towns through barbed wire and boom gates. To protect the settlers, Israel controls the movement of Palestinians. To travel from one town to another, there can be humiliating delays at checkpoints. There are hundreds of them. By contrast, the Israelis use a network of new highways, built for settlers only.

DR MUSTAFA BARGHOUTHI: If I am caught driving on any of these roads, although I am a member of parliament in Palestine, I would be sentenced to six months in jail.

LIAM BARTLETT: Automatically?

DR MUSTAFA BARGHOUTHI: Automatically.

LIAM BARTLETT: The oppression is sometimes very brutal. Some settlers resort to extreme tactics to protect their homes. So Palestinians are fighting back with - of all things - video cameras. The theory being that the camera doesn't lie.

SALPY KERVOKIAN: It gives them power. I mean, the Israeli Army has the guns and the settlers have the guns. This is their own weapon, this is the weapon that they use for the justice that they're hoping to achieve.

LIAM BARTLETT: Salpy Kervokian, an Israeli, is ashamed of what many of her own people are doing. She's part of Bet-Selem, a human rights group putting cameras into the hands of Palestinian families to expose hostile settlers.

SALPY KERVOKIAN: There is a moment of this lady attacking a home, with an Israeli soldier behind her not stopping her, and her verbally attacking the family living in that home.

LIAM BARTLETT: A camera versus a gun, it's a bit one-sided isn't it?

SALPY KERVOKIAN: Whatever comes forward they'll use, if it's a camera, or a rock, they'll use it.

LIAM BARTLETT: It was one of those cameras that captured, so dramatically, the shooting of the Matrie family. Finding a settler to publicly justify crazy behaviour is not easy, but one agreed to a secret meeting in a remote olive grove. Are you familiar with this incident, are you familiar with this?

ELYASHIV KELLER: I see him beating him up.

LIAM BARTLETT: He's seeing a gun and he's trying to defend himself. Settler Elyashiv Keller would have none of it. He said it had been made up, just to make settlers look bad.

ELYASHIV KELLER: You're showing me a fight, between people.

LIAM BARTLETT: No, I'm showing you a...

ELYASHIV KELLER: Listen!

LIAM BARTLETT: ..a settler, shooting at close range...

ELYASHIV KELLER: You are saying that he's a settler, I don't know those people. Listen! You can say, "OK, he's a settler, and he came to interview me from Australia," now, who's going to tell me in the middle of the shoot who's right?

LIAM BARTLETT: Oh, so you're saying...

ELYASHIV KELLER: OK, I'm saying I don't know what's going on here. This can be anything.

LIAM BARTLETT: Another thing settlers don't like talking about is the massive government support they get. Their houses are heavily subsidised, they're protected round the clock by soldiers and they get a lot more water than Palestinians - so settlements are green and Arab areas are not. But Mr Keller says that's fine, because settlers are peaceful, it's the Arabs who are violent. Do you want me to show you some more vision of Jewish settlers attacking people?

ELYASHIV KELLER: Do you see a gun?

LIAM BARTLETT: Do you want me to show you some more movies?

ELYASHIV KELLER: Do you see a gun?

LIAM BARTLETT: Do I see a gun on you? No.

ELYASHIV KELLER: I'm just sitting under a tree... ..in the middle of a beautiful place. That's all.

LIAM BARTLETT: And with that, this settler decided he'd had enough.

ELYASHIV KELLER: I think for us, this conversation is over.

LIAM BARTLETT: But what's far from over is the deep resentment that young Palestinians have for the settlers. We went along to one of their regular protests outside a settlement. Israeli soldiers were waiting for them. Look out - tear gas! This is supposed to be a peaceful demonstration, about what's happening with their land. And if this is peaceful, I'd hate to see violent. The tear gas canisters have just come in and everyone's beating a hasty retreat.

DR MUSTAFA BARGHOUTHI: Every day they are using violence against the Palestinians even when we are trying to protest in the most peaceful, non-violent manner.

LIAM BARTLETT: So when the settlers say you're the trouble-makers, what's your response?

DR MUSTAFA BARGHOUTHI: This is exactly like a man raping a woman and then he complains because she is screaming. That's exactly the attitude of the settlers. They want to attack us, take away our land, sometimes shoot us, and they want us not to protest.

LIAM BARTLETT: Israel is now under urgent pressure from the outside world, led by President Obama, to first freeze the building of settlements and then, somehow, to dismantle them. Winding back the clock will be an almighty challenge, but Dr Barghouthi believes it's now or probably never.

LIAM BARTLETT: How close is it?

DR MUSTAFA BARGHOUTHI: Very close, or almost there. I am so worried because I think if, I mean, we have really very specific two months now. It's about changing the course. If the course doesn't change within these two months then that means the course will not change at all.

LIAM BARTLETT: Settler Nadia Matar says nothing will change, and she's not going anywhere. So when they send in the troops to dismantle all this?

NADIA MATAR: We'll re-build it - not only 1 but 10.

LIAM BARTLETT: You'll keep building?

NADIA MATAR: Of course. They'll come, they'll break it down - not this, I hope not, but if they do, so we'll rebuild here and here and here, you're invited to come.

LIAM BARTLETT: We'd love to.

NADIA MATAR: OK, good.

While being feted as an oasis of westernism in Toronto

...Tel Aviv's city council is busy patrolling for interracial dating.

From a story you thought couldn't be printed after the civil rights movement of the 1960s, Yediot Ahronot describes the Tel Aviv city hall's establishment of a patrol unit to break up Arab-Jewish dates. Seriously.

Naomi Klein on Democracy Now!

Interview in two parts:

1. Naomi Klein explains the origins and reasons behind the protest of the Toronto Film Festival as it fetes Tel-Aviv with nary a word about Palestine.

2. Klein goes on to talk about her recent Harpers' piece, "Minority Death Match" about the UN Conference on Racism:

Norman Finkelstein on Democracy Now!

Lots of good videos in the past few days. Finkelstein is interviewed about the Goldstone report on war crimes committed in Gaza during Israel's assault.

GritTV on the BDS movement, Israeli war crimes

Excellent interviews, well worth watching:

Gaza's Fishermen

Check out these videos of one man trying to feed his family by fishing off the coast of Gaza. Shooting at fishermen and burning their boats is a routine pastime for the Israeli Defense Forces, though they can hardly be described that way. During the blockade, now older than two years, the IDF has openly restricted Gazan fisherman from going past 3 kilometers offshore (though their territorial rights extend far beyond that - several hundred kilometers if memory serves), but in practice they have always enforced even tighter boundaries designed to prevent fisherman from being able to catch enough fish.

Its quite disturbing to watch in these videos the utter pointlessness of this violence and harassment, and the lack of any sympathy for Palestinians trying to fish. The main point is that this violence and humiliation is completely senseless, neither is there a reason for it, nor is there a hint of a second thought by the IDF.

The blockade has driven Gaza into a state of humanitarian crisis, set the Gazan economy and society back to pre-1967 levels, and killed thousands of innocent individuals. Somehow, this doesn't seem to phase the Israeli government or its soldiers.

For more information, check out this news article from Al Jazeera, this recent write-up of the situation, or read this blog about the plight of Gaza's fishermen.

A Failing Strategy

There's a remarkable similarity between the Obama administration's handling of health care reform and Israeli-West Bank negotiations. In both cases, the Administration laid all its cards on the table, clearly stating ahead of time its minimum requirements for a deal. Then, in the face of a counterpart that 1. considers Obama's minimum desires as the starting point for debate and 2. repeatedly indicates complete disinterest in any actual compromise, the administration weakly issues statements (Israel, Republicans) expressing disappointment with actions that sabotage the negotiations accompanied by unfounded statements of hope that the process can be resurrected.

This is a strategy doomed to failure and one that the PA has also historically embraced. By stating ahead of time that a Palestinian state must at a minimum include a contiguous West Bank and sovereignty over East Jerusalem, both the PA and the Obama administration have given away any leverage they might have over the negotiating process. The Israelis now consider Obama/Abbas' most minimum position as the starting point for negotiations instead of a potential ending point. It would have been much better if Palestinian negotiators started at a position even they knew was unrealistic, because that would set a much higher starting point for negotiations and therefore significantly increase the chance of achieving core principles in the end. Given that the PA and now Obama are doing the opposite, it is no wonder that the Israeli government is attempting to negotiate over a settlement freeze, even though that's the most minimum requirement for the formation of a Palestinian state. It is also no surprise that each consecutive peace proposal has been significantly worse than its predecessor. In this context, the fact that the pro-Palestinian community has already written off the Obama administration is also completely unsurprising.

When it comes to health care, the current picture is similarly bleak. I don't think we're going to end up with anything better than either a weak or trigger induced public option or a bill without the public option passed only as a face-saving measure. Rather than starting from a maximalist position such as Medicare for all, he laid out the very minimum he was willing to accept: basic reforms, a mandate, and a public plan to keep insurance companies honest. But that instantly became the starting point for Republicans, who can't come back to their base with a victory without achieving a compromise at less than Obama's minimum. In other words, Obama's only realistic way to get Republican votes is by taking less than he can minimally accept. When faced with these options, its not surprise that meaningful reform is on the ropes and the democratic base is incrementally souring on the Obama administration and the prospects for saving a country slowly circling the drainpipe.

Let me sum up my point with this question, what would you be more surprised by, Obama getting more or less than his minimal demands on health care reform? The answer is that Obama getting more than he laid out as his bottom line would be a complete and utter shock. The same sadly goes for peace between Israel and the West Bank. So clearly this has been a strategy doomed from the very beginning. Its much smarter to ask for more than you reasonably expect to get, that way when your counterpart starts to negotiate, you actually have something to give away as a compromise. I really hope that the administration learns that lesson, and soon.

Israel the mighty democracy, capable of neither introspection nor shame.

I'm pretty sure most public relations battles are won by the party that blames human rights groups first.

Fayyad: "It's not our business whether Israel is Jewish"

What he said: "Israel's character is Israel's business and nobody else's."

What he should have said: "As a representative of the entire Palestinian population, which includes 1.2 million Palestinians currently denied equal rights under Israeli law, I cannot in good conscience advocate for any peace based solely on the status of the West Bank. Without ensuring that Palestinians, wherever they live, will have equal rights under democratic governance, no peace process will ever be just or secure. Today, Palestinians in Israel suffer from a systematic lack of political, social, and economic rights, as well as shockingly apparent legal and governmental discrimination. I will not consider the struggle for Palestinian rights complete until all groups of Palestinians - those in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, the refugees, and in Israel - have secured equal rights under the law. I must therefore reiterate that Israel cannot be a state of Jewish exclusivity or privilege under any final status agreement."