Palestinians: Presidents for Life, No Elections

[Mosby]

Best birthday wishes to Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas, who turned 81 last week. The octogenarian appears ready to remain at the helm until his last day -- free elections for Palestinians be damned.

Abbas has inherited a tradition of tyranny. His predecessor, Yasser Arafat, was also president for life. Both have plenty of company, joining a long list of African presidents who earned the notorious title of "President for Life" - in Uganda, Equatorial Guinea, Angola, Zimbabwe, Sudan, Chad, Eritrea and Gambia. And let us not forget the Arab dictators in these ranks.

One might hope for at least a deputy -- someone to fill the impending and inevitable power vacuum in the PA. Not likely.

-snip-

Senior figures who have dared to challenge Abbas's autocratic rule have already found themselves targeted by the president and his men. Ask former Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, who had his organization's bank accounts seized by Abbas, or Mohamed Dahlan, the former Fatah commander and minister who was forced to flee the Palestinian territories after falling out with Abbas and his sons. Perhaps deposed PLO Secretary-General Yasser Abed Rabbo, who overnight was stripped of his powers and thrown to the dogs for speaking out against the president, would have a word to say. In Ramallah, they call them the "Abbas victims."

-snip-

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7727/abbas-president-for-life

When Abbas dies in the next ten years or so we are going to see a civil war break out - one that the Palestinians might never recover from.

[Scootaloo]

1. Damned if they do, damned if they don't

Israel and the Us want a pliable strongman like Abbas. But they also want to decry the "lack of democracy" such a demand engenders. They both also fear a popular vote, which will undoubtedly elect someone not as pliable. There's also the logistical reality of holding elections in territories so thoroughly under the control of a foreign enemy power.

It's a legitimate problem, but the criticism of it is not legitimate, especially coming from parties to demand the problem exist and favor its maintenance.

[COLGATE4]

2. Sophistry at its finest.

[Scootaloo]

3. Not at all. Everything I said is true

Neither Israel notr the US have any interest in Democratic sucession in Palestinian politics. Such elections tend to result in people that those nations don't like gaining power. Remember 2006, when hamas took leadership of the Palestinian Authority through the democratic process? What happened then, and which side did hte US and Israel back and support?

It's a regular pattern, especially in US foreign policy - support strongmen in weak nations. do you think that this isn't true? because history would argue the point.

Then there is the simple logistics. To have free and fair elections, Palestinians must be able to move. All those west bank checkpoints and the enforced disconnect of the west bank and gaza make that exceedingly difficult, and I can't really imagine Israel loosening these structures. especially not for an event that will likely result in a repeat of the very undesirable 2006 results, at the cost of a pliable central figure like Abbas.

But please, do give me your own analysis. How am I being false?

[oberliner]

4. Like Russia propping up the dictator in Syria

Because elections could result in someone worse.

Or how certain folks were keen on letting the Libyan dictator stay in power.

Or our relationship with the Saudi regime, or the various emirs.

It also seems like some DUers are cool with leaving certain dictators in power and not supporting the will of the people in certain situations but not in others.

[Scootaloo]

5. Sort of, yes

Though of the three, the Saudi regime is a more apt comparison to the Palestinian situation than either Assad or Ghaddafi.

Even so, it would be laughable for Russia to wax on about the lack of Democracy in Syria while propping up its puppet, yes?

[oberliner]

6. It would be interesting to see the world reaction if the US elected Trump

Perhaps countries would encourage us to abandon democracy if that is going to be the result.

[Scootaloo]

7. He couldn't possibly be worse than Dubya

I think we absolutely do have a rock bottom, and Little Boots carved his initials into it with a flourish.

[oberliner]

8. At least Bush didn't nuke anybody

Trump seems a little too open to the idea.

[Scootaloo]

9. Oh, I'll bet he tried!

He just couldn't find the attaché labeled "Nookyular Launch Codes."

Jokes aside, Trump honestly doesn't worry me in regards to foreign policy. He's playing a schtick and he knows it. he goes up on stage, yells about "Murrika, fuck yeah!" and demands Mexico pay for a wall, promises "we're gonna handle china" and all this other vague hand-wavey nonsense. he's got no actual proposals there, he's just making noise to rile up a crowd. he's being an entertainer and using it to garner support. And while a riled crowd can be a scary thing for domestic policies - and that's where Trump worries me most - it doesn't have much impact on foreign policy.

Cruz... Cruz is the psycho that needs to have his arms amputated so he never pushes the Big red Button. That's the motherfucker that will nuke Beijing to kill the commies, nuke Mecca to kill the heathens, and nuke Jerusalem to make Jesus come back. Ted Cruz is seven flavors of crazy and none of them need to have access to launch codes.

[oberliner]

10. Interesting

I must confess, I am at a loss when it comes to Trump. I can't tell what is real and what is BS and whether he is as genuinely dangerous as he sometimes seems or whether it's all just a game. In any case, I think it would be a national embarrassment if he ends up somehow becoming POTUS - even more so than when Bush did.

But I guess we are going way far afield from the OP so I'll just leave it there.

[Scootaloo]

15. Since when does I/P ever stay on topic?

Trump does not seem to understand that his power as president would have some pretty sharp limits. The fact that he's a very stupid man is actually a good thing, in this regard. At least - again - as far as foreign policy is concerned. Like this thing with Mexico. he demands Mexico pay for his wall idea, and mexico just laughs and flips him the bird. What's he going to do, threaten war/ More middle fingers, from everywhere, and nothing will come of it - No US congress is going to approve any sort of military action against Mexico. Certainly not over such a dumb fucking idea in the first place. Just on this idea, he'll burn all of whatever political capital he has in the US, and certainly throw away any international capital.

The worst harm he could do is actually by not doing things. The Obama administration is engaged in a myriad of diplomatic efforts to thaw and improve relations with nations such as Cuba and Iran. A president Trump would have the ability to just shut that all down. he might not be able to lay about with big stick, but he would have the ability to take the Us down an isolationist turn. Which, in some ways, for some instances, might actually be a good thing... if handled properly. But Donald Trump is a fucking orangutan, so it would not be handled properly.

Ted Cruz is not an orangutan. he's a surprisingly smart guy. I think he has the cognitive ability to understand the limits of the position, and then find ways to maneuver within - and beyond - those limits. he's got that whole Nixon vibe to me. I think we're all lucky that he looks like a deformed kewpie doll, because imagine if he were actually charismatic.

[Mosby]

11. Hamas won the legistlative elections in Gaza...

...because they "stacked the deck".

So they had no right or authority to take over the strip, but they did anyway.

[Scootaloo]

13. I think you need to study the subject

[King_David]

12. All of a sudden the Palestinians care what Israel or the USA want ?

Interesting.

[Scootaloo]

14. I don't understand your response

For a US or Israeli outfit to shake its finger at Palestine for lack of elections is just a little hypocritical, is my point. Do you think Israel or the Us would rather have a pliable dictator-type, as we find in Abbas, or do you think they want the uncertainties and vagaries that come with genuine democratic elections?

I'm curious if you think that Palestine can - as things currently stand - actually engage in elections? In simple terms of logistics - the organization, money, and physical movement of people needed - they cannot. Not on their own, at least, not without leave by the occupying power. Whether Palestinians care what the US or Israel thinks or not, the simple fact is that Palestinians exercise very little control over Palestine.

[King_David]

16. No matter how pliable Abbas is , he is allowing and encouraging terror by knife

All that means is bigger walls , bigger crackdown and bigger misery for both sides.... Who needs that?

[Scootaloo]

17. I've read otherwise

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1134126717