Mbig,
I apologise for such a long delay in this post; I've found myself quite busy recently with my upcoming external exams, so forgive the short post and potential long delays in my responses.
You asked for my views on Salam Fayyad, and I'll try to summarise them here.
In essence, I find Fayyad to be the potentially best candidate/partner for peace within Palestine, particularly for his stance in moderation when compared to Hamas' violent methods and Abbas' lackluster performances (particularly in the recently leaked concession offers). I think ideologically, his theory of focusing on the domestic economy within Palestine, and vitally in the construction of functioning institutions. This could potentially be more effective than the current lifeless "peaceful negotiations", particularly as it establishes mutual ground between the Palestinians and Israelis (as opposed to the current massive power imbalance) as well as ensuring international support due to his rejection of violent resistance. However, my primary flaw with this ideology is that it may be somewhat idealistic for numerous reasons
Firstly, while many claim that Fayyad has contributed to a reduction in corruption within the Palestinian Authority; there have been serious allegations towards him and his policies on the basis of corruption. Many argue that while perhaps he himself does not participate directly in corrupt policies, he condones and does not do enough to combat them. This is massively detrimental to the fundamental basis of his ideology, as corruption is a massive obstacle to the economic rebuilding of the Palestinian state.
No problem on the time. I keep busy Off and on board.
If Fayyad is corrupt, or rather, allowing too much corruption.. who then?
Certainly he's better than anyone else.
He may not have been given all the power needed by Abbas to clean house.
Or perhaps that's part of the deal to run it.
Fayyad has great International respect, and I believe he is the Sole party in Palestine who does.
Palestine-to-be and Palestine will be a world-dependent state for at least a decade.
Money is crucial. The difference between success and a failed state.
Is he seen as an old Arafat cronie or too pro-Western? Too weak?
Surely, on lack of corruption alone, he is the winner.
But the PA and Hamas have apparently made a deal, he will not again serve as PM.
And he has said he 'won't stand in the way of his country', he accepts leaving.
It must be those who want him out are the power plotters/corrupt/fear him in a free election.
Furthermore, I think Israel would have to play a significant role in this policy; current blockades on Palestinian territories are one of the most detrimental obstacles to the Palestinian domestic economy and standard of living.
If the Palestinian people are struggling to find water, how will they rebuild a state plagued by six decades of conflict?
BBC NEWS | Middle East | Palestinian water crisis deepens
He's on it.
EUobserver.com / Headline News / EU to finance Palestinian water plant
At least the large part that is water mismanagement.
Everyone in the area has water problems. Must be the weather.
When you combine this with the fact that 85% of the exports that once took place from the West Bank and Gaza strip have been banned under restrictions by the Israeli government, you see how large a role they play in the Palestinian economy. Restrictions on fuel have contributed to the recent fuel crisis within Gaza, and even in the significantly less hostile West Bank, restrictions on travel completely flatten manufacturing, construction and a large portion of the public service sector, draining as much as $2bn from the economy in recent years.
It's my understanding Egypt has most, not all, of the responsibility for the fuel crisis; cutting off the tunnel supply.
If I recall correctly, Gasoline was actually Much cheaper in 'blockaded' Gaza than the West Bank.
And it's my impression the West Bank is prospering and growing handsomely.
It ain't Europe but neither is Greece or Spain. :^)
As for talking with Hamas for unity, OK. But that's conceding there Are two Palestines. Why not just have an internationally monitored One-state election where everyone is free to run in any district. At least Pretend they're a country before the UN makes them one.
You can't ask to be a country before you have a govt.
For this reason, I fear that Fayyad's policy of essentially ignoring the role of Israel and trying to rebuild the Palestinian economy may be somewhat idealistic, considering the massive control and influence they have over the Palestinian economy, and have had throughout the occupation. As well as this, I think whether we like it or not, Hamas' influence HAS to be dealt with in order to achieve any lasting peace. I understand that their methods should be critically condemned, but the fact remains that they control a significant portion of the Palestinian territories, and so any leadership of the PA would have to negotiate and try to sway Hamas further into moderation. Without a united Palestinian leadership to represent their people, there's no way that peace is conceivable at any point in the near future, and as bad as it may be, negotiation with "the bad guys" is sometimes necessary.
So you think he should be more vocal/bellicose to/at Israel as they are an impediment?
I think his methods are incredibly dignified.
People want a 'Palestinian Ghandi', better a Palestinian Businessman who can't be bothered by trivial violence, and who is seen as the face of the new/completely different Palestine.
"Violence. Wouldn't think of it, we're too busy running a country".
It's a master propaganda stroke as well. A 180° turn.
Who can deny a state to Palestine-as-Switzerland.
Finally, I'd like to express my skepticism regarding how the Israeli government would react to this new outlook of Palestinian leadership should Fayyad be in charge. I think that he would pose a real threat to the status quo, and should he be successful in producing a de facto Palestinian state, a transition of power could take place which would give the Palestinians a better negotiating position both directly and through the perspectives of the international community. My concern is that the current Israeli leadership under Netanyahu, has no aims to change the status quo if it requires concessions, and so may try to shoot down his policies.
Thanks for taking the time to read,
I'd love to hear your (and anyone else's) response to my expressions here.
Justice
Hey, No disagreement on Netanyahu as I've said too many times to count.
Peace's best chance IMO is the [for both sides Unlikely/wild guess] handshake between Livni and Fayyad, maybe 2017.
I've watched this for the last 30 years+ and Right now it looks as bad as it gets. Netanyahu and 2 Palestines.
Seems so bad, it's like we should talk about another subject for a few years, though this has been enjoyable.
