Monday, February 27, 2006

Did Haniya Say So or Didn't He?

[Mr Haniya] told reporters the subject of recognising Israel had not come up in the interview [by the Washington Post]. (BBC)

“Arafat: The Biography” (Tony Walker/Andrew Gowers) を終了。同名DVD の関連本、“Elusive Peace” (Ahron Bregman) を買った。

As Marwan Kanafani, Arafat’s press spokesman at the time and sometime confidant, observed of an early meeting with [Shimon] Peres: ‘We realized the size of the catastrophe when we met Peres for the first time (after Rabin’s death) and came to the conclusion he did not have the leadership qualities to go forward.’  (p. 385)

… while Palestinian leaders in their Gaza redoubt were quietly satisfied that they had seen the back for the moment of Netanyahu whom they had come to despise, there were few illusions about [Ehud] Barak, an unknown quantity politically.  Arafat and his colleagues could not put out of their minds that it was Barak, the military man, who had led elite Israeli commandos on a raid of Beirut in 1973, to avenge the Munich Olympic Games massacre, in which a troika of the PLO’s most promising cadres were assassinated.  (pp. 403-404)  

… while they (Arafat, Nabil Shaath and Madeleine Albright) were cooling their heels [at the Waldorf Astoria in New York in September 2000, waiting to see Clinton], Albright, according to Shaath, asked Arafat, ‘What are you going to tell the President of the United States about the Temple Mount?’

Arafat: ‘What I tell the President of the United States is none of your business.  By the way, it is not the Temple Mount, it is the Haram al-Sharif.’

Albright: ‘I know it as the Temple Mount.’

Arafat: ‘It’s the Haram al-Sharif.’

Albright: ‘OK, it’s the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif.’

Arafat: ‘No, it’s the Haram al-Sharif.’

Albright: ‘OK, call it what you wish.  Are you going to accept the proposal made by the President of the United States about shared sovereignty [for the holy places]?’

At that moment, an enraged Arafat walked out, saying, ‘You know nothing about the history of the place… You are delaying the meeting with the President of the United States.’  (p. 415)

Arafat was able to draw some satisfaction on 24 January 2002 from the death of Lebanese militia warlord Elie Hobeika who was blown up in a massive car bomb outside his house.  It was Hobeika who had commanded the Phalange militia units which were responsible for the 1982 massacre at Sabra and Shatila.  No culprit for Hobeika’s elimination was identified but one intriguing possibility suggested itself: the Lebanese warlord would have been a material witness at the possible trial of Ariel Sharon in a Belgian war crimes case over the  Sabra and Shatila massacre.  Now he had been silenced.  (p. 428)

… the Palestinian leader is full of anger against the Americans whom he blames for many of his ills, including his present marginalization.  He is incensed that the George W. Bush mantra of ‘regime change’ extends to the Palestinians.  He is deeply resentful that he received most of the blame for the failure of Camp David when he believes that inadequate preparation by the Americans and a cheeseparing attitude by Ehud Barak made these other parties at least as culpable.  (p. 440)

Sunday, February 26, 2006

Trouble with Sleep Yet Again


Interview with Hamas Leader -- Washington Post

'We Do Not Wish to Throw Them Into the Sea'
Sunday, February 26, 2006; Washington Post

Since Hamas won control of parliament in the recent Palestinian elections, policymakers in Washington and Jerusalem have been faced with a dilemma: how to deal with a democratically elected government that is also on the State Department's list of foreign terrorist organizations. Last week, Newsweek-Washington Post's Lally Weymouth interviewed Hamas's new prime minister, Ismail Haniyeh, by phone in his home in the refugee camp where he lives with his wife and 12 children in Gaza.

Were you surprised by the size of the Hamas victory?
Hamas entered the elections planning to be victorious.

Was the victory due to corruption in Fatah, the social services you provided or the general agreement of most Palestinians with the Hamas program of armed resistance?
The victory of Hamas is not only based on the corruption of the Palestinian Authority. Hamas has a vision and a program, and this is the reason why the Palestinian people chose Hamas. However, there is no doubt that the corruption helped Hamas's victory.

What percent of the people voted for Hamas because of your call for armed resistance?
Resistance is one of the reasons for Hamas's victory, but Hamas works [also] in the political, educational and charitable fields. All these activities helped it win.

Palestinian President Abu Mazen and the international community have put forward conditions for dealing with Hamas: 1) recognize Israel; 2) recognize existing agreements with Israel made by the Palestinian Liberation Organization; 3) renounce violence. Will you agree to these conditions?
We are surprised that such conditions are imposed on us. Why don't they direct such conditions and questions to Israel? Has Israel respected agreements? Israel has bypassed practically all agreements. We say: Let Israel recognize the legitimate rights of the Palestinians first and then we will have a position regarding this. Which Israel should we recognize? The Israel of 1917; the Israel of 1936; the Israel of 1948; the Israel of 1956; or the Israel of 1967? Which borders and which Israel? Israel has to recognize first the Palestinian state and its borders and then we will know what we are talking about.

Israel has agreed to a two-state solution, signed agreements with the PLO and withdrawn from Gaza. So will Hamas accept any of the agreements that the PLO -- starting with [Yasser] Arafat and continuing with Abu Mazen -- made with Israel?
Number one, the withdrawal from Gaza was based on a unilateral decision and a unilateral plan. It was not [done] out of the generosity of Israel. Has Israel committed itself to all these agreements? We are not war seekers nor are we war initiators.
We are not lovers of blood. We are not interested in a vicious cycle of violence. We are oppressed people with rights. If peace brings us our rights, then this is good.

Do you accept the Oslo agreement signed by Yasser Arafat?
Israel has stopped completely committing itself to Oslo.

I am not asking about Israel. Are you, as the new Palestinian prime minister, committed to Oslo?
How do you want me not to pay attention or care about what Israel says? Oslo stated that a Palestinian state would be established by 1999. Where is this Palestinian state? Has Oslo given the right to Israel to reoccupy the West Bank, to build the wall and expand the settlements, and to Judaize Jerusalem and make it totally Jewish?
Has Israel been given the right to disrupt the work on the port and airport in Gaza? Has Oslo given them the right to besiege Gaza and to stop all tax refunds from the Palestinian Authority?

So you will not abide by past agreements made by the Palestinians and Israel?
I have not said that. I have said that Israel . . .

But you are not the prime minister of Israel. Will you abide by past agreements made by the Palestinian governments and Israel?
We will review all agreements and abide by those that are in the interest of the Palestinian people.

What agreements will you honor?
The ones that will guarantee the establishment of a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital with 1967 borders -- as well as agreements that would release prisoners.

Would Hamas recognize Israel if it were to withdraw to the '67 borders?
If Israel withdraws to the '67 borders, then we will establish a peace in stages.

What does that mean?
Number one: We will establish a situation of stability and calm which will bring safety for our people -- what Sheikh [Ahmed] Yassin [a Hamas founder] called a long-term hudna.

Does a peace in stages means the ultimate obliteration of the Jewish people?
We do not have any feelings of animosity toward Jews. We do not wish to throw them into the sea. All we seek is to be given our land back, not to harm anybody.

Do you recognize Israel's right to exist?
The answer is to let Israel say it will recognize a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders, release the prisoners and recognize the rights of the refugees to return to Israel. Hamas will have a position if this occurs.

So will you extend the present ceasefire?
I will not say yes or no. The problem is with Israel. If Israel gives us a quiet period and stops its incursions and the assassinations, then we will be able to convince our people to continue with a state of quiet.

How is Hamas going to run its government with the United States cutting back funds and the Palestinian government having a deficit of $700 million? Will Iran make up the difference?
We have an economic plan for self-sufficiency based on rationing and protection of public money. Number two: Our relationship with the Islamic and Arab world has shown indications that these people will support us. Number three: The liberals and free people of the world will not like to see the Palestinian people living under siege. We have received indications from the international community that they will not stop their aid.
I ask the American administration not to participate in any resolution that will double the suffering of the Palestinian people. I am convinced that the American people would not want to see the Palestinians suffer the way they do.

You must offer Americans some kind of assurance that you agree with President Bush's two-state solution, that you oppose violence and suicide bombings, that you favor peace. Can you?
All the Palestinian people would like to stop the bloodshed and take the civilians away from this vicious cycle of violence. The problem is not with us but with the Israelis.

Will you recognize Israel?
If Israel declares that it will give the Palestinian people a state and give them back all their rights, then we are ready to recognize them.
Israel does not have a charter calling for the destruction of the Palestinian state.
Our only position will be declared once Israel recognizes our right to exist.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon accepted a two-state solution as did President Bush. What do you say about the two-state solution?
It all starts with Israel.

Saturday, February 25, 2006

Abu Ammar Was Trying to Create a Single Front

“Arafat: The Biography” (Tony Walker/Andrew Gowers) は、「オスロ合意」の直前まで読み進んだ。水没したため読み終えられなかったRubin/Rubin “Arafat: Political Biography” はずいぶん議長に批判的で、嘲笑的でさえあったが、Walker/Gowers の方は比較すれば好意的な内容だと思う。


[I]n his attempt to ensure that the forthcoming PNC would prove reasonably representative of Palestinian aspirations, Arafat traveled to Khartoum in the first week of September [of 1991] for a meeting with Ibrahim Ghosheh, spokesman for Hamas… which had its strongest roots in the Gaza Strip, and which had emerged as a powerful and militant counterweight to Fatah. For some time, Arafat had been attempting to draw Hamas into the broad PLO church. (pp. 340-341) 「ハマス」がさほど注目されていなかった時期だ。

Nippon NCB Gone Bankrupt

ずっと書き忘れていたが、元雇用者が先月末破産した。同情も残念さも感じない。その数日前に会社が夢に出てきたが、予感だったのかもしれない。90年には国会議員まで呼んで「創立10 年記念パーティー」を京王プラザホテルでやったぐらいだったのに。常務や京都で新入社員だったころを知っている営業社員の実名の出てくるネット掲示板を見 て愉快。転職していそうにない人(他の会社で働けそうにない人、日常業務を「教育」だと思い込んでいた人)も数人いたが、どうなっただろう。社員旅行で「わしは社長じゃ。酒をつげ」と言っていたSmall-Mountain 社長に、えらそうだったMiddle-River 副社長の責任は誰が問うのだろうか。

Friday, February 24, 2006

Arafat Waving from a Tank


昨日の夢。一眼レフのデジカメを買っていたようだが、よく覚えていない。その後、自転車のスタンド(kickstand)を何度も下げようとするが、どうしても下がらない。自転車の持ち主で中学校の同級生、I 君にバカにされていた。


Thursday, February 23, 2006

According to Q...

According to Q, I’m smelly, dirty and oily.  I don’t deny it, but who is so clean???

Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Some Works Done

昨日、絵はがきを投函した。振込先口座の指定について質問するため、保険会社に電話したが担当者不在。電話してもらうように依頼したがかかってこず。Fatty’s で夕食のあと、CC に行く。1時前までいて、タクシーで帰る。うちの近くで肉骨茶を食べる。


Monday, February 20, 2006

Chinese Brides

“Sunday Times” に、中国人女性と結婚したものの、女性がカネ目当てだったり、浮気症だったため離婚に至った失敗例が2つ掲載されていた。男性は2人ともめでたく再婚しているが、不思議なことにひとりはベトナム人と、もうひとりはカンボジア人とで、シンガポール人が相手ではない。なぜだろう。「外国人好き」なのか、それとも同国人に相手にされないのか。


Inexorable Emptiness

今日(日)。朝9時ごろ目が覚め、薬を飲んだら、また眠ってしまった。起きたら午後3時だった。夕方になってからCB に行って、E 最新号と“Arafat: The Biography” (Tony Walker/Andrew Gowers) の続きを2時間ほど読んだ。心の落ち着かない空虚な日。

先月読み始めて、終えていなかった“Electric Don Quixote: The Definitive Story of Frank Zappa”“Arafat: Political Biography” (Barry Rubin/Judith Colp Rubin) は、「水没」してしまったため、残念だが先日廃棄した。


Saturday, February 18, 2006

Is This Terminal Situation?

15日(水)。夕方、QちゃんとTB Plaza で会う。「伊勢丹スコッツ」で食事をしながら、一体「どうするつもりなのか」問う。曰く、「引越ししたい」、「結婚するつもりはない」、もちろん「子供をもつつもりもない」。自分の症状については、“I can’t cope (with your condition).”

これまで何度も何度も、“I need your help. Please learn and understand what is happening to me” と言ってきたにもかかわらず、このような発言に接して、「サヨナラ」とその場を去った。せっかくECT 以降、気分がよかったのに、どん底の気分にさせられた。将来の設計があまりに違う。自分の意向などまったく考慮してくれていない。

Orchard Rd をひとりで歩いてCC まで行った。10分ほどして彼女も来なくていいのにやって来た。(行く場所がバレている。)また言い争い。9時ごろ、彼女は「眠い」ので帰った。

16日(木)。久しぶりに起きられない(起きる気がない)。夕方、Q がうちに来る。(家主と店子という関係ならこうなってしまう。)無視しようとしたが、“sex addict” 呼ばわりされ、レイプされかける。何とか避ける。まったく理解不能。

17日(金)。CB にいると、Q が来る。買いたいアパートを見に連れていかれた。このアパートのどこがいけないのかさっぱりわからないのだが……Lok Lok で夕食。Orchard California Gym に行ったあと、自分はCC に行き、彼女は帰った。CC F さんに会う。「悪いことできる顔しとらへんやないか」と「ほめて」もらう。


Sunday, February 12, 2006

Lovely NTUC FairPrice Lady


Instantly fell in love with the “Choose Reusable Bags” lady at the NTUC FairPrice entrance! Who is she??

Thursday, February 09, 2006

Extraordinary Days


目が覚めると、事情を知っている人がいるかもしれないCC まで歩いていく。結局、事情がよくわからないまま警察署に届け出る。


ECT に盗難事件、それから兄から手紙と人生に影響するようなことが立て続けに起こって、今も気分が落ち着かない。せっかく気分改善のきかっけになるはずの時期だったのに。

Tuesday, February 07, 2006

Sad Letter Arrived


Robbery Case and Memory Loss

6回の予定だったECT は、5回目となるはずだった昨日で終了することになっていたが、4日夕から5日にかけての盗難事件で予定がズタズタになってしまった。今もって、記憶が蘇らない。いずれにせよ、命があったことと、旅券が戻ってきたことをよろこぶべきか。

記憶の異常はおそらくECT が原因だろう。泥酔したという記憶はまったくない。


Friday, February 03, 2006

Is This Because of the Weather?

ECT と時期を同じくして、気候がよくなってきた(ように感じる)ので、気分も改善。Qちゃんも気にしてか、病院まで迎えに来てくれる。