http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/12/31/a-serious-look-at-fayyad.html
 |
| Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayyad (R) tastes olive-based products during the annual Olive Harvest Festival in the Palestinian West Bank town of Bethlehem on November 3, 2012. (Musa Al-Shaer / AFP / Getty Images) |
I like and respect Geoffrey Aronson, and his bimonthly Report on Israeli Settlement in the Occupied Territories,
published by the Foundation for Middle East Peace, has long been a
must-read for those tracking the settlement project. I was all the more
taken aback, therefore, by his recent critique of
Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad. Aronson’s criticisms are
riddled with inaccuracies, loaded with emotive and hostile phraseology,
and, most importantly, offer no alternatives.
Aronson’s
basic argument is self-refuting. He tries to paint Fayyad as a
non-threatening lapdog of the occupation whose project has only served
Israeli and American interests. He simultaneously suggests, though, that
many pro-occupation Israelis have come to view his institution-building
program as a threat, causing them to label Fayyad "an obstacle to
peace."
But from the outset, Fayyad's policies have been the greatest possible
threat to all those, on both sides, who do not want a two-state solution
based on a compromise. This is because his program actually worked
successfully to start to create the infrastructure of an independent
Palestinian state. Greater Israel advocates have therefore always looked
at him with deep suspicion, as have Hamas and one-state advocates.
Hostility towards Fayyad by extremists is nothing new.
Aronson claims "Fayyad has evidently despaired of his failed
state-building strategy." There is no evidence of that at all. Fayyad
has been the first to label recent events, which have tended to
undermine moderates and boost extremists, particularly Hamas, as, in his
words, "doctrinal defeats.”
But what has halted Fayyad's project in its tracks is the double
whammy, following Palestinian diplomatic initiatives at the United
Nations, of the withholding of Palestinian tax revenue by Israel and the
steep reduction in aid from the West.
Fayyad, in fact, is not despairing but, as usual, looking for solutions: bank loans and other temporary financial solutions; ways of restoring aid from the West or increasing that from the Arab world; and trying to build a
reliable and regular system for the transfer of Palestinian revenues by
Israel under the terms of the Paris Protocol. Aronson, meanwhile,
mistakenly accepts Israel's claims that many outstanding Palestinian
debts to Israel are governmental, when in fact they are owed by
privately-held companies.
Aronson makes the bizarre claim that Fayyad was "catapulted" into senior
Palestinian leadership ranks by George W. Bush, personally. And he
backs this up with the ridiculous assertion that, because Fayyad studied
at the University of Texas, “When Bush looked him in the eye he saw a
Texan.” This is a baseless argument desperately looking for nonexistent
evidence. It's a barometer of how seriously the whole article should be
taken. In fact Fayyad was appointed Finance Minister personally by
President Yasser Arafat in 2002, following his service as the IMF
representative to the PA from 1996 to 2001. What's more, Fayyad also
served as Finance Minister in the Palestinian unity government, that
included Hamas, from March to June 2007.
Yet Aronson claims that in 2002, Bush set then-Prime Minister
(now-President) Mahmoud Abbas and Fayyad up as “America’s Palestine tag
team” in order to marginalize Yasser Arafat's power. This is entirely
fictional, and borders on calumny. In fact Fayyad worked well with
Arafat, while Abbas ended up resigning as Prime Minister and only
returned to power after Arafat's death. Aronson’s account of this whole
period—and Fayyad's roles within Palestinian politics and his
relationship with the United States—is conspiratorial, misinformed,
misleading and flat-out wrong....READ MORE
No comments:
Post a Comment