New York Times Editorial, "Israeli-Palestinian Collision Course": No Mention of Jordan's Palestinian Majority

In an editorial entitled "Israeli-Palestinian Collision Course" (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/07/opinion/israeli-palestinian-collision-course.html?ref=opinion&_r=0), The New York Times concludes:

"Many experts say that if there is ever to be an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement, admittedly a distant dream at this point, the Palestinians must be united. But the United States has to be careful to somehow distinguish between its support for the new government and an endorsement of Hamas and its violent, hateful behavior. To have some hope of doing that, the United States and Europe must continue to insist that Mr. Abbas stick to his promises and not allow Hamas to get the upper hand."

First, it should be acknowledged that given past enmity of the Times toward Israel in keeping with Obama administration foreign policy, this editorial shows signs of balance. Wisdom? That would be asking too much.

The ironclad guiding principles of Palestinian Authority President Abbas are to be found in a declaration he made to Jackson Diehl in 2009 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/28/AR2009052803614.html):

"'I will wait for Hamas to accept international commitments. I will wait for Israel to freeze settlements,' he said. 'Until then, in the West Bank we have a good reality . . . the people are living a normal life.'"

In fact, nothing has changed for Abbas over the past five years, and this logic, premised upon survival, still guides Abbas, who is in the tenth year of his four-year term as president of the Palestinian Authority.

Or stated otherwise, I would not read too much into Fatah's latest collaboration agreement with Hamas. Moreover, Abbas has witnessed the violence and chaos stemming from the "Arab Spring," and has no intention of allowing the West Bank to descend into mayhem.

"Many experts say that if there is ever to be an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement, . . . the Palestinians must be united"? Needless to say, the Times editorial fails to observe that Britain gave 77 percent of the Palestinian Mandate to Abdullah in 1922, thus creating the state of Jordan. Palestinians, who comprise some 70 percent of Jordan's total population of some 6.3 million people, suffer severe discrimination in a country where they comprise the overwhelming majority of the populace (see: http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3249/anti-palestinian-discrimination-jordan).

It is remarkable how discrimination against the Palestinian population of Jordan continues to be ignored by the mainstream media, which prefers to focus upon the dispute between Palestinians and Israelis. But why should we be surprised? Some 30 million Kurds living in Iraq, Iran, Turkey and Syria, are stateless, yet the media - only in the market for alleged Israeli transgressions - could not care less.

New York Times Editorial "A Fatah-Hamas Deal": Unbounded Naïveté (I)

Yesterday, in an editorial entitled "A Fatah-Hamas Deal" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/09/opinion/09mon1.html), The New York Times told us:

"Ultimately, a successful Palestinian state will need to have all its people, from both the West Bank and Gaza, working together to build a stable and prosperous future. The recent agreement between the two main factions — Fatah, which leads the Palestinian Authority and has committed to peace with Israel, and Hamas, which has committed to Israel’s destruction — is not the answer."

However, The New York Times declares that the U.S. must not cut off funds to the Palestinian Authority, which would eliminate Washington’s leverage over a new government and "shift the political balance dangerously toward Hamas."

The New York Times continues:

"Other reconciliation attempts between Fatah and Hamas have imploded, but Mr. Abbas seems to believe this will advance his push to get the United Nations General Assembly to recognize a Palestinian state. Above all, his sudden willingness to deal with his enemies in Hamas is a sign of his desperation with the stalled peace process."

Abbas has turned to Hamas out of "desperation with the stalled peace process"? What is the basis for this balderdash?

All that matters to Abbas, whose term as president of the Palestinian Authority should have ended in 2009, is to retain power. As Abbas indicated in May 2009 to Jackson Diehl of The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/28/AR2009052803614.html), he couldn't care less about "the stalled peace process":

"'I will wait for Hamas to accept international commitments. I will wait for Israel to freeze settlements,' he said. 'Until then, in the West Bank we have a good reality . . . the people are living a normal life.'"

So why is Abbas now ostensibly pressing for Palestinian statehood? Answer: Following the wave of unrest in the Arab world, he is deathly afraid that West Bank Palestinians will rise up against his one-man, one-party rule, which is rife with corruption. Notwithstanding his hatred for Hamas, he is currently pursuing a ruse intended to persuade Palestinians that his concern extends beyond his own welfare.

Unity between Fatah and Hamas? Not a chance; however, the editorial board of The New York Times has swallowed the Abbas stratagem hook, line and sinker.