Being a Palestinian... would you trust Hillary Clinton?
by
patrick.kleeblatt | 12.11.2010
After the US failed tremendously in all their "efforts" to bring peace to
Palestine, and latest even approved Israel's new settlement activities, no
Palestinian will be enabled to trust in the erroneous statements the
Secretary of State of the United States has made lately and will further
do.
Since now almost two decades, the US-Government ployed the successive
Palestinian leaders to accept without any condition ever to "make peace" as
required by Israel. At the same time the US were aiming to bring the
opposite parties around the table for subject negotiations, they delivered
heavy weapons and almost abolished ammunition (cluster bombs, phosphor
grenades, etc...) to its nearest middle-east ally, Israel.
Moreover, what is said during press conferences and what is said behind
closed doors lays in diametric opposition. It must be considered as a fact,
that the US have absolutely no interest of bringing peace to the
middle-east. One hard to deny reason is the US military industry, that has
billions (in dollars) of reasons to keep the fire burning. Imagine just for
a moment that there is peace between the two countries. US military
industry would loose one of the most profitable markets that was a unique
profit resource and "legal".
Furthermore, Palestine is and will never become a market place for the
US-economy. Would someone seriously believe the Palestinians would welcome
WAL-MART, or Starbucks (just taken as good examples, even though there
would be more names available). So what interest the US have to deliver
"peace and democracy" to Palestine? NONE
The US, and in instance Barak Obama knew exactly at the time Nethanyahu
told him that the settlement construction will go on, that again one chance
of many had gone. This guy who promised his fellow citizens and the world
the "change" will come is discovered, meanwhile on a daily basis, as a lier
and a looser. He received the peace nobel prize and went on with the war.
He said he would close Guantanamo, and torture sees no end. He said he
would allow everybody in the US to be on the "save side" and saw his health
care program busted. He promised more civil liberties and more equity, now
he orders the FBI to "entrap" american muslims.
Hard hit by the economic crisis, the US-civil society believed that "I
can"-Obama will squeeze and get rid of the idiots who created the mess.
With few exceptions, so ass Madoff, it's still business as usual. The same
civil society believed the democrats and the new-born Martin Luther, that
the rich would have to assume their part of revitalizing economy,
employment and much more. What came out? Obama gives the rich a $160
billion tax benefit, has approved the same amount for military expenses (in
within the costs for Iraq and Afghanistan are not listed) and leaved the
coming US-generations today a debt of roundabout $13 trillion. And there
are still more bad news to come.
Now let me ask you again. If you were a Palestinian, would you believe
these people?
Even though it must be considered that as Argentine and Brazil recognized
the Palestinian state, and i will believe that many on the world, except
the politicians and economic players, do so as well, it actually is purely
symbolic. But the US-Government feels so strong to tell these countries
that they interfere in a peace process. What peace process?
So not only that the US reclaim the right of governance over almost two
thirds of the world, they will teach Argentine and Brazil what to do and
what not. And afterwards they wonder that Hugo Chavez nationalizes the
US-industries in Venezuela. Every country should do so until these self
proclaimed world governors turn back to reason. Who do you think you are by
giving advice to others.
Even though China is not a "child of sadness", it is almost the US that
blocks the UN. Ban ki-Moon takes no rest appealing for peace, compromises
and much more. And it's always the US and their merchants of death who
engage the stalemate situation. There must be an end, don't you think so.
Alternatives
Honestly said, alternatives are few, decades of war, occupation, rape and
torture have brought generations on the front of no compromise. I do not
accept the bombs which detonate in Israel, nor do i accept the rockets and
the extremists. But it must be considered that the US and Israel went on
and on pushing the growing generations to use the force against the
oppression and siege.
Now, would the EU be able to bring the parties together? Positively not.
The EU is a patchwork of governments in which everyone seeks to dominate
the other. The euro is weak, economic players and their lobbyists rule the
politics. Ashton plays the "Randy McDonald" but has not really the power to
engage the EU in real peace talks. Whereas Germany still feels that guilty
that there is no room to condemn Israel, the French are taken in between
two seats. They are economically (most in regard of weapon and nuclear
sales) close to the middle-east states, but don't want to hurt the Jews
(those in Israel as well the own ones in France).
The other countries of the EU are wheter to small, weak or in such an
economical mess that they have the hands tied. I won't even speak about
those EU-Partners that have no working government. And to those that could
state i forgot the Brits.... well i presume they actually have their own
students to beat...
China too is actually not an alternative. First they have no real
political, nor economic interest in both Israel and Palestine. And i will
not believe that there would be anyone triggering on the dragon's beard,
regarding that Iran is set to become a needy oil supplier. Russia maybe...
but rather not. Russia also has other cats to beat then going into endless
discussions with a "one way" sign.
Hmmm... looks like i'm running out of alternatives. Latin America must
first strengthen itself before it might become a concrete mediator, but
there isn't much time. Well i think we've made it around the world and...
not really an alternative seems available.
Thus, it is no reason to leave it to the US. They brought the boat on the
ground, played a trashy game with the Palestinians and always followed the
"this is what we want" of the Israelis. A solution, even though it is seen
as an utopy, might be the UN. But it should be so that the "Veto"-States
could not make use of their joker. There should be a simple vote and the
majority would be to decide firstly if or not Palestine is a state on its
own. Then there should be defined the borders, of which i suggest those of
1967 would be reasonable. Then Israel has to be taken accountable for all
the right violations it committed. And last not least, the resolutions that
were validated must be honored.
Then and only then, i allow myself to imagine that both parties can have
serious negotiations. But dear readers, don't expect to grow old enough to
see this by your own eyes. There will be more and more people to die, just
because of primary economic, and secondly political interests. It could be
severely accelerated by a real political change in Israel, but that's far
from reality.
.jpg)
Comentarios
Enviar un comentario nuevo