By William Markiewicz
- Thus spake the Powerful. But first he must understand that one negotiates for peace, not for negotiations. Otherwise negotiations die in the womb. The Bush-Sharon tandem means unconditional victory for Sharon combined with unconditional defeat for Abbas. Has anybody ever heard of such a preliminary condition: "First, be obedient, then we'll negotiate." The weaker partner cannot accept negotiations under ultimatum because the weaker would rightly believe that once the powerful obtains what he wants he'll give nothing in exchange. Not within the NWO framework anyway.
During the war in Algeria, while peace talks were going on, the rebels continued to attack. The French protested: "Why do you fight while we're negotiating?" The Algerians answered: "Because there is no peace yet." It may be an extreme option, but it's also true that you don't put the horse before the cart. If peace could come before negotiations, then who needs negotiations?
Regarding the situation on Palestinian Territories, the Israelis' priority is not negotiations with the Palestinians but among the Israelis themselves. The Israeli colonists refuse to give away the annexed territories they shouldn't be in to start with. Negotiations among the Israelis may last months if not years because the government is not ready to use force against other Israelis. Another generation of colonists may grow, the Palestinians physically and psychologically will weaken with time. Who would stop fighting in those conditions?Back to the index of the Vagabond