Par LSA Oulahbib

It's occur to me there are two reasons for this (secret) palestinian reject. First of all, because to stand a very State in fair balance between continuingly evolving life standards and strong fight about prosperity inside the global changeous world, this kind of work in this way is too harsh comparatively at this time being by what "they" (I want to say their leaders) are very assisted, underscored, by international islamist communauty, UN, and, above all, EU, France in particular.

To proove this assertion, it's enough to read "Why not two peoples, one state? " (from Michael Tarazi who is a legal adviser to the PLO) which explains why this kind of Palestinian aims one State rather two: it's more easier to convince the progressist people across the world that just one State for your own is selfish and it's better to have just one for two, share everything like an old couple.

But it seems that kindly but idealistic thought, -which move actually Europe History, (after two thousands years and not just few like Jews and Palestinians; without to forget, for instance, that French people dont want be taken as they will be English...), this gently way (one State, not two) is not the very reason nevertheless, but a standby posture for the palestinian leaders who are never accepted the Israeli fact.

Think this way : never, in all the History of Islam, the muslims had accepted that the "dhimmi" people, like it wrote in "the" book (Jews and Christians), could live under in their own law. Even the so called "secular" Palestinians, not anymore. Because inside this kind of word, "secular", but also "socialism" or "nationalism", you are not the same signification with the occidental terms.

It's not say a very specific way without only religious point of view, but the opposite and worse perspective : the religious and the politic life are just mixed in the same way and they are all you want but "Arab" ; it's mean not just the top of the History mankind, but also the superiority from the men on the women, not just inside the family, but also outside, in the social life, and so on. Find just one muslim State, even Tunisia, on an other track, you can't. It's a fact, not just the illusion.

It's why the mystery, at this stage, is the european audience about it, specially in France and UK. Maybe because these two countrys are become blindy by their guilty colonial feeling to have not make their best for genuine people when they was the mastermind.

But to recognize this way and to think about it is a thing, to become an "useful idiot" is an other. Otherwise, it's very dangerous to not separate compassionnal behaviour and politic strategy. For instance, more you encourage the irrealistic revendication like the right of return inside the israeli boundaries, (even just to be quiet or to talk nothing about it : it the same), more you permit the lethal response like you can see in the time being, only if you are honest of course.

In this spot, you can take the actual french policy about Irak. More President Chirac sings aloady about "multilateralism", more the islamist and baathist people picks Chirac like a shield ; perhaps it's why they don't can let free the two journalists (even they are very pro palestinian). They are taken Chirac with his own words : if you are very anti-american, proove it and talk about us like "resistants" and make a pressure to push us at the negociation table in november. And we help you to hold your word straight : we improve yourself with keeping two of your people, just in case you forgotten your (dhimmi) destiny like your future (futile) is.

And it's the same reverse in the other side : more the Israeli are the Oslo profile (specially after their odd and wird South Libanese retreat), more the palestinian leaders said : they are definitively smooth, even weak, day after day ; it's why the intifada and kamikaze way can force them to abandon their will and we have the time to wait.

We have all the time, no matter with that, specially if you have a good account money in the Swiss Bank, a big and pretty flat near Champ Elysee, Neuilly sur Seine for instance (like Arafat's wife), and not matter also if you are already starving your own people to contain him, strain him in the wild condition, like a wild tigger before the circus time (kamikaze moment and media links, two faces and one piece) and you keep in this way, on the track, all the time you can ; because the problem is not the time being,fu...the present, no futur but muslim way ; it's mean "The Return inside the Golden Age" (Medine) or nothing.

So, you have two possibility. Either you said to them : there is just one way to get democracy life (but several shapes obviously), to build a fairy and open society kept the balance between richs and poors ; or, you said to them : I encourage you to keep moving in an "other" way, even it's wrong, warry, lethal, but no matter, it's yours.

If you choose this second feature, don't be surprise if this bubble blows in your face, soon or later : it's "chimic" you know...

*

Résumé : Les groupes palestiniens ne veulent pas d'un Etat parce que cela figerait la perspective d'un retour vers l'époque de la domination islamique ; aussi militent-ils actuellement pour un Etat deux peuples parce que ce combat sera plus aisé à mener au sein d'un Etat de Droit. Le Quai d'Orsay défend dorénavant ce point de vue, pour l'instant officieux il est vrai.

Par ailleurs il semble bien que plus le camp démocrate mondial se divise, plus ses ennemis peuvent en utiliser les failles. Ainsi la position chiraquienne est aujourd'hui une défense avancée de l'islamisme mondial en ce sens qu'il peut s'en servir comme bouclier. Il faut donc moins voir dans la prise d'otages des deux journalistes français (pro palestiniens) la main de la Syrie qu'une tentative de prendre Chirac au mot en le forçant à défendre l'idée qu'il existe une "résistance irakienne", même si elle refuse le processus politique actuel.

Face à cela, soit l'on a le courage de dire qu'il n'existe qu'un seul chemin, celui de l'Etat de Droit, et ce au-delà du fait qu'il a bien entendu plusieurs formes, soit on accepte le fait accompli d'une force politique résolue qui a définitivement tourné le dos à l'histoire démocratique telle qu'elle a commencé depuis quatre siècles en Europe (ce qui est peu) parce que cette force pense avoir tout le temps devant elle puisque son but, c'est-à-dire, la finalité de son existence, est la domination mondiale.

Voir également :

Misère permanente de la classe politico-médiatique française à propos de l'Irak

Two suggestions for Iraq

Why islamist irakis renegades are so in love with the opposite sex

Réflexion sur le meurtre (des Népalais) en Islam...

Otages français : crise de longue durée ?

Révélations des amis islamistes du Quai d'Orsay

Pourquoi le dieu des musulmans n'est pas le même dieu que celui du judéo-christianisme

En finir avec le monde "arabe"