Working Group on the Middle East Peace Process

Testing the Water

2012-01-28T16:21:00.002Z

Palestinian radical groups have been thinking for some time now of adopting a policy of non-violent protest. They are testing the water on 30th March with a march on Jerusalem. The $64,000 question is how both Israel and the Fatah controlled Palestinian Authority will react. Can they tolerate non-violent protest? Neither of them will like it.

See this link to a radical website >>>>>>>>> CLICK HERE

Israel Air Force Strike ends Lull in Violence

2011-12-09T17:21:00.000Z

Why oh why does Israel choose to re-start a chapter of violence with Gaza after a time of calm? I mean why? What is the point of targeted killings that engender so much hatred and achieve so little? This is the view of recent events as distributed today by the Conservative Friends of Israel (not the most neutral source but the story tells itself). These words are unedited as they come from the Friends of Israel:

The recent lull in violence along the Israel-Gaza border ended this week with at least 13 rockets being launched into southern Israel and a series of Israel Air Force strikes against militants in Gaza in a 24 hour period.
Rocket fire intensified after an Israeli air strike on a car in Gaza City, killing two militants, including a Palestinian reportedly planning a terrorist attack on the Egypt border.
The IDF strike was a targeted hit on a militant in the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade who was reportedly plotting to commit terror attacks against Israeli citizens and security forces along the Israel-Egypt border.
The militant killed in the strike, Ismail Batash, was described as a senior operative in Fatah’s Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, and was also a member of the “Army of Believers” an al-Qaeda affiliate based in the Gaza Strip.
According to the IDF Spokesman, Batash had plotted a number of attacks, including a 2007 attack in which a suicide bomber crossed from Sinai into Eilat and blew himself up in a bakery, killing three Israelis.
The strike, which was the first Israeli strike inside Gaza City since the three-week Gaza war in 2008-2009, followed an order by Israel's Education Ministry forbidding any school trips to take place around the southern Israeli city of Eilat, after receiving warnings against a possible terror attack on the Israel-Egypt border.
Palestinian gunmen responded to the strike with a barrage of rockets fired deep into southern Israel.
A Grad-type rocket exploded in an open field near the southern city of Be'er Sheva, with another Qassam landing in an open field in the Sdot Negev Regional Council; no injuries or damages were reported in either incident.
Rocket fire continued with projectiles landing in the western Negev, Eshkol Regional Council, and two additional rockets landing just south of Ashkelon, a major Israeli civilian centre.
An additional rocket barrage began early Friday evening when 5 rockets exploded in southern Israel, including one shot down by the Iron Dome missile defence system.
In response to the escalating rocket fire, an Israeli air strike hit a Hamas training camp in Gaza City on Friday, killing one civilian and wounding 13 others, mostly women and children.
The IDF has said that it regretted any harm to uninvolved civilians, which it said was caused by the presence of explosives and weapons at the targeted sites, including rockets.
The airstrikes, the IDF Spokesman said in a statement, were accurate and direct hits on terror targets were recorded.
The statement also strongly criticised Hamas’ continuing exploitation of civilians: “[Hamas] chooses to operate in the heart of civilian population centres and uses human shields”.
Earlier in the week, the IAF launched an airstrike against a group of militants along the Gaza border, killing one and wounding two others, after a gun battle broke out when Israeli forces neared a buffer zone along the border.
The IDF often patrols the border to search for explosives or clear out areas potentially used by militants to stage attacks.
The Israeli aircraft targeted two militant squads that were preparing to fire rockets into southern Israel.
Islamic Jihad, which has launched a series of such attacks against Israel in recent months, has since claimed that the militants involved were all members.
Early last month, Israel and Islamic Jihad engaged in several days of fighting in which some 10 militants and an Israeli civilian were killed.

Marwan Barghouti, The Best Justification For Remaining Cynical About The Prisoner Exchange

2011-10-13T15:10:00.001Z

News that Gilad Shalit will return to Israeli hands in exchange for 1,027 Palestinian prisoners was celebrated on the streets of Jerusalem and in Gaza. Videos showed jubilant scenes in which Palestinians rejoiced with the knowledge that family, friends and community members would finally be released from Israeli prisons. Al Jazeera reported Palestinians pouring onto the streets in Jabaliya refugee camp in Gaza where celebratory gunfire and car horns could be heard all around. Indeed Hamas leader, Khaled Meshaal, reiterated this positive tone, saying in a television address from Damascus, “this is a national achievement that we should be proud of." A similarly positive line is being taken by various mainstream media outlets, with the prisoner swap deal being described as a “landmark” deal, and a demonstration of a “new face of Hamas”.

But there is actually very little to celebrate. The mainstream media, Mr Meshaal, and some of the Palestinian public may put a positive spin on it, but the reality is that this is at best a misguided Hamas decision and at worst a deep betrayal by Hamas. The logistics of the exchange have been detailed, with 450 Palestinians released in the first phase of one week, and another 550 freed in the second phase. What has received far less attention is not only the fact that 203 prisoners will be deported, with 40 barred from Israel and the Occupied Territories completely, but also the thousands of Palestinian prisoners that remain in Israeli prisons, including hundreds of children.

Significantly, the figure who represents the most hopeful sign that a genuine peace agreement could be reached, Marwan Barghouti, will remain incarcerated. Barghouti’s continued imprisonment is a clear sign of Israel’s lack of commitment to the Middle East Peace Process, since his release would breathe new life into the Palestinian struggle. Barghouti has become a symbol of hope for many Palestinians and, alongside this popular support, also holds sway in the upper echelons of the Palestinian leadership, being referred to by some as “Palestine’s Mandela.”

The subject of his potential release is a divisive one within Israeli circles. Some members of the Knesset, including former Defence Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, have called for him to be part of a prisoner exchange, but others, who seem to have won the argument on this occasion, believe he should never walk free. He has been called a “terrorist” by those in this anti-Barghouti camp, but they forget one important point: he is part of what Mandela referred to as “the long walk to freedom”, a national liberation struggle. His actions must therefore be viewed within this context. Whether he was involved in stoking violence during the intifadas or not, and even behind bars, Barghouti remains the best prospect for peace.

The Arab Awakening and the Israeli-Palestinian Connection

2011-10-05T14:32:00.000Z

Pro-democracy marchers in Alexandria, Egypt, celebrate their victory on February 18, 2011. Credit: Mohamed Adel

NCF Member Tony Klug has contributed an interesting article to Tikkun magazine. Tony writes:

The stunning failure of the international commentariat to foresee the seismic shifts that are engulfing the Arab world is reason enough to be guarded about what commentators are now telling us about the causes and meaning of the uprisings.

Until events proved otherwise, many self-appointed experts confidently—sometimes arrogantly—explained that the global movement toward democracy had been spurned by the Arab world simply because liberty and equality were “not part of the Arab makeup.” So it must have come as quite a shock to them that the Arab people turned out to be not so different from the rest of the human race!

While the future course of events is not yet clear, there are certain tentative deductions that I believe we can risk making even now.

The first is the self-evident observation that there are opportunities and there are dangers, including, as witnessed in Libya and, potentially, Syria, the ominous prospect of prolonged civil wars in countries where the ruling powers decide to fight anti-government protesters to the bitter end. It is, perhaps, telling that the regimes that have always regarded themselves as “revolutionary” are among the last to come to terms with the new revolutionary mood.

Second, autocratic regimes plainly cannot be depended on to deliver “stability.” This is not altogether surprising, as there is usually no mechanism to change these brittle regimes that does not involve bringing down the whole system.

A third deduction is that nonviolent mass action is not the poor relative of an armed uprising but can often be more effective in achieving and sustaining change. Had the popular rebellions in Tunisia and Egypt been commandeered by men and women of the gun, they would probably have invited instant and overwhelming counterviolence by the respective regimes, which would have gladly seized the opportunity to crush the incipient protests.

Fourth, while the grievances of the Arab street may be similar, the contexts are different in each country. So it is not surprising if the revolutions—and the responses they provoke—take divergent paths.

Fifth, no one faction—religious, nationalist, or ideological—owns the revolution, except maybe the Arab youth, male and female, who have broken through the fear factor and are not prepared to swallow the old slogans, put up with a life of oppression, and suffer the alienation, hopelessness, and humiliations of their parents’ generation. However, this is not to say that there may not be an attempt by this or that political grouping to hijack one or another of the revolutions. Eternal vigilance on the part of the young revolutionaries, coupled with strong constitutional safeguards, will be vital to forestall such an eventuality, particularly during transitional phases.
Sixth, the new social media have revolutionized the way people communicate with each other and the potential for rapid mobilization. To the ruling old guard, putting down armed uprisings and attempted coups must have seemed like child’s play compared with the challenges presented by Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.
Seventh, unlike the revolutions in Eastern Europe in 1989 that, in the main, aimed to transform their despotic governances into Western European–style liberal democracies, the Arab uprisings seem not to have very clear models other than generally wanting to change the political systems. Whether this is a strength or a weakness is yet to be seen.
FOR FULL ARTICLE CLICK HERE

Palestinian Authority's UN membership bid

2011-09-20T16:26:00.002Z

Palestinian officials announced on Tuesday that they had enlisted the support of six, or possibly seven, members of the UN Security Council to support their bid for UN recognition as a sovereign state. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has announced that he will submit his member application to the Security Council immediately after his address to the General Assembly on Friday. Palestinian diplomats have been working feverishly to secure the votes of nine member states, despite the fact that the US has already made clear it will veto the proposal. Washington has indicated it wants to avoid using its veto, therefore avoiding a situation where they appear to have single-handedly rejected the Palestinian bid, and so American diplomats have been working to create a blocking coalition of seven votes. Abbas has been under pressure from European governments to submit his bid to the General Assembly, which can only issue recommendations, rather than to the Security Council.
As of Tuesday afternoon only the United States, Germany and Columbia (which receives American financial support to fight rebels and drug lords) have announced that they will vote against the proposal. The positions of France and Britain remain unclear. Abbas has made clear that he has won the support of Gabon, and is currently negotiating with Nigeria and Bosnia-Herzegovina. Israeli premiere Benjamin Netanyahu has arrived in US and has called on President Abbas to open direct negotiations in New York. However Abbas has conditioned negotiations on an Israeli construction freeze in occupied territory, and therefore has agreed to meet Netanyahu for protocol purposes only, not to relaunch negotiations.
A poll by the Palestinian Centre for Policy and Survey Search interviewed 1,200 Palestinians and concluded that 83% of Palestinians support Abbas’ bid.

Livni Accuses Netanyahu of “Diplomatic Stupidity”

2011-09-20T13:09:00.002Z

Israeli opposition leader Tzipi Livni has criticised Prime Minister Netanyahu’s foreign policy on the grounds that it has endangered Israel by “putting the United States into a corner”. Speaking at a special Knesset debate on Monday ahead of the Palestinian statehood bid at the UN, Livni heavily criticised Netanyahu for a lack of action in the face of harsh diplomatic realities and international isolation for the state of Israel. In the light of diplomatic difficulties with the Palestinians, Turks and Egyptians, Livni emphasised that Israel cannot afford to alienate its friends in the United States. The Kadima leader said “They [the United States] don't understand Israel's policy, they don't understand why the stubbornness over settlements, they don't believe the prime minister of Israel when he says 'two states' but doesn't do anything about it.” Livni asserts that Netanyahu’s claim that he is committed to a two-state solution and his subsequent refusal to take any steps to realize this goal has aroused American suspicions of the Prime Minister. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is to officially submit his bid for full UN membership for the Palestinian state to the General Assembly on Friday.

‘Cottage Cheese’ Protests in Israel

2011-09-08T10:10:00.005Z

The somewhat humorously named protests began in June 2011, stemming from a Facebook page which protested the rising cost of living in Israel. The price of cottage cheese, which is considered an essential every- day item in Israel, has risen by forty five per cent in the past three years. This is most likely as a result of the government having stopped regulating its price, in a misjudged attempt to encourage competition in the market.

Since June, the ‘Cottage Cheese’ protests have continued to escalate. One hundred thousand protesters joined the original Facebook protest page, and participated in a nationwide boycott of the product, which, according to activists, will not end until the price of cottage cheese is lowered by 12.5%.

The government is now having to contemplate allowing the importation of dairy products in order to stimulate international competition and drive down the cost of cottage cheese in Israel, and it is interesting to note the wider rationale of the recent protests. The Cottage Cheese Protests embody the national sentiment that the benefits of the country's economic growth have not extended to the majority of the population. The cost of living and housing in Israel has not risen in accordance with what much of the population can afford; Israel has a poverty rate that is approximately two times higher than the average developed country, for example; house prices in one particularly sought- after region neighbouring Tel Aviv have risen 49% in just six years.

As a result of this, we are once again witnessing the use of social networking sites in the Middle East to facilitate calls for reform. The use of Facebook in Israel in recent months has mobilised people from a variety of socio- economic and religious backgrounds to actively express their dissatisfaction with the government, in addressing the issues that matter to them. Indeed, in conjunction with this, large protest encampments have sprung up along boulevards in major cities across Israel, in response to the perceived nationwide lack of affordable housing. The Hooverville era style encampments stemmed from a Facebook page set up by 25- year old Daphne Leef two months ago, from which she envisaged a small- scale protest. The spread of these protests is in itself testament to the widespread dissatisfaction felt across Israel at the rising costs of living.

Many have attributed the recent protests to the educated but dissatisfied youth; young graduates make up a large proportion of those affected by the lack of affordable housing, and social networking sites such as Facebook provide a platform from which they are able to unite and take action. It seems that Prime Minister Netanyahu’s recent efforts to reconcile the protestors with a team of ministers for negotiating purposes has been in vain, as September 3rd saw a further 500,000 demonstrators take to the streets of many cities across the nation.

The protests are the biggest in Israeli history and are particularly significant in the sense that they indicate to the international community that Israel is not as unified as might be expected. Palestine have begun their bid for statehood recognition at the UN in a move that is likely to divide international opinion; the Israeli authorities will therefore consider it crucially important to present a united front, now more than ever.

UK Arrest Warrants and the Law of Universal Jurisdiction

2011-08-17T10:38:00.000Z

The procedure by which arrest warrants can be sought and issued without any prior knowledge or advice by a prosecutor is an unusual feature of the system in England and Wales. In addition, Spain, Belgium and Norway also seek to arrest Israelis on charges of alleged war crimes through “universal jurisdiction” laws. The principle of “universal jurisdiction” laws is that some alleged crimes are so grave that they can be tried anywhere, regardless of where the offences were committed. This law developed since the General Pinochet case in 1999.

In July 2010 the UK announced that it was planning a timetable to introduce legislation which would somewhat restrict the application of universal jurisdiction in the UK, because threats of arrests are stopping Israeli politicians from visiting the UK.

The proposed law, which is part of the new Police and Social Responsibility bill, does not restrict the scope of universal jurisdiction in the UK but will affect the possibility of private persons obtaining an arrest warrant in relation to universal jurisdiction crimes. In effect it would ensure that the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions was required before an arrest warrant could be issued. This is an attempt to prevent the courts being used for political purposes.

The bill was introduced in Parliament on 30 November 2010, is passing through Parliament at the moment. On 20 July 2011, there was the third reading of the bill in the House of Lords, where final amendments were made to it.

Oil and gas discovery off eastern Mediterranean.

2011-08-04T14:28:00.002Z

Political turmoil in the Middle East is rife. Tensions could drastically increase in future months if Israel and Lebanon are unable to come to an agreement surrounding the recent discovery of oil and gas off their coasts. Given the fragile nature of Lebanon's economy at the moment, the country is desperate to secure its rights over these natural resources.

It is estimated that nearly two billion barrels of recoverable oil and huge reserves of gas have been found in the eastern part of the Mediterranean.

The problem of this discovery relates to the inability of both countries to agree their maritime border. This could escalate into real political tension because Hassan Nasrallah, the head of Hezbollah has recently entered into this disagreement. In a televised statement, Nasrallah stated that "Israel should keep your hands off our waters...and if Lebanon's facilities are targeted by a country... that country' facilities will be targeted too".

Whilst Israel has already begun to sale exploration rights of two natural gas fields (called Tamar and Leviathan), Lebanon does not have the financial resources to explore.

The case for Palestinian statehood in the UN

2011-07-27T13:24:00.001Z

The UN Security Council holds monthly discussions on the Arab Israeli dispute. Over the last few months the Palestinians have been deciding whether to seek full membership at the Security Council, or to petition the General Assembly for enhanced observer status this September.

At the most recent monthly meeting, supporters of the Palestinian case for statehood referred to the Arab Spring that has swept through the Middle East, in which millions of people have sought freedom from oppression. The argument is that this drive for democracy should be extended by recognising a Palestinian state. Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian envoy to the United Nations has hinted that if the diplomatic option does not free up, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians could start demonstrating and demanding a right to statehood.

However Israel and America are resilient in not allowing this threat to impact the peace negotiations. The Israeli position is that the outstanding issues (such as borders, the status of Jerusalem and the return of refugees) have to be negotiated before a Palestinian state is created. It seems that Israel has the implicit support of Arab states in the Security Council. While supporting the Palestinian effort, the Arab states are leaning towards the General Assembly option for Palestine, thereby preventing a confrontation with Washington.

Hamas executes Palestinians

2011-07-27T11:17:00.002Z

Two Palestinians (a father and son) were executed after being convicted of collaborating with Israel.

Under Palestinian law, collaboration with Israel, murder and drug trafficking are all punishable by death. Executions must be approved by the President, but Hamas no longer recognises the legitimacy of Mahmoud Abbas because elections have not been held since his term ran out in January 2009.

Another step backwards

2011-07-26T14:03:00.001Z

There are rumours that Israel will cancel the Oslo accords. This threat is linked to Palestinian attempts to gain state recognition at the UN in September, and is Israel’s attempt to respond to the planned Palestinian move.

The Oslo accords were signed in 1993. It was intended that they be in force for five years, by which time a permanent treaty would have been reached.

Anti- Democratic law passed in Knesset

2011-07-12T11:04:00.003Z

The boycotting of Israeli goods is a world-wide phenomenon, seen as a strategy in response to settlement building in the West Bank. Recently, however, a new trend has developed with Israelis themselves boycotting their own goods in an act of defiance against the increased settlement building.

Yisrael Beiteinu, the right wing party led by Avidgor Lieberman has taken strong action against this trend. The “Boycott Law”, passed with a majority vote of 47-38, will effectively punish Israelis for seeking to boycott any organisation or part of the Jewish state, including settlements. Anyone breaching the law can be sued by an individual or institution claiming economic, cultural or academic damage.

This is very worrying development for the democratic nature of Israeli politics as it goes to the heart of freedom of speech in Israel.

Obama's relations with Israel

2011-07-04T13:53:00.003Z

It is clear that the relationship between Israel and the US has been on a downward spiral since the election of Obama as president.

Although Obama previously made a successful trip to Israel before being elected, he has not visited the state since this. This is despite attempts from Israeli officials to persuade Obama to visit. Obama also made a historic visit to Cairo where he delivered a major speech which included outlines for Middle East peace process; however he pointedly missed of a visit to Israel from the itinerary.

The Jerusalem- Washington shift in relationship was also certainly hindered by the treatment of Binyamin Netanyahu on his visit to America. One Israeli newspaper said that the Prime Minister had received, “the treatment reserved for the President of Equatorial Guniea”. Israeli’s viewed Netanyahu’s treatment as humiliation for Jerusalem.

Obama, previously being focused on Health reforms in the US, was thought to be distracted on the situation in the Middle East because of domestic reforms.

In addition to this Obama and Netanyahu have both publically admitted they had different views on the path to Middle East peace. Obama stated in a key speech that any future Palestinian state must be based on the borders that existed prior to the 1967 war. However, Netanyahu stressed that although there may be some concessions, the 1967 lines were indefensible.

This combination of issues has led to most Israelis seeing Obama as lacking in the basic commitment to Israel that characterised American presidents such as Truman, Clinton, Kennedy and Bush.

The relevance of the law of "Universal Jurisdiction"

2011-06-30T12:50:00.000Z

Amir Peretz, former defense minister of Israel abruptly cancelled his trip to London this week. There is speculation that he cancelled his trip due to the impact of the law of "universal jurisdiction".

This is the procedure, which is an unusual feature of the English and Welsh justice system, by which arrest warrants can be sought and issued without any prior knowledge or advice by a prosecutor. Spain, Belgium and Norway also seek to arrest Israelis on charges of alleged war crimes through “universal jurisdiction” laws.

The principle of “universal jurisdiction” laws is that some alleged crimes are so grave that they can be tried anywhere, regardless of where the offences were committed. This law developed since the General Pinochet case in 1999.

In July 2010 the UK announced that it planned to introduce legislation which would somewhat restrict the application of universal jurisdiction in the UK, because threats of arrests are stopping Israeli politicians from visiting the UK. The proposed rules do not restrict the scope of universal jurisdiction in the UK but will affect the possibility of private persons obtaining an arrest warrant in relation to universal jurisdiction crimes.

Mid East Dilemmas

2011-06-27T09:15:00.010Z

The Middle East is changing. The pressure cooker that we put on the boil is exploding and we act surprised like hens who've just seen the fox in the chicken coop. Wise up. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. The old issues like Afghanistan and Iran haven't gone away. Don't take your eye off the ball.

Iran

And the ball is Iran. We can still expect the world to be at real risk from the fallout from a brutal Mid East war in 2013. Bad times come in the aftermath of the US Presidential elections in November 2012. Then you get the window for war in the run up to Israel's 2013 Knesset elections. There is some debate as to when these will be held. Theoretically they should be by February 2013 (the previous elections being four years prior in February 2009) but there are circumstances in which they could run up to six months later as long as they are announced by February 2013. Everything now depends on how likely it is that Ahmadinejad wins another term in Iran's Presidential elections in June 2013. As all the world knows, most democracies go to war in the run up to elections and not at other times. So watch that space.

Meantime the US is emasculated by its inability to negotiate with the key actor. Remember that Iran's Revolutionary Guard has split between the goodies, the pragmatic traditionalists, and the baddies, i.e. Ayatollah Mezbo Yazdi and his disciple Ahmadinejad both of whom (and this is not hype this is a fact) believe in bringing on Armageddon. But the USA only talks to the bad guys. Sad really. And we see no progress. Have we no bright White House strategists to weave us a real long term policy? Or must Western foreign policy in the 21st century be merely reactive?

Palestine

Then there's Hamas. The single greatest mistake in US foreign policy has been to promote unilateralism on issues such as that of the Hamas question, thus disabling the world. We oppose democracy in the Middle East. Up to a point we always have done, and Hamas is the classic example of this policy in action. They win the election so we intervene with multiple hoops for them to jump through (recognition of Israel plus renunciation of violence plus endorsement of Oslo) rather than permit them to form a government. Well we can't have an Islamist government can we? I sympathise actually. After all they poured away our whisky at the Gaza border in December 2010 so they must be evil. Democracy is not tolerable.

How dumb can you get? Can you imagine how useless a Hamas government would swiftly have become had we let them govern? All governments become unpopular over time. They'd have been voted out. And had they not, had they refused to be subject to the ballot box, then we'd be seeing the people rise up against them as they have been against the establishment in Libya, Egypt, Yemen, Tunisia and Syria. How sweet could that be were you of a neo-con inclination? Instead we have boxed ourselves into a corner by popularising Hamas, making them the victims, and keeping them electable to such a degree that we have to put the brakes on when it comes to suggestions that there might be a further democratic experiment for Palestine. We even opposed Palestinian-Palestinian unity on the basis that to permit it would mean allowing Hamas into the PLO. Intolerable. But thank goodness Egypt has moved things on a little despite the West and there is hope.

Hope most particularly because Senator George J Mitchell Jnr is no longer the US special envoy for Middle East Peace. He quit in apparent high dudgeon because Egypt encouraged Palestinian-Palestinian peace against his wishes. But he was trouble from the outset. He reinforced Abu Mazen's insane policy of giving Israel control of the agenda. Abu Mazen said way back that he would not attend peace talks if Israel continued settlement building. Hasn't Abu Mazen got his head round the fact that the current Government of Israel does not - for the moment - want peace talks? Arafat never did this - he never gave Israel control of the agenda in this way, so that if Israel found they were having difficulty dealing with the peace issue it could just be sidestepped by re-starting settlement construction. The point being that instead of telling Abu Mazen to wise up, Mitchell reinforced the no settlement halt / no talks scenario.

But that was then, this is now. And now we have such a better situation. For one thing the USA is no longer pursuing a Mid East policy directly opposed to that of Israel. This is important because we have got rid of much of the dissembling. It was done brutally. Netanyahu dressed down Obama in public (and undoubtedly Israel will pay a heavy price for that piece of grandstanding for the public back home, because the last thing Israel can afford is a worsening relationship with her main patron). But the point is that for the best part of a year, more maybe, the USA has been pursuing a foreign policy in regard to Mid East peace that pretends you can negotiate the borders of a Palestinian state without any deal on Jerusalem, the settlements, on the right of return. That was a red line for Israel which sees itself as unable to surrender land (as it is its only bargaining chip) without deals on the rest. Now the USA can no longer pretend and dissemble to the world. It has to call a spade a spade with regard to Israel. Which is good for peace.

More negatively, here's an interesting observation from Alon Ben Meir. We have paraphrased his comment:

quo: Israel through settlement construction and arrogant intransigence in recognizing any merit to Palestinian positions; Palestinians through their refusal to return to the negotiating table and insistence on the right of return of the Palestinian refugees, which Israel will not accept. The status quo has become a political asset for each side, even at the risk of serving as a strategic liability for the future of both peoples.The cost of maintaining the conflict is currently acceptable to both sides. The economy in Israel and the West Bank is thriving, and it is even improving in the Gaza Strip, where Hamas' relationship with Egypt is improving with the renewed open border. From each side's perspective, today's conflict is manageable in the immediate-term, even if both parties appear headed off a cliff in the not-too-distant future."

Libya

Now let's talk Libya. By way of a little scene setting, the NCF was sent by the then UK Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, Derek Fatchett, to encourage Libya to allow the Lockerbie boys to go to trial. I remember insisting, when I met Gaddafi's classmate and advisor, who shall be nameless, that it'd be no sweat if the two boys went on trial because they'd probably be found innocent. He put his hand on one of my knees and leant in close and said. "But William; what if they're guilty?" And my jaw dropped. They were of course. Guilty as sin. I guess you know the dynamic there. The late John Bulloch explained it to me on the basis of inside knowledge provided him by the notorious Palestinian Abu Nidal. The Lockerbie action on 21st December 1988 with the loss of 270 lives was in retaliation for the allegedly accidental downing of Iran Air flight 655 with the loss of 290 lives by the USS Vincennes on 3 July 1988. The terrorist attack was commissioned by an Iranian Foundation and paid for through Abu Nidal, then based in Libya, with the tacit knowledge of the Libyan authorities. It was all done swiftly so that there could be no doubt as to the tit-for-tat nature of the action. I mention this to set the record straight given that Lockerbie is misunderstood.

Fast forward to today and the government of Libya gets its day of reckoning; not because of Lockerbie but because of years of grinding oppression. But it has been a tough fight. Gaddafi's loyalists have too much to lose. They'll take the fight to the death and may, by the skin of their teeth, hold on. I genuinely doubt it but it is possible. Whatever, it will be messy. Friends in Tripoli confirm how bad it is. If they express dissent in public protest, snipers shoot them from roofs of schools! Food is in short supply in the Medieval style siege the West is imposing. They are terrified of the rebels who have a well earned reputation for barbarity. They see no prospects for a post war democracy and think the deal is to replace a Tripoli based dictatorship with a Benghazi based dictatorship.

Meanwhile the West is strongly against any peace deal or truce, stating that Gaddafi must go as a precursor to any future for Libya.

And there's an issue here. Where should we be coming from? You and I in the West? We need to regain something of our old idealism. A new 17 year old NCF intern wrote today that she was not sure whether our intervention in Libya was oil related. She said: "Ultimately, Libya will determine the motives of our government and our path in foreign affairs in the future. I believe that the highest priority of our affairs in the Middle East is to protect lives and ensure that we defend the citizens that are vulnerable to corruption and oppression in government. It is our duty to ensure that countries in the Middle East can have a democratic and responsible government as we do, and I believe it is a cause worth fighting for. However there are many questions I would like to ask and find out about in terms of our interest in oil; an interest that I see as selfish. Foreign intervention in the Middle East must be to ensure that other countries can enjoy the freedom and peace that we do now."

She's right of course.

Iraq

Time for some light relief. There is a success story and it's called Iraq. Helluva place. Of course, like the curate's egg, it's not perfect. There's Kirkuk for instance. An internecine festering wound. The Brits, the UN and the meddlers in the International Crisis Group have been busy kicking that can down the road. Which is bad because meanwhile the bonfire that is the squabble over the status of this disputed city gets bigger and bigger and bigger and one day someone will set a match to it.

But Kirkuk aside, Iraq is brilliant. One place at least Allied troops did not die in vain. Iraq is a vibrant democracy reminiscent of that which emerged in post colonial India.

Well fairly brilliant that is. There are indications that Iran is getting more and more clout in Iraq. The latest sad note is that Iran and Iraq have formed a joint committee with the Red Cross to shut down Camp Ashraf in Iraq which houses thousands of Iranian opposition activists. Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said this month: “The camp will be shut down by the end of this year. For this, a tripartite committee has been set up by Iraq, Iran and the International Red Cross to make decisions and follow up on necessary measures to shut down the camp of this terrorist group." The People’s Mujahideen established Camp Ashraf in the 1980s — when Saddam Hussain was at war with Iran — as a base from which to launch military action against the Islamic Republic. Camp Ashraf is now home to some 3,400 people. The announcement was met with a “vigorous” condemnation by the National Council of Resistance of Iran, the broad grouping that includes the People’s Mujahideen. The NCRI said allowing Iran to “interfere in the issue of Ashraf is a red line that should not be crossed,” and urged the International Committee of the Red Cross “not to lose credibility by participating in this plan of repression.”. But they are beating a dead sheep. The Red Cross lost its credibility years ago when it helped the UN impose sanctions via UNSCR 1284 that led to the Iraq war and it seems in no hurry to become respectable again if its latest actions are anything to go by. Iran must be delighted.

Afghanistan

And then there is Afghanistan. The sledgehammer approach currently being adopted in areas like the Sangin district of Helmand Province has resulted in stupendous levels of collateral damage. This in defence of a decadent, corrupt and indecent government. Part of the problem we are facing Mid East wide today is an inability on the part of the great powers in general and the US in particular to distinguish between legality and legitimacy. President Hamid Karzai represents the legal government of Afghanistan. His is not the legitimate government of Afghanistan. On top of which disinformation levels in regard to Afghanistan are astonishing. Just as an Iran / Saudi proxy war takes place in Iraq, so too a RAW / ISI proxy war takes place in Afghanistan, i.e. India's Secret Service (the Research and Analysis Wing) versus Pakistan's Secret Service (Inter-Services Intelligence). Pakistan cannot face being encircled by enemies. Karzai is India's ally.

There are possibilities for a better Afghanistan, but the crackpot strategy the West is currently pursuing of handing the southern half of the country to an unpopular Taliban government and the northern half of the country to an unpopular Karzai government is not good.

Other options? Well yes. Dump Karzai and let traditional Afghan structures of governance return. It really is not difficult. A sort of federated tribal ruled Afghanistan with a loose royalist coalition in governance is easy peasy lemon squeezy and would deliver stability and calm over time and we could get out with honour. This other approach attempts to ease the fragile Afghanistan into the 2014 transition and involves allocating more responsibility to local tribesmen. This would mean an Afghan Government that cooperates with former insurgents such as the Pashtuns and allows them a greater stake in their own country through financial incentives to secure and manage their own local region. The ANA could be organised into smaller divisions and placed in certain regions to oversee and offer support to the tribes.

But we won't do it. We are too proud to admit we were wrong.

Which means we are handing Southern Afghanistan back to the Taliban? How disgusting. How unworthy of the many allied troops that have died. What about the women of Afghanistan? NCF intern Giorgia Cacacae writes "Afghanistan's post-Taliban reforms have barely improved the lives of women. A 2010 report conducted by UNAMA found that in 29 out of the 34 Afghan provinces, abuse of women’s rights occurs on a daily basis. In 1950s' Kabul, women were students, worked on university faculties, worked in respected office jobs and even on construction sites. Under King Amanulla in the 1920s, women first won the right to go to schools and under King Zahir Shah, they walked the streets safely without burqas. In the communist 1980s, women were finally viewed as having the right to be involved in policy forming. Many have died as martyrs in order to fight for women's rights over the years in Afghanistan: Malalai Kakar - a prominent police woman, Safia Ama Jan - Director of Ministry of Women's Affairs and Zakia Zaki - journalist, to name but a few have been murdered and tortured by Afghan men for their progressive ideals. Suraya Parlika is a veteran protestor; a widely respected Nobel Peace Prize Nominee and Upper House member in the Afghan Parliament. She was imprisoned, beaten regularly and had her fingernails removed. It seems that these women’s momentous sacrifice has somehow not made a difference in the 21st Century." And now we are going to let the Taliban back ! Great.

This month Iran's supreme leader accused the United States of supporting terrorism, pointing to American drone strikes in Pakistan and Afghanistan that he said have killed scores of civilians. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said a country whose military forces are responsible for such deaths can’t lecture the world about fighting terror. As long as American troops are based in Afghanistan, there will be no real security,” Khamenei said.

Perhaps, sadly, he is right.

Syria

And then there's Syria. Niccolo Machiavelli said in The Prince, "If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." Deliver your crushing blow to repress your population, then ease off and be gentle and they'll be yours. That used to be the Syrian way. Every now and again the whisper would go out that there had been more arrests of opposition activists - or executions in Snednya Prison - or whatever. But by and large governance was quite benign. No more. Now things are bad bordering on evil. Perhaps the Syrian example merits closer examination:

The Syrian Reform Group based in America and led by Faride Ghadry called for demonstrations in Syria last Saturday 5th February. They were jumping on the Egypt bandwagon. Not to be outdone the Muslim Brotherhood jumped on Faride Ghadry's bandwagon and called for demonstrations a day earlier on Friday 4th February.

And what happened? There were no demonstrations of any significance. The Muslim Brotherhood were utterly humiliated. Truth is they are very weak in Syria just as they are in Egypt (contrary to Western perceptions). Indeed they were humiliated in Egypt under similar circumstances ("The 6th April Movement" in Egypt successfully called a general strike on 6th April 2010 demanding the removal of President Mubarak but a repeat demonstration called for 6 May 2010 was cancelled by them because they perceived the Muslim Brotherhood as jumping on the bandwagon - this lead to the political humiliation of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt at the time).

That is not to say that they would not garner support in a genuine election in either country, perhaps even mustering 20% of the votes. But they can never be the key political force in Syria.

Is that the point? Perhaps not. It was the street, not the Muslim Brotherhood, that led the Egyptian Revolution.

So who then leads the street protests in Syria? It takes courage to demonstrate in Syria given the stronghold the government exercises. The people are the ones that do it. The ordinary people. Not this or that political group. Actually protests might have been far larger but for the economic reforms that have been delivered. Economic you ask? Well yes, economic. To quote the Middle East Association just a month or so ago, "Syria boasts one of the region’s most diversified economies. With ever increasing competition, the private sector is experiencing growth. GDP growth is 4.5%".

And up to recently, Syria was comparatively well run. No chaos. So what's gone wrong? Well the way all this began is interesting:

In an apparent response to Facebook activity, children in the town of Deraa started spray-painting anti-government slogans as graffiti on walls. Some were arrested on 6th March on orders from Atif Najib, head of the Political Security Directorate in Deraa province. A delegation of tribal leaders came to see Atif Najib. The tribal leaders asked for the release of the boys imprisoned for graffiti. In a traditional gesture, they took their headdresses from off their heads and placed them on the table, saying they’d take them up again when the matter had been resolved. By way of response Atif took the khaffiah (headdresses) of the senior tribal leaders from the table and threw them into the rubbish bin. Protests broke out. (Deraa Governor Faisal Kalthoum was subsequently sacked on 22nd March and Atif Najib was dismissed on 9th April - as a sop to the protesters).

And then somewhere in there the Syrian government lost the plot. In my book the seminal event was the killing of the boy. Outrage against the lack of human rights afforded to Syrian citizens during the demonstrations was highlighted by the story of a 13 year old boy called Hamza al-Khateeb. Hamza died in police custody, after being abducted by local security forces whilst attending a protest in the southern town of Saida at the end of April. His battered and mutilated body (with bullet holes in his arms, sides and chest) was returned to his family four weeks later. The Syrian government, totally insensitive to this incident, alleged that he was shot during a demonstration. Dr Akram Shaar stated on state run television “the apparent torture marks were the result of natural decomposition”.

And now all hell has broken loose. Will the government survive in Syria? hard to tell. A coup d'etat is a possibility but unlikely. I think they will hang on. But it's going to be a close call.

In conclusion

Syria, Libya, Palestine, Israel. What future? Not great in the short term but in the longer term things are much healthier. There are prospects for cleaner governance less subject to incompetent Western meddling. There are undoubtedly better prospects for peace. You may need a spyglass to see it but peace is coming. Just make sure your view is not rose tinted.

Anyone for Peace?

2011-06-13T21:36:00.000Z

Here's an interesting observation from Alon Ben Meir. Sadly perhaps he's right. Perhaps neither side really wants peace. The people do of course. Just not the governments:

The study of conflict resolution is prefaced on the notion that two parties in conflict desire a mutually acceptable resolution to end their dispute, however intractable it may be. The behavior by Israel and the Palestinians, however, suggests a different desired outcome. Whereas both talk about their desire to make peace, their actual actions on the ground demonstrate differently. Today, Israelis and Palestinians alike are defying essential principles of conflict resolution, serving to prolong, rather than conclude their festering conflict.
Diminishing Returns
To achieve a resolution, parties in conflict must believe that continuing their dispute provides diminishing returns. That is, they must exhaust all possibilities to improve upon their positions and recognize that the situation of both sides can only be improved through compromise and cooperation. Recent developments indicate that neither Israel nor the Palestinians have come to this conclusion.
In fact, their behavior suggests the opposite. Today, each side has contributed to preservation of the status quo: Israel through settlement construction and arrogant intransigence in recognizing any merit to Palestinian positions; Palestinians through their refusal to return to the negotiating table and insistence on the right of return of the Palestinian refugees, which Israel will not accept. The status quo has become a political asset for each side, even at the risk of serving as a strategic liability for the future of both peoples. Furthermore, with short-term political considerations dominating the political discourse in Ramallah and Jerusalem, neither side has indicated any willingness to take the kind of calculated risk that will be necessary to resolve the conflicts. Without calculated risks, or efforts that begin to mitigate the conflict, it is impossible to move forward toward a resolution-and today in Israel-Palestine, there is neither. Furthermore, the cost of maintaining the conflict today is currently acceptable to both sides. The economy in Israel and the West Bank is thriving, and it is even improving in the Gaza Strip, where Hamas' relationship with Egypt is improving with the renewed open border. From each side's perspective, today's conflict is manageable in the immediate-term, even if both parties appear headed off a cliff in the not-too-distant future.

The changing face of Egyptian foreign policy

2011-05-31T14:10:00.000Z

Under President Mubarak, the four year closure of the Rafah border represented Egypt’s decision to put its partnership with Israel and the United States above supporting Muslims living inside Gaza. This changed on Saturday 28 May 2011. Egypt no longer enforces Israel’s blockade over Gaza.

The decision by Egypt to flex its regional muscle is demonstrated not only by the reopening of this boarder, but also by it facilitating the reconciliation pact between Fatah and Hamas. Both of these events are a reminder of how things are changing between Egypt and Israel post Mubarak. There is a tangible shift by the Egyptians away from Israel and toward the Palestinians.

Acceptance Speech of Dov Alfon: Winner of the Peace through Media Award

2011-05-23T10:02:00.001Z

Dov Alfon is editor-in-chief of Haaretz. This article is based on a speech thanking the International Council for Press and Broadcasting for selecting him as a recipient of the Peace through Media Award 2011.

The recommendation for the award, written by the president of the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, Sami Michael, focused on his commitment to combative journalism for peace in the Middle East, his launching of the annual issue of "Haaretz shel sofrim" (The Writers' Haaretz), and his meticulous work and full editorial independence during these difficult times for the printed press.

The award was presented at the Oxford and Cambridge Club in London last month, at a ceremony hosted by the Next Century Foundation and co-presided by its general secretary, the former publisher William Morris and by Lord Stone of Blackheath.

“I am delighted to see in the audience colleagues from the British and international media whom I admire and esteem. I imagine you will agree with me that we are engaged in one of the strangest professions in the world. I don't know how many calls The Times, the BBC or Reader's Digest received today, but Haaretz has been getting calls all morning from an angry man named Julian Assange, who claims that someone leaked us the Israel file of WikiLeaks without his knowledge or authorization.

This is truly unprecedented, a leak without authorization. In Hebrew, there is a Talmudic proverb that says: "Who steals from a thief goes unpunished." Still, it is difficult to understand the gripe of this specific complainant.

The criteria for the publication of a report in Haaretz are quite straightforward: We will publish whatever is true, does not violate the law and is of public interest. Still, every morning people
get up and insist that they deserve their own special criteria.

You cited three grounds for the award, one of them being upholding Haaretz's editorial independence. This is without any doubt both the supreme and most complex obligation with which I am entrusted. It is a mission with which my predecessors as editor-in-chief were also charged.

Lately, however, this mission has come under a new threat: namely, the fact that the few remaining quality newspapers in the world are being sought out by tycoons and oligarchs thirst for a bit of respectability.
In light of the steep decline in the profits of the printed press, you would think they would no longer be the targets of hostile takeover attempts. Yet, in practice, we are witnessing a global phenomenon of independent newspapers being purchased for preposterous prices, in much the same way that titles of nobility used to be purchased from bankrupt families in this city, and all to provide for the instant laundering of an insufficiently clean image.

If the first reason cited by the judges is preserving editorial independence, then it should be clear that I am accepting this award first and foremost in the name of the paper's owners, the Schocken family, who have safeguarded Haaretz from this existential peril for three generations. It is they who bear this cross, to cite the rather gloomy yet accurate description of the publisher, Mr. Amos Schocken, published in an interview in The New Yorker in March.

I must also comment on the second reason for the award: the annual issue of "Haaretz shel Sofrim" or "The Writers' Haaretz.". Indeed, once a year, on the day that Hebrew Book Week begins, our news reporters get a day off and dozens of writers and poets from Israel and abroad fill in for them.

In response to the marvellous texts prepared by Etgar Keret and Margaret Atwood, Nurith Gertz and Jonathan Safran Foer, Zeruya Shalev and Jamaica Kincaid - just to name but a few of our regular contributors - I am asked by readers every year anew: Why only once a year? Why shouldn't writers do the paper every day?

The answer is that there is a profession known as journalism, and to be a journalist, it is not enough to have a talent for writing. Writers have contributed to Haaretz since its first day, and great writers have made a living by working for the paper. Over the years, the paper has bolstered its standing as the natural home of Hebrew literature, and in recent years, writers who left Haaretz in favor of competing newspapers -among them, prominent peace advocates like David Grossman, Meir Wieseltier, A.B. Yehoshua, Sami Michael and Amos Oz - have once again begun to publish in our pages.

But only a journalist could obtain the Israeli file of WikiLeaks or the secret archive of Kafka; only a journalist could expose irregularities in the establishment of the Museum of Tolerance in Jerusalem or the illegal incarceration of African refugees along the border with Egypt, the minutes of the General Staff meeting that addressed illegal assassinations in the territories, the double-billing system of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, or the procedure that prevents Ethiopian children, because of the color of their skin, from attending a school 20 minutes away from the Ministry of Education in Tel Aviv.

That is why Haaretz has Yossi Melman, Ofer Aderet, Nir Hasson, Dana Weiler-Polak, Uri Blau, Gidi Weitz and Or Kashti - the reporters, respectively, whose stories I have cited. And I could mention dozens of other journalistic achievements which came about solely because of persistence, curiosity and resourcefulness - the basic qualities of a reporter.

I am accepting this award today also, and primarily, thanks to the dozens of correspondents, columnists, photographers, designers and editors of Haaretz. For a newspaper is not the product of the chief editor's skill, but of the accumulated skills of its finest journalists. This award belongs above all to them.

That leaves me with the third and final reason this award is being given to me - namely, for being the editor of a newspaper that "fights for peace."

I do not feel that we are fighting for peace. We just refuse to be part of the blind game leaders on both sides are playing, and we insist on addressing the situation in the only way open to us: through courageous, inquisitive and stubborn reportorial coverage of the truth, however absurd that truth may be.

It is difficult to talk about events in the Middle East in this magnificent hall, in a club which dates back to a meeting of intellectuals in London in May 1830. But we have to try.

As we speak, the Israeli army has bombed Gaza today. The attacks killed terrorists and innocent civilians alike. The bombing was in retaliation for a barrage of rockets fired by Hamas at southern Israel earlier, including a lethal mortar attack on a school bus.
When will this conflict end? The history of Italy tells us a curious and tragic story. During the war between Siena and Florence, in the 13th century, residents of Siena had been hurling heavy rocks into Florence relentlessly, so the Florentines decided to retaliate with a new invention - a full-fledged biological weapon: dead donkeys.

They tried to spread diseases in aggressive Siena by catapulting donkey carcasses over the city wall, and they succeeded: The assault of the dead donkeys ended only when the diseases began to spread in Florence as well, after the direction of the wind had changed.

One cannot resist comparing this absurd story to the fighting on Israel's southern border. Hamas engineers are constantly upgrading hunks of scrap metal in order to turn them into powerful rockets, while Israeli engineers have invented a virtual roof of protection which bears the blatantly unlyrical name of "Iron Dome."

Nor should we forget the latest chapter: Israel's abduction of an engineer from the other side, in the heart of Europe. All these engineering feats, all this inventiveness, all this ingenuity - will they one day be channeled into the pursuit of peace instead of war?

Today, it is possible to travel from Siena to Florence, through a breathtaking landscape, without encountering even one catapulted dead donkey. I am convinced that the day will come when this will also be the case along the stunning beachfront stretching between Ashdod and Gaza.

Until then, Haaretz will continue to cover the reality as it is, in all its absurdity. That is why you decided to bestow this distinguished award upon me.

On behalf of all the employees of Haaretz, one of the world's most formidable newspapers, I thank you”.

2011 International Media Awards Winners

2011-05-23T09:58:00.003Z

The International Council for Press and Broadcasting Seventh International Media Awards

The International Media Awards ceremony was held at a gala night in central London on Saturday 9th of April. Western, Israeli, Arab and Asian journalists from across the Middle East gathered for the seventh International Media Awards.

The Peace through Media Award

.DAOUD QUTTAB is founder/general director of AmmanNet and director of the Institute of Modern Media at Al Quds University
.DOV ALFON is Editor in Chief at Ha’aretz.

The Cutting Edge Award

.FALAH AL THAHABI is an Iraqi journalist and the current managing director at Alhurra TV.
.DILAWAR KHAN WAZIR is the BBC Urdu Service Correspondent for the tribal areas and Waziristan.
.NADA ABDEL SAMED is a Beirut based broadcaster for BBC Arabic.
.AYMAN MOHYELDIN is a correspondent for Al Jazeera.
.ADEL ZANOON works for AFP & ANN, Gaza.

Outstanding Contribution to Broadcasting

.JACKIE ROWLAND is a field correspondent for Al Jazeera English

The Breakaway Award

.ALICE FORDHAM is a Baghdad based freelance journalist working for The Times, Christian Science Monitor and as a correspondent for The Economist.

Outstanding Contribution to Peace Award

.LINDA MENHUIN is a founding member of the Society for Peace with Syria and an advisory board member of the Smart Middle East Forum.

Press Freedom Award

.FERAS KILANI is a journalist for BBC Arabic
.GOKTAY KORALTAN is a cameraman for BBC Arabic
.CHRIS COBB SMITH is a production co-ordinator for BBC Arabic

The changing dynamics of Israel and Palestine

2011-05-19T14:10:00.001Z

Netanyahu will be visiting Washington imminently to discuss the stalled peace talks with Obama. Recent developments in the region, such as the reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas, will make these talks tense. Netanyahu does not want to negotiate peace with a Palestinian side, that should it form a government, would encompass a terrorist organisation that fails to recognise the state of Israel.

Netanyahu said at the opening session of parliament in Israel “A government, half of whose members declare daily their intention to destroy the State of Israel, is not a partner for peace.”

However the rapidly unfolding nature of events sweeping the Middle East highlights the fact that Israel can no longer stall the peace talks. The number of Palestinian protesters (living in Syria, Lebanon Gaza and the West Bank) that demonstrated on Nakba day shows how Palestinians have caught the “revolution bug” when they marched onto Israeli borders from four directions. Of particular significance was the breaching of the border fence on the Golan Heights which has been quiet for years.

This recognition that the status quo between Israel and the Palestinians cannot last is demonstrated by the increased willingness by Netanyahu to concede the vast majority of the West Bank in return for a demilitarised Palestinian state.

2011-03-28T14:07:00.000Z

We are currently experiencing a very important shift in the Middle-East area. Firstly, it was Egypt and Tynisia then Bahrain and Libia, and the domino seems to continue without anyone knows for sure what do these revolutions mean. This area though is undoubtedly absoloutely crucial for the stability of the international system as the global economy and the security of the West is directy related with the evolutions on the area.
For this reason, the importance of a succesful peace process is absolutely essential. So far the liberal peacebuilding agenda is moving somewhere in between the idealistic declarations for demcocracy and human rights which are incorporated within the R2P UN agenda and the will for stability, even if this means that auhoritarian regimes should be supported. The reason for that is that one of the main aims of the liberal peacebuilding is to continue promoting the current neoliberal development agenda within the context of the neoliberal governmentality that we are experiencing in the era of globalization.
Right now though after the recent economic crisis, the wide acceptace that global poverty and inequality is rather increasing than decreasing, and of course the revolution in the Arab world, it is time for some re-evaluation. Neoliberal economic-development agenda and globalization itself seems to undermine for years the peacebuilding process. People in the countries that were rebeled against, were for years excluded from basic goods and any opportunity for a change of their social status, factors that are mainly related with the problematic results that the current developement agenda gives. This was the main reason of the revolutions. Democracy or Islam are just two different political discources that try to capitalize the mobilization that poverty and inequality brought. Hence, it is time a different peacebuilding agenda to be put forward, one that will understand the problems that neoliberal globalization creates in terms of stability and security and that will first try to create strong institutions and then to promote any kind of democracy.

Wake-up call from Jerusalem

2011-03-25T15:30:00.005Z

As revolutionary movements are sweeping the Arab world with a varying degree of success, the recent bomb attack on a bus in Jerusalem reminded the world that the conflict between Israel and Palestine is still very much alive. For people in Jerusalem, it was a disturbing message that they are not safe from such attacks, despite the relative calm that the city has experienced during the past few years. No one has so far assumed responsibility for Monday's attack, which killed a Scottish missionary and wounded around 50. One of the usual suspects, Islamic Jihad, claims it was not their job, but praised the attack.

Whoever was behind it, the event may be part of a resurgence in violence. Most likely it is not a coincidence that it happened right after an increase in tensions on the Gaza strip, with rockets flying in both directions across the border. The increase in violence there and the awful recent attack in one of Israel's settlements on the West Bank could easily spread bringing more violence to Jerusalem and other cities as tensions are growing. The peace process seems to be going nowhere, so there is every reason to be pessimistic about the situation. And with Netanyahu's stated "iron will" to "to defend the state and its citizens", there seems to be little room for rapprochement, despite Palestinian PM Fayyad's condemnation of the attack.

The Arab spring may quickly turn the conflict into an even uglier situation. We hope it will not, but unfortunately this region is a testatement not only to what successes hope may bring, but also to what disappointments.

Israel demolishes historic Jerusalem hotel

2011-01-12T11:19:00.002Z

Because of the tragedy represented by the demolition of Shepherd's Hotel in Jerusalem, we publish this statement sent us by the Palestinian Authority's Ambassador in London:

Israel intends to build luxury apartments over illegally occupied land despite condemnation from the International Community. The Shepherd hotel was established in the 1930’s, once home to Jerusalem’s Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini. An attempt to destroy this historical building is an act to erase the Palestinian history and identity and undermine peace efforts. The larger Israeli settlement enterprise seeks territorial expansion in which the number of Palestinians residing is reduced. The design fragments Palestinian neighbourhoods, separating the community with the ultimate aim of annexing the Old City and its environs to Israel proper.
Nearly 500,000 settlers live in over 100 settlements built on Palestinian land since the illegal occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem in 1967. Israel is prohibited under Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention from building settlements and transferring their own civilian population. Israel has therefore, no legal right to confiscate private Palestinian land.

The illegal settlement activity pursued by Israel stalled the U.S sponsored peace negotiations last year thus defying the American Administration’s attempt to revive the peace talks. In a statement by U.S Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, criticising the illegal settlement activity by saying this "undermines peace efforts to achieve the two states - solution".
Israeli settlement activity policies are an outright attempt to cleanse Jerusalem and the other Palestinian cities of its indigenous inhabitants, its heritage and history, which ultimately would lead to a major disaster and insecurity in the Middle East region. We call on the International Community to act in holding Israel accountable for its breach of Palestinian rights, primarily in view of its escalated colonization in East Jerusalem.

Amb. Prof. Manuel Hassassian
Palestinian General Delegation
5 Galena Road
Hammersmith W6 0LT
Tel: 020 8563 0008
Fax: 020 8563 0058

2010-11-02T15:00:00.001Z

Most Israelis view the war on corruption as more important than the peace porocess. Sad really in a way. This from Tamar Hermon's excellent Peace Index:

http://www.idi.org.il/ResearchAndPrograms/peace_index/Documents/October_2010/Peace%20Index-October-trans.pdf

The Gilad Question

2010-10-22T14:10:00.002Z

The hearts of Israel appear to have been hijacked by a specky reservist from Galilee. His slightly bewildered face, as if foretelling his current predicament, shines out from billboards, broadsheets, and blogs.
While unremarkable in his own right, since being kidnapped by Hamas in 2006, young Gilad Shalit has been commandeered by the media as a living symbol of Israeli identity: the younger generation of Israel’s society is being held to ransom by their impetuous neighbours and compromised by their dithering government.

Military service is a right-of-passage for all young Israelis. By being caught at this time, between a boy and a man, Gilad appears at his most vulnerable and most emotive.

This video, posted on Youtube, is a reaction against the media frenzy around Shalit . While the representation of Palestinians is obscenely xenophobic, but they are not the real victims of this satirist’s art. Instead he points the finger of blame for failed negotiations over Gilad’s release firmly in the direction of the general public, rather than towards Hamas or Netanyahu.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4Idgv4Km98&feature=player_embedded

The contradictions evident in the campaigns to free Gilad, which fret about his health, distraught family, and his position as an innocent pawn in a government game, deny all recognition of responsibility for Palestinian prisoners held in violation of international humanitarian law.

Khalid Meshaal, interviewed by Newsweek, had this to say: “Yes, Gilad Shalit is a human being. But 8,000 Palestinian prisoners are human beings, too. Gilad Shalit has a family. Those 8,000 prisoners have families, too. Yes, Gilad Shalit has a right to be free and we are conscientious of giving him this freedom and to release him. But we have thousands of our captives who have a right to be liberated and be free.”

By publically squaring up to Israel over Gilad, Hamas is testing the waters for direct peace talks. By campaigning so passionately for the release of one soldier, a section of Israel’s public is pushing their own government into a corner, through the manipulation of media which subversively dictates public opinion.

Many Palestinians are eagerly awaiting a prisoner swap too: for the return of their loved ones, and for the return of a potential new leader – Marwan Barghouti.

Barghouti, a populist leader respected by both Fatah and Hamas members, has languished in an Israeli jail under 5 life sentences and yet still has a considerable following amongst all Palestinians who believe this man may be the key to peace.

Talking About Israel

2010-10-12T19:28:00.000Z

Felix sent this across with the comment: "Self serving but in part very interesting statistics". Which is true I guess:

CLICK HERE TO VIEW >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Where the peace talks currently stand

2010-10-12T11:54:00.000Z

Israel’s 10 month moratorium on building new homes in Jewish settlements in the West Bank expired on September 26. This brought peace talks to standstill. Minutes after settlement freeze expired, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu issued a statement calling on Mr. Abbas “to continue the good and sincere talks that we have just started, in order to reach an historic peace agreement between our two peoples.” But Mr. Netanyahu made no reference to the settlement freeze, which Mr. Abbas has said repeatedly, must be extended in order for the Palestinians to remain in negotiations with Israel.

America has offered Israel an incentive package in exchange for a 60 day extension of the settlement freeze. Allegedly Israel has been promised a lengthy “transitional period” for security on the eastern border of a future Palestinian (which would include Israel’s ability to retain IDF presence in the Jordan Valley). Military hardware and a pledge to veto U.N. resolutions relating to Arab-Israeli peace for a year have also been promised by the Americans.

By accepting this offer, Israel would keep alive the peace talks. However the political make-up of Israel makes it difficult for Netanyahu to accept this offer. He would need the approval of a settlement freeze extension from his 29-member Cabinet or at least his 15-member Security Cabinet, and he doesn’t have enough votes yet in those bodies. Furthermore Netanyahu’s greatest political fear is of a repeat of 1999, when after making concessions to the Palestinians at Wye Plantation, he lost his right-wing political support base and was defeated by Barak in the election. This time round Netanyahu wants to avoid accepting an American package, going ahead with the peacemaking, and then losing the next election to Kadima’s Tzipi Livni.

Palestinian Refusal to Recognise 'Jewish State' in Exchange for a Freeze

2010-10-11T16:28:00.001Z

Abu Mazen has rejected an offer to freeze settlement building in exchange for recognition of Israel ‘as a Jewish State’, stating that ‘issue of the Jewishness of the state has nothing to do with the matter’.

Netanyahu described the offer not as a condition but as a ‘trust-building step’. He was speaking at the third session of the opening of the 18th Knesset.

Perhaps the offer is an attempt to seize the initiative in arguments over a settlement freeze.

Meanwhile Kadima’s Tzipi Livni criticised Netanyahu’s leadership, saying that his indecision and preoccupation with the coalition is making Israel weak in the eyes of the international community.

Moon Valley

2010-09-27T20:11:00.000Z

This is one of the great projects I reckon. Selling Palestinian agricultural produce in the West with the help of a leading member of the British Jewish community. Well done Lord Stone. He sets us all an example. And if you have cash to invest they are still looking for a further £200,000 to add to the £300,000 they have pledged. Incidentally for anyone who wants to see it this is the Utube 'upload' of the 6 minute DVD on the Moon Valley project:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXtU4LWy7u0

Cup half full?

2010-09-27T15:52:00.000Z

Now don't you find this interesting? How negative and gloomy people can be when things are - in reality - not half so bad as they think they are. This comes from the wonderful Israeli "Peace Index" people:

Hamas shooting in West Bank targets talks in Washington.

2010-09-01T13:38:00.004Z

On the eve of direct talks between Israel and Palestine, four Jewish settlers were killed near Hebron in a drive-by shooting. Hamas claimed responsibility for this “heroic operation”.

Palestinian security forces reacted swiftly to the shooting by arresting 150 Hamas members- recognizing that this incident could derail peace talks in Washington before they even started.

However this was not enough to stop West Bank settlers pledging to resume immediate settlement building- in defiance of the current settlement freeze by the Israeli government.

This incident is a stark reminder that Hamas plays a central role in Palestinian politics, and cannot be ignored in the upcoming peace talks.

A sad day for peace

2010-08-31T22:36:00.000Z

Martin Indyk has been full of hope regarding the latest Mid East talks but Martin Indyk has always been an optimist - even when he was Ambassador in Israel. He is a nice guy however, which covers a multitude of sins, and he's not proud, which covers even more.

Hamas told the NCF in Gaza last week they feared there would be no way to stop more violence. The tragic killings in the West Bank today are just the beginning, though the reason for the timing is the same old tit for tat revenge for an assisnation by Israel we are so used to. See: http://middleeastanalyst.com/2010/08/30/israel-assassinates-another-hamas-commander/

Sadly in any case this peace process is conducted by the same team of dinosaurs as all the others:

http://ncfmepp.blogspot.com/2010/08/palestinian-delegation-to-washington.html#links

So what hope?

Well there would be hope if the Obama team were committed to steamrollering it through with Israel. The German prisoner swop negotiators have been called back in by Israel which is positive (the release of Barghouti into the West bank being a vital pre-cursor to a credible peace). But they are not going to release him. Not in the face of Hamas violence.

So we are doomed. Peace is inevitable. Just not yet. The whole point (from Israel's perspective) of doing this now was to distract it's population from noticing that they were doing nothing on Iran whilst the nuclear plant comes on line. In this Netanyahu has succeeded. What a consummate genius. And the Hamas violence will mean he can squirm out of the settlement freeze if he wishes (though he may be a shrewd enough statesman to keep it going in some form).

Such times.

The Palestinian Delegation to Washington

2010-08-31T15:50:00.000Z

The PLO Negotiations Department sent us the names of their delegation to Washington for the September talks. They are all familiar names and faces from the old guard who have done this a hundred times before. Specifically:

MAHMOUD ABBAS “ABU MAZEN” – PRESIDENT

Born in Safad, Palestine in 1935, Mahmoud Abbas, and his family fled Palestine in 1948, becoming refugees in Syria. He lived in exile until 1994, when he came to the Occupied Palestinian Territories as part of the Palestinian negotiation team. He has three children and eight grandchildren.
Political Career
Mahmoud Abbas is a founding member of Fatah, the largest political party in the Palestine Liberation Organization (“PLO”). Mr. Abbas has been a member of the Fatah Central Committee since 1964 and a member of the Palestinian National Council (“PNC” – the Palestinian government in exile) since 1968. Since 1980, Mr. Abbas has been a member of the PLO Executive Committee. Mr. Abbas also served as the head of the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department between 1994 and 2003. In 2005 he was elected President of the Palestinian National Authority. He is also the chairman of the PLO after late Yasser Arafat.
In 1974, he was responsible for opening channels of communications with Israeli peace groups and was the primary force behind the PNC’s decision to work with these groups.
Mr. Abbas is the signatory of the 1993 Declaration of Principles that launched the Oslo Peace Process. In 1995, he signed the Oslo Agreements, also known as the Interim Agreements.
Education
Mr. Abbas holds a Ph.D. in History from Oriental College in Moscow and a B.A. in Law from Damascus University. He is the author of several books in Arabic including, The Other Side, The Fall of the Netanyahu Government and The Road to Oslo. He enjoys Arabic poetry, classical Arabic music and the study of history.
2. DR. SAEB M. ERAKAT – CHIEF NEGOTIATOR
Dr. Erakat was born on April 28, 1955 in Jerusalem. He currently resides in Jericho.
Political Career
Dr. Erakat began his political career in 1991, as Vice Chairman of the Palestinian Negotiating Delegation. He then served as Head of the Palestinian Election Commission (1993 – 1996). In that time, he also served as the Chairman of the Palestinian Negotiating Delegation for Elections. He was appointed as Minister of Local Government in 1994, a position he held until 2003. Since 1996, Dr. Erakat has been an elected member of the Palestinian Legislative Council, a seat he won in 1996 and then again in 2006. Also in 1996, Dr. Erakat was selected to lead the Palestinian side of the Steering and Monitoring Committee. In 2003, President Abbas named Dr. Erakat as Chief Palestinian Negotiator and Head of the PLO’s Negotiations Affairs Department.
Career
Dr. Erakat was a professor of Political Science at Al Najah University in Nablus between 1979 and 1991, when he took a leave of absence. He was also a member of the Editorial Staff at Al Quds Newspaper between 1980 and 1992 and was Secretary General of the Arab Studies Society between 1989 and 1994.
Education
Dr. Erakat holds a Ph.D. in Peace Studies from Bradford University in the UK, a MA in International Relations and a BA in Political Science, both from the University of San Francisco. He has authored nine books and has conducted extensive research on foreign policy, oil, conflict resolution and negotiations.
3. YASSER ABED RABBO

Born in Jaffa, Palestine in 1945. He is married with two children.
Political Career
Mr. Abed Rabbo previously served as the Minister of Culture and Information, a post he held since 1994. Since 1998, he has headed the PA Committee for Education, Culture and Science.
Mr. Abed Rabbo has served on the PLO Executive Committee since 1971 and has served as the head of the PLO Department of Information and Culture since 1974. In 1968, Mr. Abed Rabbo was a founding member of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP), a leftist group within the PLO. After 23 years in the DFLP, Mr. Abed Rabbo broke away from the group in 1991 to head the Palestinian Democratic Union, FIDA, a group that came to closer agreement with the peace policies of PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat.
Mr. Abed Rabbo is a senior member of the Palestinian negotiation team, attending all major negotiations, including those conducted at Camp David (2000) and Taba (2001). In 1988, he led the first Palestinian delegation in negotiations with the US administration.
Education
Mr. Abed Rabbo holds a B.A. in Economics and Political Science from the American University in Cairo. He enjoys reading literature.
4. DR. NABEEL SHAATH

Born in Safad, Palestine in 1938, Dr. Shaath lived in exile and returned to the Gaza Strip in June 1994. He is married with four children.

Political Career

Dr. Shaath previously served as the Minister of Planning and International Cooperation, a position he held since 1994. He was elected to the PLC in 1996 representing Khan Yunis in the Gaza Strip.

A long-time figure in Palestinian politics, Dr. Shaath served as the Director of the PLO Planning Center in Beirut. In 1974, he headed the PLO’s first delegation to the United Nations. Since 1989, has been a member of the Fatah Central Committee. Today he is in charge of International Relations for Fatah.

Dr. Shaath was a member of the Madrid Peace Delegation and later was involved in negotiations with Israel that led to the signing of the Oslo Agreements. From 1993 to 1995, he served as the head of the Palestinian negotiation team, and participated in later negotiations with Israel, including those conducted at Camp David (2000) and Taba (2001). He has also represented Palestine at the World Economic Forum.

Career

As a public planning and administration consultant, Dr. Shaath worked extensively throughout the Arab world, establishing both the Engineering and Management Institute and the Center for Administrative Development, which offers management training in 14 offices throughout the Arab world.

Dr. Shaath taught economics and business at the American University of Cairo and the American University of Beirut. From 1970 to 1975, he was the Dean of the School of Business Administration at the American University in Beirut.
His interest in education prompted him to found the Dar al-Fata al-Arabi, the only institution in the Arab world dedicated to publishing books for children and young readers.
Education
Dr. Shaath holds a Ph.D. in Law from the University of Pennsylvania, a Ph.D. in Economics and Finance from the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, an MBA in Finance and Banking from the University of Pennsylvania and a B.A. in Business Administration from the University of Alexandria in Egypt. Dr. Shaath is an avid piano player and enjoys reading poetry.
5. AKRAM HANIYEH
Born in Ramallah in 1953.

Political Career

Mr. Haniyeh began his political career as an organizer for PLO activities in the West Bank during the 1970s/early 1980s, for which he was placed under house arrest by the Israeli authorities from Aug. 1980 until mid-1981. In 1986, Mr. Haniyeh was deported by Israel to Algeria for “activities on behalf of Fatah.” Once in Tunis, he became an aid to Khalil Al-Wazir, working as the PLO press representative in Tunis, and was considered a link between the ‘outside’ leadership in Tunis and the inside’ leadership in the occupied Palestinian Territory. During the Madrid peace talks, Mr. Haniyeh liaised between PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat and the media.

Mr. Haniyeh returned to Palestine in 1994 and became a political advisor to Arafat as well as a member of final status talks team. Mr. Haniyeh participated in the July 2000 Camp David talks and eventually wrote a book about his experience, entitled The Camp David Papers, (Ramallah, 2000).

Career

Mr. Haniyeh began his career in journalism working for the Jordanian Ash-Sha‘ab newspaper in Jerusalem from 1976-79, eventually becoming its editor until 1981. Mr. Haniyeh worked for the Public Relations Department at Birzeit University from 1981 until 1984 and served as Chairman of the Arab Journalists’ Union in the occupied Palestinian territory from 1983 until 1985. Upon returning to Palestine from exile in 1994, he established the Al-Ayyam newspaper in Ramallah and has since served as its editor.

Education

Mr. Haniyeh has a BA in English Literature from the University of Cairo. He sits on the Board of Trustees of An-Najah University. Mr. Haniyeh writes political essays and short stories; among his publications is Rites for Another Day, (Arabic, 1986).

6. DR. MOHAMMAD SHTAYYEH

Born in Nablus in 1958.

Political Career

In 1993, Dr. Shtayyeh was a member of the Palestinian Delegation to Paris Economic Talks with Israel. In 1995, he was appointed Head of the Palestinian Delegation to the Multilateral Talks on Regional Economic Cooperation Group “REDWG.” In 1996, Dr. Shtayyeh supervised the Palestinian Presidential and Legislative Elections as Secretary General of the Palestinian Central Elections Commission (CEC). Dr. Shtayyeh was appointed as Minister of Housing and Public Works in the 9th Palestinian cabinet.

Career

Dr. Shtayyeh is a founding member of the Palestinian Development Fund, as well as the Palestinian Housing Council. Dr. Shtayyeh is also the founder and President of the Palestinian Center for Regional Studies (PCRS), a regional think tank. Dr. Shtayyeh has served as Dean at Bir Zeit University. He established the National Institute of Information Technology and the National Institute for Administration. Dr. Shtayyeh is currently the President of the Board of Trustees of the Arab-American University in Jenin, President of The Palestinian Economic Council for Development and Reconstruction (PECDAR) and serves as a Governor of the Islamic Development Bank, representing Palestine.
Education
Dr. Shtayyeh hold a Ph.D. in Development Studies from the Institute of Development Studies in the University of Sussex, Brighton, UK. He has authored several books and articles.
NABIL ABURDENEH
Born in Bethlehem. He is married and has two sons.
Political Career

Nabil Aburdeneh is known as one of the historic members of Fatah as well as for his close relation with late President Yasser Arafat. He was appointed spokesperson for the Palestinian presidency by President Arafat and has continued his role under the presidency of Mahmoud Abbas.

During his career he has been involved in the peace process as a close adviser to the Palestinian President.
Education
Along with other Palestinian leaders he attended the Cairo University where he studied law.
For more information, please call + 970 (or 2) 2 2963743

2010-08-27T16:14:00.002Z

In the centre of the Israeli occupied east Jerusalem there is a multi storey building name Beit Yonatan. This building houses the headquarters of a Jewish company called Ateret Cohanim, which helps Jews buy apartments and houses from the Arabs. This is illustrative of the highly religious tensions that permeate the land in and around Jerusalem that was occupied in 1967. Indeed, the Palestinians that sell often have to move city or leave the country because they are considered as traitors.

This is, in a way, part of the problem of settlement. The state is desperately trying to make the area around Beit Yonatan more Jewish, so a community can be started. But they are going about it in the wrong way – paying off the original residents is not legitimate, and there is no wonder that the Palestinians see sellers as traitors. Indeed, the Palestinians that refuse the payoff are staying as a matter of faith and religion, and feel threatened by the emerging Jewish community. However, many Israeli’s argue that Jewish settlers going to live in the heart of Palestinian communities are trouble makers, and retard efforts to bring peace to Jerusalem.

Effectively, this is just another instance which reminds us it is impossible to have peace in Jerusalem when both sides believe it is their birthright, and while companies like Ateret Cohanim continue to subvert the peace process.

The dangers of posting personal photos on Facebook

2010-08-25T16:15:00.003Z

Photos uploaded onto Facebook by a former IDF solider showing her posing next to detained Palestinians (who were handcuffed and blind folded) have caused outrage.
The soldier, who was recently discharged from the IDF, posted the photos on facebook in an album she called "Army...best time of my life :)."

This episode in yet another political PR disaster for Israel because it supports the view of opponents of the IDF that Israel objectifies Palestinians and have a complete disregard for their humanity, human rights and right for privacy.

“Ya Salam”... a further bridge towards mutual understanding?

2010-08-24T15:37:00.002Z

At a time when direct peace talks between Israel and Palestinians are back on the table after a 20 month stalemate, an additional initiative is being introduced by Israelis to help foster a spirit of rapprochement between both sides.

Israeli authorities are going to introduce a new scheme to make Arabic language classes compulsory in state schools. It is hoped that the scheme, called Ya Salam, will turn language into a cultural bridge and promote tolerance between Jews and Arabs.

Grassroots Efforts for Peace

2010-07-16T10:09:00.005Z

With the focus so often on governmental policy, I thought it would be interesting to take a look at some grassroots movements for peace in Israel and Palestine.

Oasis of Peace (Neve Shalom / Wahat al-Salam.)

Situated between Jerusalem and Tel-Aviv, this village community of 200 people aims to prove that Israel's Jews and Arabs can live peacefully side by side. Autonomous and self-governed, the village claims to have no political affiliation. Instead their aim is to construct an "humane, egalitarian and just society." To this end they have set up the School for Peace which educates young Arab and Jewish Israelis. In turn governed by a Jewish and Arab director, the school has educated some 35,000 students since it opened its doors for the first time in 1979. Their work is guided by four basic assumptions:

1.The beliefs and outlooks on which a person’s identity and behavior are constructed are deep-seated and stable, and generally resistant to change. Our work attempts to expose these outlooks and permit people to grapple with them.

2.The conflict rests on an encounter between two national groups, not between individuals; hence we see the group as having an essential importance, beyond the sum of the individuals comprising it.

3.The group is a microcosm of reality and thus offers an avenue for learning about the society at large.

4.The encounter group is an open entity, linked to and influenced by the larger reality outside.

The village also operates a humanitarian aid programme for those, primarily palestinians, who have been affected by the ongoing conflict.

Their website can be found here.

Also interesting to look at is:

The Parents Circle-Families Forum

An Interview with Benjamin Netanyahu's Father

2010-07-12T16:42:00.004Z

Follow the link below and read a fascinating interview with Bibi's father. Simply imagine the discussions at the kitchen table when Bibi was growing up. Whilst many of his father's sentiments are obviously not all shared by his son Bibi they do give an indication of the enviroment in which Bibi grew up in and do not bode well for an Arab-Israeli peace process under his leadership.

http://www.promisedlandblog.com/?p=803

The Face that represents the stalemate in Middle East Peace talks

2010-07-01T12:34:00.002Z

25 June 2010 marked the four year anniversary of the capture of Gilad Shalit by Hamas. Symbolically Shalit represents the fate of the peace process in the Middle East. His fate will almost certainly determine whether the region is plunged into a new cycle of violence, or whether the peace process can somehow be revived.

If Hamas were to kill him any prospect of a rapprochement between Israel and a Hamas-led Palestinian Government would vanish. Without doubt Israel would seek revenge against those it held responsible; not only Hamas but also against the group’s exiled leaders in Beirut and Damascus. Conversely if Israel’s military pressure, or a deal to swap Palestinian prisoners for the soldier could persuade Hamas to release Shalit, surprising possibilities could open up.

The sticking point for Hamas surrounding the release of Palestinian prisoners relates to Marwan Barghouti and Ahmed Saadat. Whilst Israel has agreed to release many of the 1,000 Palestinian prisoners they categorically will not release the two above mentioned prisoners.

Israelis, on the other hand, are incensed with their government regarding the recent agreement to ease the Israeli blockade of Gaza due to international pressure after the flotilla incident in May 2010. By not having negotiated Shalit’s release at this time the Israeli government have forsaken a point of leverage with Hamas.

Millions of people have been affected by the ongoing hostilities in Israel and Palestine, but Gilad Shalit has become the face that represents the hopelessness of the stalled peace talks

Kuwait royal family tries to back of anti-Isreal move

2010-06-08T10:18:00.002Z

The Kuwait Royal family is trying to face down moves by Kuwait's parliament to pull out of the Arab Initiative for peace with Israel. Though technically illegal (the royals and the cabinet are actually obliged to stand by resolutions with a National Assembly majority) they may get away with it. They are under pressure from the USA not to break ranks with the rest of the Arab World and destroy the only peace process achievement since the heady days of the Jordan-Egypt peace with Israel:

Kuwait keen on Arab consensus on peace initiative: Al-Busairi
Kuwait government spokesman Dr. Mohammad Al-Busairi reaffirmed on Monday the government's commitment to maintaining the Arab consensus on the initiative for peace in the Middle East, reaffirmed at several Arab summits . . . More >>>>>>>>>>>

Mavi Marmara Attack- A Barrier To Peace In The Middle East

2010-06-04T15:21:00.006Z

The Mava Marmara set out from Istanbul for Gaza on 22nd May. It carried $20m worth of aid. As everyone knows, the ship was however attacked, killing 9 of the 500 or more peace activits and injuring dozens more. Israel's continuing disregard for international law, its blockade of Gaza and the construction illegal settlements in East Jerusalem will affect the security of the United States and ally nations as well. It will also be an insurmountable obstacle to peace in the Middle East.

The Gaza Seige - an Iranian viewpoint

2010-06-04T12:50:00.004Z

This came in from Ayatollah Safavi. It expresses an Iranian perspective on the current crisis over the Gaza blockade:

Freedom Flotilla: A call for an International and Israeli change of policy

By Seyed Safavi & Hanan Nasser

International Peace Studies Centre (IPSC)
peace-ipsc.org

The Freedom Flotilla, which headed for the besieged Gaza Strip from Cyprus on Sunday with the aim of breaking the Israeli blockade and delivering 10,000 tonnes of much needed humanitarian aid, was stopped by the killing of at least nine civilian activists on board the Turkish passenger ship, Mavi Marmara, by Israeli Naval Commandos. The Israeli military’s operation, which was conducted in international waters, received the “full backing” of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, caused an outpouring of condemnation from nations and governments across the globe and placed Israeli-Turkish relations at a turning point.

The siege, imposed since 2007, has turned the Gaza Strip into a concentration camp imprisoning its 1,400,000 residents. Amnesty International has said that the Gaza population is “trapped in the Gaza Strip. Their daily lives – in an area of land just 40 kilometers long and 9.5 kilometers wide – are marked by power shortages, little or no running water of poor quality and deteriorating health care. Mass unemployment, extreme poverty, and food insecurity both exacerbate and are deepened by the impact of the Israeli blockade”. In addition, the Gazans live in constant fear of Israeli bombings and the threat of yet another Israeli military operation similar to Operation Cast Lead which resulted in the deaths of 1,400 Palestinians, in which the UN fact finding mission into the operation found “strong evidence that Israeli forces committed grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention in Gaza, including: willful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, and extensive destruction of property.” In its report, known as the Goldstone report, the mission stated: “Israel’s blockade of Gaza amounts to a violation of Israel’s obligations as an Occupying Power under the Fourth Geneva Convention. The deliberate actions of the Israeli forces and the declared policies of the Government indicate the intention to inflict collective punishment on the people of the Gaza Strip.”The Freedom Flotilla, organized by the Free Gaza Movement, aimed to “raise awareness about the prison-like closure of the Gaza Strip” and to send a statement that through peaceful means and through the strong will and action of nations, if not governments, justice can be established and the people of Gaza can be freed.

Israel, which was once again confronted by the international will, not the will of governments but of nations, decided to answer peace with violence and taint a peaceful movement for freedom, justice and preservation of human dignity, with the blood and incarceration of civilian activists.
The action of the Israeli military, which has received the “full backing” of the Israeli prime minister, and is yet to be condemned by Israel’s guardian and patron, the United States, is also a statement, it is a statement of violence, disregard for human life, disregard for international law and the absence of any desire for peace. It is yet another statement that the international legal tools to ensure accountability do not apply to Israel. Israel has been granted immunity by an international community, led by the United States, that has been passive to its policy of “collective punishment” in the Gaza Strip over the past years.

Israel launched Monday’s raid knowing from experience that it will once more be protected by the United States and that it will not face UN Security Council resolutions or sanctions for its breach of international laws.

The Israeli actions have fueled western and Muslim outrage as governments across Europe summoned Israeli ambassadors and demanded clarifications over the incident.
In the Muslim world, the Arab League is expected to hold an emergency meeting on Tuesday to discuss the raid. Muslim governments slammed the attack as “state terrorism” and an “act of piracy” as Egypt summoned the Israeli ambassador and Jordan “handed the Israeli charge d’affaire a protest note”, according to an AFP report. Other Middle Eastern states such as Syria and Lebanon, warned that Israel’s actions “threaten to pull the Middle East into a war whose consequences will not be limited to the region” while Iran stated that the raid is “in contravention of human values, [international] law and justice,” and called for a “decisive resolution” by the security council to stop Israeli crimes; further, Saudi Arabia called on the international community to take action.

The most consequential reaction for Israel was that of Israel’s regional ally, Turkey, whose president accused it of practicing “state terrorism” while the Turkish foreign minister warned that the attack could have “irrevocable ramifications” on bilateral ties. In the meantime, the Turkish government said it withdrew its ambassador to Israel and canceled three military maneuvers with Israel. It remains to be seen what steps the Turkish military and government will take in protest to the Israeli actions. Most of the nine activists who were killed were Turkish. However, what is needed is a strong response by Turkey particularly in the pursuit of an independent inquiry into the incident.

European Union ambassadors in a statement “condemned the use of violence” and demanded “an immediate, full and impartial inquiry into the events and the circumstances surrounding it”. It said that the EU “does not accept the continued policy of closure, it is unacceptable and politically counterproductive, we need to urgently achieve a durable solution to the situation in Gaza”.

For its part, the UN Security Council called for an impartial inquiry into the raid after a ten-hour emergency session, which was requested by Turkey and Lebanon. In its statement, the Security Council called for “a full investigation into the matter and it calls for a prompt, impartial, credible and transparent investigation conforming to international standards”. It stressed that “the situation in Gaza is not sustainable” and reiterated the Council’s “grave concern at the humanitarian situation in Gaza”.

In the face of such a storm, Israel defended its actions and adhered to its policy of continuing the siege on Gaza. Netanyahu called the incident “regrettable” but justified the attack as a “clear case of self-defense” awarding his “full support” to the Israeli military.

The first step, which must be taken, is to place pressure on Israel to lift its unproductive siege on Gaza. Further, in line with the international community’s call for an inquiry into the killings on board of the Mavi Marmara, it is of utmost importance that the inquiry is independent, particularly as “Israel’s system of investigation and prosecution of serious violations of human rights and humanitarian law, in particular of suspected war crimes and crimes against humanity, has major structural flaws that make the system inconsistent with international standards.” (United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict). Such an investigation is particularly important in the context of the Middle East peace process. The immunity extended by the US and her allies to Israel is the greatest barrier to the establishment of just peace in the Middle East.

Such international leniency is demonstrated by Israel’s disregard for international law, its violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention and Security Council resolutions, its continued blockade of Gaza, its construction of illegal settlements on Palestinian Territories, its rhetoric of war against its neighbors and its use of violence, as demonstrated once more on Monday.
In light of the international community’s unchanged policy toward Israel, it will not feel compelled to act as a cooperative partner in peace negotiations. Israel’s past and present actions show that it has no interest in peace. None of the Israeli ceasefires, be it in the case of the Occupied Palestinian Territories or Lebanon, or withdrawals from occupied territories have been the result of an Israeli desire for peace. They have been a tactic, in which Israel, after using “disproportionate force” against its targets and achieving its military and political objectives, withdraws or calls for a ceasefire in order to recuperate and allow for the public outrage of its actions to subside only to strike once more. Israel’s long-term strategy has been to create a climate of fear and violence in the region marked by periods of calm.

The behavior of Israel is not only the foremost barrier to peace in the Middle East but it directly affects the security of the US and her allies, and the situation faced by American and NATO troops across the Muslim lands. There is need for a shift in the behavior of the West towards Israel, whereby Israel, like any other state is held accountable for its actions by legal tools such as UN Security Council resolutions, sanctions and trade and arms embargoes. This policy shift, which would mark an end to policy of double standards employed by the US and her allies in the Middle East, will directly result in a behavioral change in Israel. In the absence of a policy of impunity for its crimes and breaches, Israel will have to respect its obligations under international humanitarian treaties. This is one of the preconditions for successful peace negotiations, and it is a first step to ensure the establishment of a just peace in the Middle East.

The attack on the Freedom Flotilla was also an attack on citizens of more than a dozen countries including the United States, Britain, Australia, Greece, Canada, Malaysia, Algeria, Serbia, Belgium, Ireland, Norway, Sweden, Kuwait and Turkey, as it took place in international waters. The raid offers an opportunity for the international community to move away from the policy of complacency towards Israel. An important result of this policy shift would be the message that it would send to the Muslim world that the rule of law will be applied equally upon all parties in the conflict, and that “change” is more than an empty promise.

The War of Public Opinion

2010-06-02T14:37:00.000Z

Israel’s attempted diversion of the Flotilla’s was certain to end in tears for Israel, whilst it was a public relations triumph for Hamas. Even though the ships never made it to Gaza, the point of the exercise was to provoke Israel into a military reaction and to discredit her on camera. It was inevitable that the Israelis would stop the “humanitarian” Flotillas heading towards Gaza by sea. The Israelis had offered to transfer the supplies from the Flotilla to Gaza from the port in Ashdod through official channels. However this offer was rejected in favour of a guaranteed confrontation. The outcome has been international condemnation, criticism and further isolation of Israel.

In the first few hours of reporting of this incident, the damage has already been done (Israel is still recovering from the international beating it received from allegations of committing war crimes during the 2009 Gaza offensive). Turkey, traditionally Israel’s strongest Muslim ally, immediately withdrew its ambassador to the country and the UN Security Council has also condemned the raid. More concerning is the impact this raid will have on the renewed proximity talks between Israel and Palestine.

This incident has succeeded in defining the global image of Israel. It has divided Israel and Western governments by shifting public opinion against Israel. Israel’s enemies will argue that Israel prefers bloodshed to reasonable accommodation (allowing the ships to go to Gaza and offload). The concern is that as Western public opinion shifts against Israel, Western political leaders will adopt the same thinking.

Given the size of Israel, it is not large enough to withstand extended international isolation. The implications of this raid have profound geopolitical implications, as mentioned above.

Israeli/Palestinian Winners of the 2010 International Media Awards

2010-05-11T13:09:00.005Z

The International Media Council Awards of the Next Century Foundation were presented at a ceremony on 8 May 2010 at the Oxford and Cambridge Club, Pall Mall. The following prizes were awarded to Israeli and Palestinian journalists.

1. The Peace Through Media Awards

The Peace Through Media Awards are given to journalists or broadcasters of outstanding calibre. They are selected because their work is of such quality that it has helped to foster a climate of peace and understanding.

AKIVA ELDAR - the Chief Political Columnist for Haaretz. His columns also regularly appear in the Haaretz-Herald Tribune edition and the Japanese daily Mainichi. Before taking up his current role, Mr. Eldar lectured at the School of Journalism in Tel Aviv, as well as working as Haaretz US Bureau Chief and Washington correspondent, covering the peace process, US-Israel relations, American issues and Israel-Diaspora relations. Prior to this, he spent ten years as Diplomatic Correspondent. Mr. Eldar is the co-author of two books; a biography of Shimon Peres and Lords of the Land: The War Over Israel's Settlements in the Occupied Territories.

2. The Cutting Edge Awards

The Cutting Edge Awards are an acknowledgement of the work of media professionals who have risen to prominence through the outstanding quality of their work and their balanced and considered coverage.

MOEEN EL HILOU - currently Gaza Producer for Israel's Channel 10 TV, as well as being a director for the Hebrew News Department at Palestine TV. Fluent in Arabic and Hebrew, he has had an eventful career as a journalist, covering all interviews between the late Yasser Arafat and Israeli officials, as well as himself interviewing important Israeli figures including Ehud Olmert (when he was Sharon's Deputy Prime Minister) and Shimon Peres.

ITAI ANGHEL - senior correspondent for the weekly current affairs program "UVDA" on Israel's Channel 2 television, the Israeli equivalent to BBC's "Panorama" or CBS's "60 Minutes". Beginning his career as a foreign correspondent, and later Chief Editor of Foreign Affairs, for the GLZ radio station during the pivotal years of 1987-93, Mr. Anghel covered conflicts in former Yugoslavia and the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Since his move to Channel 2 in 1993, he has covered numerous significant conflicts and political events, including the first post-apartheid elections in South Africa, the Rwandan genocide, the aftermath of September 11th in the United States, an Israeli exclusive on the funeral of Yasser Arafat and the Second Lebanon War. Mr. Anghel has become known for his objectivity in reporting, and his determination to make the voices of all sides heard. He has also been actively involved in humanitarian work, setting up the Humanitarian - Israelis for Congo organisation and bringing concerts and medical delegations to the country.

MOSSI RAZ - Israel Coordinator for All For Peace Radio, a joint Israeli-Arab radio station which seeks to bring the accumulated experience and expertise of both the Jewish-Arab Centre for Peace and the Palestinian Biladi organisation to bear through the mass media, creating hope and finding common ground between the neighbouring peoples. He is a well-known peace activist in Israel and was elected to the Knesset for the liberal Meretz party in 2000, serving for three years. He is also the director of the non-profit Ir Shalom co-existence program, bringing together various volunteer professionals from the field of town planning and construction to create an equitable planning model for the Palestinian community.

MAYSA SINIORA - Palestine Coordinator for All For Peace Radio, a joint Israeli-Arab radio station which seeks to bring the accumulated experience and expertise of both the Jewish-Arab Centre for Peace and the Palestinian Biladi organisation to bear through the mass media, creating hope and finding common ground between the neighbouring peoples. Maysa began her political activism in London, heading the London Palestinian student organisation. After returning to Jerusalem in 1996, she became a reporter on Biladi's Jerusalem Times and was recently named by Haaretz's Marker business magazine as one of the top 40 women in the country for "making a difference". Throughout her career, she has sought to involve "people on the street," rather than concentrating on Palestinian or Israeli politicians.

Israel moves to the Right

2010-05-03T11:33:00.003Z

The inexhorable drift to the right in Israel seems unstoppable. In student polls the results at universities are astonishing - showing that most of the young generation are more right wing than their parents and back Lieberman. David sent us the following from Jews for Justice:

May 2nd, 2010
A mixed bag… The worst news is that the rightward drift in Israel continues apace with a bill before the Knesset to outlaw NGOs that provide evidence of human-rights violations. But there is the hope that protest about the Sheikh Jarrar evictions might see the emergence of a new Israeli left. (See also Bradley Burston's moving analysis of the situation.) Ten Israel Prize laureates and more than 50 academics and intellectuals wrote to the Israeli Defence Minister protesting against Israel’s sweeping ban on Palestinian students from Gaza studying in the West Bank. And Al Jazeera’s Jacky Rowland reports on the differences in access to central Jerusalem for residents of the illegal settlements and Palestinians from Shuafat and Beit Hanina. In Europe there is a liberal Zionist move to launch a new Jewish peace movement under the name of J Call on 3rd May in Brussels. On the Palestinian side: Rachel Shabi assesses the attempt of the Palestinian Authority to reinvent itself as a popular movement but suggests it is skin-deep; there is a new International Crisis Group report on the changing strategy of the PLO; and the fifth Bil’in International Conference on the Popular Struggle committed itself to establishing legal accountability, promoting a BDS strategy and building an international network in support of Palestinian popular non-violent resistance. In the US the most high-profile campaign yet to organise divestment from companies profiting from the occupation has been temporarily halted at Berkeley. But there is no doubt that the divesters won both the argument and majority support, and the issue will no doubt return to the agenda soon. (See also the essay by refusenik Joathan Ben Artzi on taking sides.) In the States, too, Elie Wiesel’s call for Jerusalem to be taken out of current political discussions did not receive the response he wanted from the Obama government. In South Africa in the barred-mitzah-gate saga, Justice Richard Goldstone, author of the UN report on Gaza, was effectively barred from attending his grandson’s forthcoming barmitzvah by the Zionist and Orthodox Jewish establishment. Howls of outrage have forced a reversal… Alan Dershowitz, scourge of Norman Finkelstein and other critics of Israel, has now turned his attentions to Richard Goldstone and to JStreet which he accuses of having “gone over to the dark side”. Some other interesting essays and analytical pieces that appeared this week: Stephen Maher on the Israel lobby thesis that “does little to explain US foreign policy in the Middle East”; Noam Chomsky provides an overview of recent history of Gaza, of the settlements and of Washington’s changing responses to Israel; and a special issue of the Badil Resource Centre journal al-Majdal devoted to the Jewish National Fund was published.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

In Washington-Speak, “ Palestinian State ” Means “Fried Chicken”

2010-04-29T07:49:00.000Z

David Sasson drew our attention to this. Interesting - he's right - Palestine has been cantonised:

By Noam Chomsky

The fact that the Israel-Palestine conflict grinds on without resolution might appear to be rather strange. For many of the world’s conflicts, it is difficult even to conjure up a feasible settlement. In this case, it is not only possible, but there is near universal agreement on its basic contours: a two-state settlement along the internationally recognized (pre-June 1967) borders -- with “minor and mutual modifications,” to adopt official U.S. terminology before Washington departed from the international community in the mid-1970s.

The basic principles have been accepted by virtually the entire world, including the Arab states (who go on to call for full normalization of relations), the Organization of Islamic States (including Iran ), and relevant non-state actors (including Hamas). A settlement along these lines was first proposed at the U.N. Security Council in January 1976 by the major Arab states. Israel refused to attend the session. The U.S. vetoed the resolution, and did so again in 1980. The record at the General Assembly since is similar.

There was one important and revealing break in U.S.-Israeli rejectionism. After the failed Camp David agreements in 2000, President Clinton recognized that the terms he and Israel had proposed were unacceptable to any Palestinians. That December, he proposed his “parameters”: imprecise, but more forthcoming. He then stated that both sides had accepted the parameters, while expressing reservations.

Israeli and Palestinian negotiators met in Taba , Egypt , in January 2001 to resolve the differences and were making considerable progress. In their final press conference, they reported that, with a little more time, they could probably have reached full agreement. Israel called off the negotiations prematurely, however, and official progress then terminated, though informal discussions at a high level continued leading to the Geneva Accord, rejected by Israel and ignored by the U.S.

A good deal has happened since, but a settlement along those lines is still not out of reach -- if, of course, Washington is once again willing to accept it. Unfortunately, there is little sign of that.

Substantial mythology has been created about the entire record, but the basic facts are clear enough and quite well documented.

The U.S. and Israel have been acting in tandem to extend and deepen the occupation. In 2005, recognizing that it was pointless to subsidize a few thousand Israeli settlers in Gaza , who were appropriating substantial resources and protected by a large part of the Israeli army, the government of Ariel Sharon decided to move them to the much more valuable West Bank and Golan Heights .

Instead of carrying out the operation straightforwardly, as would have been easy enough, the government decided to stage a “national trauma,” which virtually duplicated the farce accompanying the withdrawal from the Sinai desert after the Camp David agreements of 1978-79. In each case, the withdrawal permitted the cry of “Never Again,” which meant in practice: we cannot abandon an inch of the Palestinian territories that we want to take in violation of international law. This farce played very well in the West, though it was ridiculed by more astute Israeli commentators, among them that country’s prominent sociologist the late Baruch Kimmerling.

After its formal withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, Israel never actually relinquished its total control over the territory, often described realistically as “the world’s largest prison.” In January 2006, a few months after the withdrawal, Palestine had an election that was recognized as free and fair by international observers. Palestinians, however, voted “the wrong way,” electing Hamas. Instantly, the U.S. and Israel intensified their assault against Gazans as punishment for this misdeed. The facts and the reasoning were not concealed; rather, they were openly published alongside reverential commentary on Washington ’s sincere dedication to democracy. The U.S.-backed Israeli assault against the Gazans has only been intensified since, thanks to violence and economic strangulation, increasingly savage.

Meanwhile in the West Bank, always with firm U.S. backing, Israel has been carrying forward longstanding programs to take the valuable land and resources of the Palestinians and leave them in unviable cantons, mostly out of sight. Israeli commentators frankly refer to these goals as “neocolonial.” Ariel Sharon, the main architect of the settlement programs, called these cantons “Bantustans,” though the term is misleading: South Africa needed the majority black work force, while Israel would be happy if the Palestinians disappeared, and its policies are directed to that end.

Blockading Gaza by Land and Sea

One step towards cantonization and the undermining of hopes for Palestinian national survival is the separation of Gaza from the West Bank . These hopes have been almost entirely consigned to oblivion, an atrocity to which we should not contribute by tacit consent. Israeli journalist Amira Hass, one of the leading specialists on Gaza , writes that “the restrictions on Palestinian movement that Israel introduced in January 1991 reversed a process that had been initiated in June 1967. Back then, and for the first time since 1948, a large portion of the Palestinian people again lived in the open territory of a single country -- to be sure, one that was occupied, but was nevertheless whole.… The total separation of the Gaza Strip from the West Bank is one of the greatest achievements of Israeli politics, whose overarching objective is to prevent a solution based on international decisions and understandings and instead dictate an arrangement based on Israel ’s military superiority.…

“Since January 1991, Israel has bureaucratically and logistically merely perfected the split and the separation: not only between Palestinians in the occupied territories and their brothers in Israel , but also between the Palestinian residents of Jerusalem and those in the rest of the territories and between Gazans and West Bankers/Jerusalemit es. Jews live in this same piece of land within a superior and separate system of privileges, laws, services, physical infrastructure and freedom of movement.”

The leading academic specialist on Gaza , Harvard scholar Sara Roy, adds:

“ Gaza is an example of a society that has been deliberately reduced to a state of abject destitution, its once productive population transformed into one of aid-dependent paupers.… Gaza ’s subjection began long before Israel ’s recent war against it [December 2008]. The Israeli occupation — now largely forgotten or denied by the international community — has devastated Gaza ’s economy and people, especially since 2006…. After Israel ’s December [2008] assault, Gaza ’s already compromised conditions have become virtually unlivable. Livelihoods, homes, and public infrastructure have been damaged or destroyed on a scale that even the Israel Defense Forces admitted was indefensible.

“In Gaza today, there is no private sector to speak of and no industry. 80 percent of Gaza ’s agricultural crops were destroyed and Israel continues to snipe at farmers attempting to plant and tend fields near the well-fenced and patrolled border. Most productive activity has been extinguished.… Today, 96 percent of Gaza ’s population of 1.4 million is dependent on humanitarian aid for basic needs. According to the World Food Programme, the Gaza Strip requires a minimum of 400 trucks of food every day just to meet the basic nutritional needs of the population. Yet, despite a March [22, 2009] decision by the Israeli cabinet to lift all restrictions on foodstuffs entering Gaza, only 653 trucks of food and other supplies were allowed entry during the week of May 10, at best meeting 23 percent of required need. Israel now allows only 30 to 40 commercial items to enter Gaza compared to 4,000 approved products prior to June 2006.”

It cannot be too often stressed that Israel had no credible pretext for its 2008–9 attack on Gaza , with full U.S. support and illegally using U.S. weapons. Near-universal opinion asserts the contrary, claiming that Israel was acting in self-defense. That is utterly unsustainable, in light of Israel ’s flat rejection of peaceful means that were readily available, as Israel and its U.S. partner in crime knew very well. That aside, Israel ’s siege of Gaza is itself an act of war, as Israel of all countries certainly recognizes, having repeatedly justified launching major wars on grounds of partial restrictions on its access to the outside world, though nothing remotely like what it has long imposed on Gaza .

One crucial element of Israel ’s criminal siege, little reported, is the naval blockade. Peter Beaumont reports from Gaza that, “on its coastal littoral, Gaza’s limitations are marked by a different fence where the bars are Israeli gunboats with their huge wakes, scurrying beyond the Palestinian fishing boats and preventing them from going outside a zone imposed by the warships.” According to reports from the scene, the naval siege has been tightened steadily since 2000. Fishing boats have been driven steadily out of Gaza ’s territorial waters and toward the shore by Israeli gunboats, often violently without warning and with many casualties. As a result of these naval actions, Gaza ’s fishing industry has virtually collapsed; fishing is impossible near shore because of the contamination caused by Israel ’s regular attacks, including the destruction of power plants and sewage facilities.

These Israeli naval attacks began shortly after the discovery by the BG (British Gas) Group of what appear to be quite sizeable natural gas fields in Gaza ’s territorial waters. Industry journals report that Israel is already appropriating these Gazan resources for its own use, part of its commitment to shift its economy to natural gas. The standard industry source reports:

“Israel’s finance ministry has given the Israel Electric Corp. (IEC) approval to purchase larger quantities of natural gas from BG than originally agreed upon, according to Israeli government sources [which] said the state-owned utility would be able to negotiate for as much as 1.5 billion cubic meters of natural gas from the Marine field located off the Mediterranean coast of the Palestinian controlled Gaza Strip.

“Last year the Israeli government approved the purchase of 800 million cubic meters of gas from the field by the IEC…. Recently the Israeli government changed its policy and decided the state-owned utility could buy the entire quantity of gas from the Gaza Marine field. Previously the government had said the IEC could buy half the total amount and the remainder would be bought by private power producers.”

The pillage of what could become a major source of income for Gaza is surely known to U.S. authorities. It is only reasonable to suppose that the intention to appropriate these limited resources, either by Israel alone or together with the collaborationist Palestinian Authority, is the motive for preventing Gazan fishing boats from entering Gaza’s territorial waters.

There are some instructive precedents. In 1989, Australian foreign minister Gareth Evans signed a treaty with his Indonesian counterpart Ali Alatas granting Australia rights to the substantial oil reserves in “the Indonesian Province of East Timor .” The Indonesia-Australia Timor Gap Treaty, which offered not a crumb to the people whose oil was being stolen, “is the only legal agreement anywhere in the world that effectively recognises Indonesia ’s right to rule East Timor ,” the Australian press reported.

Asked about his willingness to recognize the Indonesian conquest and to rob the sole resource of the conquered territory, which had been subjected to near-genocidal slaughter by the Indonesian invader with the strong support of Australia (along with the U.S., the U.K., and some others), Evans explained that “there is no binding legal obligation not to recognise the acquisition of territory that was acquired by force,” adding that “the world is a pretty unfair place, littered with examples of acquisition by force.”

It should, then, be unproblematic for Israel to follow suit in Gaza .

A few years later, Evans became the leading figure in the campaign to introduce the concept “responsibility to protect” -- known as R2P -- into international law. R2P is intended to establish an international obligation to protect populations from grave crimes. Evans is the author of a major book on the subject and was co-chair of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, which issued what is considered the basic document on R2P.

In an article devoted to this “idealistic effort to establish a new humanitarian principle,” the London Economist featured Evans and his “bold but passionate claim on behalf of a three-word expression which (in quite large part thanks to his efforts) now belongs to the language of diplomacy: the ‘responsibility to protect.’” The article is accompanied by a picture of Evans with the caption “Evans: a lifelong passion to protect.” His hand is pressed to his forehead in despair over the difficulties faced by his idealistic effort. The journal chose not to run a different photo that circulates in Australia , depicting Evans and Alatas exuberantly clasping their hands together as they toast the Timor Gap Treaty that they had just signed.

Though a “protected population” under international law, Gazans do not fall under the jurisdiction of the “responsibility to protect,” joining other unfortunates, in accord with the maxim of Thucydides -- that the strong do as they wish, and the weak suffer as they must -- which holds with its customary precision.

Obama and the Settlements

The kinds of restrictions on movement used to destroy Gaza have long been in force in the West Bank as well, less cruelly but with grim effects on life and the economy. The World Bank reports that Israel has established “a complex closure regime that restricts Palestinian access to large areas of the West Bank … The Palestinian economy has remained stagnant, largely because of the sharp downturn in Gaza and Israel ’s continued restrictions on Palestinian trade and movement in the West Bank .”

The World Bank “cited Israeli roadblocks and checkpoints hindering trade and travel, as well as restrictions on Palestinian building in the West Bank , where the Western-backed government of Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas holds sway.” Israel does permit -- indeed encourage -- a privileged existence for elites in Ramallah and sometimes elsewhere, largely relying on European funding, a traditional feature of colonial and neocolonial practice.

All of this constitutes what Israeli activist Jeff Halper calls a “matrix of control” to subdue the colonized population. These systematic programs over more than 40 years aim to establish Defense Minister Moshe Dayan’s recommendation to his colleagues shortly after Israel ’s 1967 conquests that we must tell the Palestinians in the territories: “We have no solution, you shall continue to live like dogs, and whoever wishes may leave, and we will see where this process leads.”

Turning to the second bone of contention, settlements, there is indeed a confrontation, but it is rather less dramatic than portrayed. Washington ’s position was presented most strongly in Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s much-quoted statement rejecting “natural growth exceptions” to the policy opposing new settlements. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, along with President Shimon Peres and, in fact, virtually the whole Israeli political spectrum, insists on permitting “natural growth” within the areas that Israel intends to annex, complaining that the United States is backing down on George W. Bush’s authorization of such expansion within his “vision” of a Palestinian state.

Senior Netanyahu cabinet members have gone further. Transportation Minister Yisrael Katz announced that “the current Israeli government will not accept in any way the freezing of legal settlement activity in Judea and Samaria .” The term “legal” in U.S.-Israeli parlance means “illegal, but authorized by the government of Israel with a wink from Washington .” In this usage, unauthorized outposts are termed “illegal,” though apart from the dictates of the powerful, they are no more illegal than the settlements granted to Israel under Bush’s “vision” and Obama’s scrupulous omission.

The Obama-Clinton “hardball” formulation is not new. It repeats the wording of the Bush administration draft of the 2003 Road Map, which stipulates that in Phase I, “ Israel freezes all settlement activity (including natural growth of settlements) .” All sides formally accept the Road Map (modified to drop the phrase “natural growth”) -- consistently overlooking the fact that Israel , with U.S. support, at once added 14 “reservations” that render it inoperable.

If Obama were at all serious about opposing settlement expansion, he could easily proceed with concrete measures by, for example, reducing U.S. aid by the amount devoted to this purpose. That would hardly be a radical or courageous move. The Bush I administration did so (reducing loan guarantees), but after the Oslo accord in 1993, President Clinton left calculations to the government of Israel . Unsurprisingly, there was “no change in the expenditures flowing to the settlements,” the Israeli press reported. “[Prime Minister] Rabin will continue not to dry out the settlements,” the report concludes. “And the Americans? They will understand.”

Obama administration officials informed the press that the Bush I measures are “not under discussion,” and that pressures will be “largely symbolic.” In short, Obama understands, just as Clinton and Bush II did.

American Visionaries

At best, settlement expansion is a side issue, rather like the issue of “illegal outposts” -- namely those that the government of Israel has not authorized. Concentration on these issues diverts attention from the fact that there are no “legal outposts” and that it is the existing settlements that are the primary problem to be faced.

The U.S. press reports that “a partial freeze has been in place for several years, but settlers have found ways around the strictures… [C]onstruction in the settlements has slowed but never stopped, continuing at an annual rate of about 1,500 to 2,000 units over the past three years. If building continues at the 2008 rate, the 46,500 units already approved will be completed in about 20 years.… If Israel built all the housing units already approved in the nation’s overall master plan for settlements, it would almost double the number of settler homes in the West Bank .” Peace Now, which monitors settlement activities, estimates further that the two largest settlements would double in size: Ariel and Ma’aleh Adumim, built mainly during the Oslo years in the salients that subdivide the West Bank into cantons.

“Natural population growth” is largely a myth, Israel ’s leading diplomatic correspondent, Akiva Eldar, points out, citing demographic studies by Colonel (res.) Shaul Arieli, deputy military secretary to former prime minister and incumbent defense minister Ehud Barak. Settlement growth consists largely of Israeli immigrants in violation of the Geneva Conventions, assisted with generous subsidies. Much of it is in direct violation of formal government decisions, but carried out with the authorization of the government, specifically Barak, considered a dove in the Israeli spectrum.

Correspondent Jackson Diehl derides the “long-dormant Palestinian fantasy,” revived by President Abbas, “that the United States will simply force Israel to make critical concessions, whether or not its democratic government agrees.” He does not explain why refusal to participate in Israel ’s illegal expansion -- which, if serious, would “force Israel to make critical concessions” -- would be improper interference in Israel ’s democracy.

Returning to reality, all of these discussions about settlement expansion evade the most crucial issue about settlements: what the United States and Israel have already established in the West Bank . The evasion tacitly concedes that the illegal settlement programs already in place are somehow acceptable (putting aside the Golan Heights, annexed in violation of Security Council orders) -- though the Bush “vision,” apparently accepted by Obama, moves from tacit to explicit support for these violations of law. What is in place already suffices to ensure that there can be no viable Palestinian self-determination. Hence, there is every indication that even on the unlikely assumption that “natural growth” will be ended, U.S.-Israeli rejectionism will persist, blocking the international consensus as before.

Subsequently, Prime Minister Netanyahu declared a 10-month suspension of new construction, with many exemptions, and entirely excluding Greater Jerusalem, where expropriation in Arab areas and construction for Jewish settlers continues at a rapid pace. Hillary Clinton praised these “unprecedented” concessions on (illegal) construction, eliciting anger and ridicule in much of the world.

It might be different if a legitimate “land swap” were under consideration, a solution approached at Taba and spelled out more fully in the Geneva Accord reached in informal high-level Israel-Palestine negotiations. The accord was presented in Geneva in October 2003, welcomed by much of the world, rejected by Israel , and ignored by the United States .

Washington’s “Evenhandedness”

Barack Obama’s June 4, 2009, Cairo address to the Muslim world kept pretty much to his well-honed “blank slate” style -- with little of substance, but presented in a personable manner that allows listeners to write on the slate what they want to hear. CNN captured its spirit in headlining a report “Obama Looks to Reach the Soul of the Muslim World.” Obama had announced the goals of his address in an interview with New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman. “‘We have a joke around the White House,’ the president said. ‘We’re just going to keep on telling the truth until it stops working and nowhere is truth-telling more important than the Middle East .’” The White House commitment is most welcome, but it is useful to see how it translates into practice.

Obama admonished his audience that it is easy to “point fingers… but if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security.”

Turning from Obama-Friedman Truth to truth, there is a third side, with a decisive role throughout: the United States . But that participant in the conflict Obama omitted. The omission is understood to be normal and appropriate, hence unmentioned: Friedman’s column is headlined “Obama Speech Aimed at Both Arabs and Israelis.” The front-page Wall Street Journal report on Obama’s speech appears under the heading “Obama Chides Israel , Arabs in His Overture to Muslims.” Other reports are the same.

The convention is understandable on the doctrinal principle that though the U.S. government sometimes makes mistakes, its intentions are by definition benign, even noble. In the world of attractive imagery, Washington has always sought desperately to be an honest broker, yearning to advance peace and justice. The doctrine trumps truth, of which there is little hint in the speech or the mainstream coverage of it.

Obama once again echoed Bush’s “vision” of two states, without saying what he meant by the phrase “Palestinian state.” His intentions were clarified not only by the crucial omissions already discussed, but also by his one explicit criticism of Israel : “The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.” That is, Israel should live up to Phase I of the 2003 Road Map, rejected at once by Israel with tacit U.S. support, as noted -- though the truth is that Obama has ruled out even steps of the Bush I variety to withdraw from participation in these crimes.

The operative words are “legitimacy” and “continued.” By omission, Obama indicates that he accepts Bush’s vision: the vast existing settlement and infrastructure projects are “legitimate,” thus ensuring that the phrase “Palestinian state” means “fried chicken.”

Always even-handed, Obama also had an admonition for the Arab states: they “must recognize that the Arab Peace Initiative was an important beginning, but not the end of their responsibilities.” Plainly, however, it cannot be a meaningful “beginning” if Obama continues to reject its core principles: implementation of the international consensus. To do so, however, is evidently not Washington ’s “responsibility” in Obama’s vision; no explanation given, no notice taken.

On democracy, Obama said that “we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election” -- as in January 2006, when Washington picked the outcome with a vengeance, turning at once to severe punishment of the Palestinians because it did not like the outcome of a peaceful election, all with Obama’s apparent approval judging by his words before, and actions since, taking office.

Obama politely refrained from comment about his host, President Mubarak, one of the most brutal dictators in the region, though he has had some illuminating words about him. As he was about to board a plane to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, the two “moderate” Arab states, “Mr. Obama signaled that while he would mention American concerns about human rights in Egypt, he would not challenge Mr. Mubarak too sharply, because he is a ‘force for stability and good’ in the Middle East… Mr. Obama said he did not regard Mr. Mubarak as an authoritarian leader. ‘No, I tend not to use labels for folks,’ Mr. Obama said. The president noted that there had been criticism ‘of the manner in which politics operates in Egypt ,’ but he also said that Mr. Mubarak had been ‘a stalwart ally, in many respects, to the United States .’”

When a politician uses the word “folks,” we should brace ourselves for the deceit, or worse, that is coming. Outside of this context, there are “people,” or often “villains,” and using labels for them is highly meritorious. Obama is right, however, not to have used the word “authoritarian,” which is far too mild a label for his friend.

Just as in the past, support for democracy, and for human rights as well, keeps to the pattern that scholarship has repeatedly discovered, correlating closely with strategic and economic objectives. There should be little difficulty in understanding why those whose eyes are not closed tight shut by rigid doctrine dismiss Obama’s yearning for human rights and democracy as a joke in bad taste.

Noam Chomsky is Institute Professor emeritus in the Department of Linguistics and Philosophy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is the author of numerous books, including the New York Times bestsellers Hegemony or Survival and Failed States. His newest book, Hopes and Prospects, is out this week from Haymarket Books

Unfairness from the UK

2010-02-23T22:32:00.002Z

PALESTINIAN FARMERS DENIED VISAS BY THE UK GOVERNMENT FOR FAIRTRADE FORTNIGHT:

These farmers, whose olive oil is the only one in the world to carry the Fairtrade mark, have been invited by a UK social enterprise, Zaytoun, and were to be accompanied by a leading British NGO. The shocking refusal to allow those producers from newly certified Fairtrade Cooperatives into the UK to attend events across England, Wales and Scotland, comes exactly one year after this: Gordon Brown said he was "delighted" by the launch, marking the start of Fairtrade Fortnight, the annual campaign urging people to buy goods with the internationally recognised mark designed to ensure producers from poorer countries get a fair price and long-term security. Brown said: "Olive oil production provides an essential part of the West Bank economy. In buying this oil, British shoppers wil be helping the farmers of Palestine to make a living. "

PLEASE SIGN THIS PETITION TO TELL THE FCO TO ALLOW THESE FARMERS TO ATTEND FAIRTRADE FORTNIGHT.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/fairtradefarmersfrompalestine/

Hammas Summer Camps

2010-02-20T23:50:00.003Z

Award winning Gaza journalist and NCF member, Adel Zanoon, writes to send us this:

GAZA CITY, June 17, 2009 (AFP) - Summer has arrived, school's out, and on the carpeted floor of a Gaza City mosque Ala al-Ramalawi is reciting the Koran to a group of 12-year-old girls in colourful veils.
For most of Gaza's children summer camp still means swimming, horseback riding and campfire songs.
But the number of children attending Hamas-run religious camps has soared in the two years since the group seized power, reflecting the growing religious awareness among the enclave's impoverished residents.
"There is no way for us but learning ... The enemy wants to condemn us to a siege and shelling and poverty," says Ramalawi, 16, who prides herself on having memorised the Koran but says she is not a member of Hamas.
Anwar Nassar, the director of the Koran camps, says Hamas supporters make up at most 60 percent of the youth who attend the camps, but that the total number of attendees has soared since the group seized power.
Since the takeover on June 15, 2007, Israel and Egypt have sealed Gaza off to all but limited humanitarian aid, crippling the local economy, fueling massive unemployment, and stalling reconstruction efforts.
Israel has insisted that the blockade is necessary to prevent Hamas -- which is backed by Iran and Syria and committed to the Jewish state's destruction -- from arming itself.
But human rights groups have slammed the restrictions as collective punishment of the overcrowded territory of 1.5 million people, where the vast majority of the population depends on foreign aid.
The lack of most building materials has meant that Gaza has recovered little from the devastating three-week Israeli offensive at the turn of the year that killed more than 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis.
"The stronger the siege gets and the more frustration there is, the more it pushes the youth towards religiosity and Koranic studies," Nassar said.
More than 20,000 youth between the ages of 12 and 20 will attend the two-month-long religious summer camps this year, up from just 3,000 the year before, he said.

'No future for girls except to learn religion'

Another 100,000 are attending camps that Hamas says are purely recreational, according to Ayman Dalul, the director of the "Victory of Gaza for Jerusalem" camp.
"We will teach the participants arts, swimming, riding horses and history. There are other camps especially for scouts, technology and computers," he says, insisting that military training is not part of the curriculum.
Although many of the youth attending the camps are not Hamas supporters, the growth in interest in Islam serves the interests of the movement, which is committed to the destruction of Israel.
"Hamas is interested in the youth from childhood on," says Sheikh Hamza, a 22-year-old teacher with a long, scraggly beard, one of 1,200 instructors paid 250 dollars a month to teach the Koran and religious studies.
"Teaching the Koran is part of the religion. These are the generations that the movement will rely on for steadfastness and confronting enemies."
Hamas will spend more than 3.5 million dollars on the camps this year alongside its vast network of charities and other social programmes, with much of the funding coming from international Islamic charities.
Such activities, which date back to the movement's founding in the 1980s, have helped it to build up grass-roots political support and contributed to the increasing religious conservatism in Gaza in recent years.
Umm Mohammed, her face concealed beneath a long, black Saudi-style veil, proudly sends her three daughters to a Koranic camp held on the second floor of a mosque near her house.
"Every path is blocked," she says. "There is no future for girls except to learn the religion and the Koran in order to raise their children to serve Palestine and Islam. Everything brings frustration. We have to be stronger."

Grassroots protests

2010-02-09T15:50:00.001Z

Israeli momentum to have prisoner Gilad Shalit released has taken a new turn given that previous negotiations for the Marwan Barghouti /Shalit exchange seems to have faltered.

The focus of this alternate campaign is Hadarim Detention Centre - the prison which holds Fatah leader Barghouti. Protestors hope to block families of Palestinian prisoners from visiting their relatives inside. The argument for this: why should Palestinian prisoners be allowed visits when Shailt has not even had one visit since his capture in 2006 from Gaza.

Earlier this year the same Israeli group staged demonstrations outside the Israeli prime minister's residence and also tried to prevent fuel tanks from going into the Gaza Strip from Israel to try and make their point.

The visitation rights that the Palestinian prisoners have are believed to be one of the reasons why Hamas is under no pressure to negotiate a prisoner exchange. By bringing this protest movement to the grassroots level, Israeli’s are hoping that Palestinian mother’s will turn into their ambassadors, and champion the cause to have Shalit released.

Prince Turki and the Israeli

2010-02-08T23:55:00.003Z

Danny Ayalon had the humility to apologise for his bad behaviour and that earned him a handshake from Prince Turki. Which is good. We should all manage more humility. Should we not? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

2010-02-03T12:38:00.002Z

The RPS sent round this interesting comment on a story about Israel's infiltration of Hamas:

A story published by Khaled Abu Toameh in the Jerusalem Post highlights the possibility that the Israeli intelligence may have infiltrated Hamas and the Syrian security apparatus as questions linger about the mysterious killing of a top Hamas operative in Dubai some two weeks ago.

When it comes to recruiting for the services of a high intelligence officer in Syria, or anywhere else for that matter, the reasons are not many. One either does it for money, ideology, or because you know the ship is sinking and you are hedging your bet.

To view article click here

The Transformation of Hamas

2010-01-30T15:11:00.007Z

One of our board members writes: You may have seen this recent piece on Hamas. Somewhat rambling, but it should inspire your continued efforts to work with Hamas. Much of the author's info appears sourced from earlier in 2009 and before, but he offers a useful perspective. It might be read in light of Mish'al's comments earlier this week. Enjoy!

"The Transformation of Hamas" by Fawaz A. Gerges. Excerpts from an article that appeared in the January 25, 2010 edition of The Nation. The author is an LSE professor.

"Something is stirring within the Hamas body politic, a moderating trend that, if nourished and engaged, could transform Palestinian politics and the Arab-Israeli peace process.

There are unmistakable signs that the religiously based radical movement has subtly changed its uncompromising posture on Israel.

Although low-key and restrained, those shifts indicate that the movement is searching for a formula that addresses the concerns of Western powers yet avoids alienating its social base.

Far from impulsive and unexpected, Hamas's shift reflects a gradual evolution occurring over the past five years.

The big strategic turn occurred in 2005, when Hamas decided to participate in the January 2006 legislative elections and thus tacitly accepted the governing rules of the Palestinian Authority (PA), one of which includes recognition of Israel.

Ever since, top Hamas leaders have repeatedly declared they will accept a resolution of the conflict along the 1967 borders.

The Damascus-based Khaled Meshal, head of Hamas's political bureau and considered a hardliner, acknowledged as much in 2008.

Pressed by an Australian journalist on policy changes Hamas might make, Meshal asserted that the organization has shifted on several key points including acceptance of the national accords for a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders and participation in the 2006 elections.

Another senior Hamas leader, Ghazi Hamad, was more specific than Meshal, telling journalists in January 2009 that Hamas would be satisfied with ending Israeli control over the Palestinian areas occupied in the 1967 war--the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem.

In other words, Hamas would not hold out for liberation of the land that currently includes Israel.

Previously Hamas moderates had called at times for a tahdia (a minor truce, or calm") or hudna (a longer-term truce, lasting as long as fifty years), which implies some measure of recognition, if only tacit.

The moderates justified their policy shift by using Islamic terms (in Islamic history hudnas sometimes develop into permanent truces). Now leaders appear to be going further; they have made a concerted effort to re-educate the rank and file about the necessity of living side by side with their Jewish neighbors, and in so doing mentally prepare them for a permanent settlement.

In Gaza's mosques pro-Hamas clerics have begun to cite the example of the famed twelfth-century Muslim military commander and statesman Saladin, who after liberating Jerusalem from the Crusaders allowed them to retain a coastal state in the Levant.

The point is that if Saladin could tolerate the warring, bloodthirsty Crusaders, then today's Palestinians should be willing to live peacefully with a Jewish state in their midst.

The Saladin story is important because it provides Hamas with religious legitimacy and allows it to justify the change of direction to followers.

Hamas's raison d'être rests on religious legitimation; its leaders understand that they neglect this at their peril. Western leaders and students of international politics should acknowledge that Hamas can no more abandon its commitment to Islamism than the United States can abandon its commitment to liberal democracy.

It should be emphasized that Hamas is not monolithic on the issue of peace. There are multiple, clashing view-points and constituencies within the movement.

Several factors have played a role in the transformation. They include the burden of governing a war-torn Gaza and the devastation from Israel's 2008-09 attack, which has caused incalculable human suffering and increasing public dissatisfaction in Gaza with Hamas rule.

Before the 2006 parliamentary elections, Hamas was known for its suicide bombers, not its bureaucrats, even though between 2002 and 2006 the organization moved from rejectionism toward participation in a political framework that is a direct product of the Oslo peace process of the 1990s. After the elections, the shift continued.

Hamas is not just a political party. It's a social movement, and as such it has a long record of concern about and close attention to public opinion. Given the gravity of deteriorating conditions in Gaza and Hamas's weak performance during last year's fighting, it should be no surprise that the organization has undergone a period of fairly intense soul-searching and reassessment of strategic options.

Ironically, despite the West's refusal to regard the Hamas government as legitimate and despite the continuing brutal siege of Gaza, demands for democratic governance within Gaza are driving change.

Yet Hamas leaders are fully aware of the danger of alienating more-hardline factions if they show weakness or water down their position and move toward de facto recognition of Israel without getting something substantive in return. This difficult balance often explains the tensions and contradictions in Hamas's public and private pronouncements

What is striking about Hamas's shift toward the peace process is that it has come at a time of critical challenges from Al Qaeda-like jihadist groups; a low-intensity civil war with rival Fatah, the ruling party of the PA; and a deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza.

Last summer a militant group called Jund Ansar Allah, or the Warriors of God, one of a handful of Al Qaeda-inspired factions, declared the establishment of an Islamic emirate in Gaza--a flagrant rejection of Hamas's authority. Hamas security forces struck instantly and mercilessly at the Warriors, killing more than twenty members, including the group's leader, Abdel-Latif Moussa.

In one stroke, the Hamas leadership sent a message to foes and friends alike that it will not tolerate global jihadist groups like Al Qaeda, which want to turn Gaza into a theater of transnational jihad.

Despite the crushing of Moussa's outfit, the extremist challenge persists. The Israeli siege, in place since 2006, along with the suffering and despair it has caused among Gaza's 1.4 million inhabitants, has driven hundreds of young Palestinians into the arms of small Salafist extremist factions that accuse Hamas of forfeiting the armed struggle and failing to implement Shariah law.

Hamas leaders appear to be worried about the proliferation of these factions and
have instructed clerics to warn worshipers against joining such bands.

Compared with these puritanical and nihilistic groups, Hamas is well within the
mainstream of Islamist politics.

Operationally and ideologically, there are huge differences between Hamas and jihadi extremists such as Al Qaeda--and there's a lot of bad blood. Hamas is a broad-based religious/nationalist resistance whose focus and violence is limited to Palestine/Israel, while Al Qaeda is a small, transnational terrorist network
that has carried out attacks worldwide.

Al Qaeda leaders Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri have vehemently criticized Hamas for its willingness to play politics and negotiate with Israel.

Hamas leaders have responded that they know what is good for their people, and they have made it crystal clear they have no interest in transnational militancy. Their overriding goal is political and nationalist rather than ideological and global: to empower Palestinians and liberate the occupied Palestinian territories.

Unlike Al Qaeda and other fringe factions, Hamas is a viable social movement with an extensive social network and a large popular base that has been estimated at several hundred thousand.

Given its tradition of sensitivity and responsiveness to Palestinian public opinion, a convincing argument could be made that the recent changes in the organization's conduct can be attributed to the high levels of poverty, unemployment and isolation of Palestinians in Gaza, who fear an even greater deterioration of conditions there.

A further example of Hamas's political and social priorities is its decision to
agree in principle to an Egyptian-brokered deal that sketches out a path to peace with Fatah.

After two years of bitter and violent division, the warring parties came very close to agreement in October. The deal collapsed at the last moment, but talks continue.

There are two points to make about the Egyptian role:

¤ First, Hamas leaders say they feel somewhat betrayed by the Egyptians because
after pressure from the Americans, Cairo unilaterally revised the final agreed-upon text without consulting the Hamas negotiating team.

¤ Second, many Palestinian and Arab observers think Egypt is in no hurry to conclude the Fatah-Hamas talks. They contend that faced with regional challenges and rivals (Iran, Turkey, Syria and Saudi Arabia), the Mubarak regime views its brokering process in the Palestinian-Israeli theater as an important regional asset and a way to solidify its relationship with Washington.

Despite its frequently reactionary rhetoric, Hamas is a rational actor, a conclusion reached by former Mossad chief Ephraim Halevy, who also served as Ariel Sharon's national security adviser and who is certainly not a peacenik.

The Hamas leadership has undergone a transformation "right under our very noses"
by recognizing that "its ideological goal is not attainable and will not be in
the foreseeable future," Halevy wrote in the Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot just
before the 2008 attack on Gaza. He believes Hamas is ready and willing to accept
the establishment of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders.

The US Army Strategic Studies Institute published a similar analysis just before
the Israeli offensive, concluding that Hamas was considering a shift of its
position and that "Israel's stance toward [Hamas]...has been a major obstacle to
substantive peacemaking."

Indeed, it could be argued that Hamas has moved closer to a vision of peace consistent with international law and consensus (two separate states in historic
Palestine, divided more or less along the '67 borders with East Jerusalem as the
capital of Palestine, and recognition of all states in the region) than the current Israeli governing coalition.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vehemently opposes the establishment of a genuinely viable Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, and is opposed to
giving up any part of Jerusalem--and Netanyahu's governing coalition is more right wing and pro-settlement than he is.

Hamas's political evolution and deepening moderation stand in stark contrast to
the rejectionism of the Netanyahu government and call into question which parties are "hardline" and which are "extremist."

And at the regional level, a sea change has occurred in the official Arab position toward the Jewish state (the Arab League's 2002 Beirut Declaration, subsequently reiterated, offers full recognition and diplomatic relations if Israel accepts the international consensus regarding a two-state solution), while the attitudes of the Israeli ruling elite have hardened. This marks a transformation of regional politics and a reversal of roles.

Observers might ask, If Hamas is so eager to accept a two-state solution, why doesn't it simply accept the three conditions for engagement required by the so-called diplomatic Quartet (the United States, Russia, the European Union and
the United Nations): recognition of Israel, renunciation of violence and acceptance of all previous agreements (primarily, the Oslo Accords)? In my interviews with Hamas officials, they stress that while they have made significant concessions to the Quartet, it has not lifted the punishing sanctions against Hamas, nor has it pressed Israel to end its siege, which has caused a dire humanitarian crisis.

In addition, Hamas leaders believe that recognition of Israel is the last card
in their hand and are reluctant to play it before talks even begin. Their diplomatic starting point will be to demand that Israel recognize the national rights of the Palestinians and withdraw from the occupied territories--but it will not be their final position.

There can be no viable, lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians if Hamas is not consulted and if the Palestinians remain divided, with two warring authorities in the West Bank and Gaza. Hamas has the means and public support to
undermine any agreement that does not address the legitimate rights and claims
of the Palestinian people. Its Fatah/PA rival lacks a popular mandate and the
legitimacy needed to implement a resolution of the conflict.

PA President Mahmoud Abbas has been weakened by a series of blunders of his own
making, and with his moral authority compromised in the eyes of a sizable Palestinian constituency, Abbas is yesterday's man--no matter how long he remains in power as a lame duck, and whether or not he competes in the upcoming presidential elections.

If the United States and Europe engaged Hamas, encouraging it to continue moderating its views instead of ignoring it or, worse yet, seeking its overthrow, the West could test the extent of Hamas's evolution.

So far the strategy of isolation and military confrontation--pursued in tandem
by Israel and the United States--has not appeared to weaken Hamas significantly.
If anything, it has radicalized hundreds of young Palestinians, who have joined
extremist factions and reinforced the culture of martyrdom and nihilism.

All the while, the siege of Gaza has left a trail of untold pain and suffering.

If the Western powers don't engage Hamas, they will never know if it can evolve
into an open, tolerant and peaceful social movement.

The jury is still out on whether the Islamist movement can make that painful and
ideologically costly transition. But the claim that engaging Hamas legitimizes
it does not carry much weight; the organization derives its legitimacy from the
Palestinian people, a mandate resoundingly confirmed in the free and fair elections of 2006.

To break the impasse and prevent gains by more extremist factions, the Obama
administration and Congress should support a unified Palestinian government that
could negotiate peace with Israel.

Whatever they think of its ideology, US officials should acknowledge that Hamas
is a legitimately elected representative of the Palestinian people, and that any
treaty signed by a rump Fatah/PA will not withstand the test of time.

And instead of twisting Cairo's arms in a rejectionist direction, Washington
should encourage its Egyptian ally to broker a truce between Hamas and Fatah and
thus repair the badly frayed Palestinian governing institutions.

If the Obama administration continues to shun engagement with Hamas, Europe ought to take the lead in establishing an official connection. European governments have already dealt with Lebanon's Hezbollah, a group similar to Hamas in some respects, and they possess the skills, experience and political weight to help broker a viable peace settlement.

Like it or not, Hamas is the most powerful organization in the occupied territories. It is deeply entrenched in Palestinian society. Neither Israel nor the Western powers can wish it away.

The good news, if my reading is correct, is that Hamas has changed, is willing
to meet some of the Quartet's conditions and is making domestic political preparations for further changes.

But if Hamas is not engaged, and if the siege of Gaza and Palestinian suffering
continue without hope of ending the political impasse, there is a real danger of
a regional war."

Judge denies injunction for Jared

2010-01-13T23:20:00.002Z

Soraya sends this disturbing item that impacts severely on freedom of the press:

On Wednesday night, Ma'an attorney Castro Daoud filed an injunction in a Tel Aviv court to delay the deportation of Jared Malsin, Chief Editor for the English Desk at Ma'an News Agency, the largest news network in the Palestinian territories. Israel's attorney general denied the request aproximately an hour after it was filed.

The injunction was denied with difinitive terminology. There remains a slim chance that a judge could overrule the attorney general.

Jared Malsin, an American citizen, was detained upon arrival at Israel's Ben Gurion International Airport near Tel Aviv at 4pm on Tuesday, 12 January 2009. He was interrogated for eight hours in a detention hall at the airoprt during which time he had no access to a lawyer or his consulate. He is now scheduled for deportation to Prague at 6:05 am on Thursday, 14 January 2010.

US Embassy staff have registered objections with the Israeli authorities over Malsin's detention, which appeared to be politically motivated. Dutch officials, whose government provided some of Ma'an's initial funding in 2005, expressed similar alarm in a letter that the US Embassy passed to Israel from Jack Twiss Quarles van Ufford, the head of the Representative Office of The Netherlands to the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah.

Israeli security agents have prevented Malsin from taking calls, and for hours lied to concerned US consular staff, initially denying that he was even being held. In what could only be explained as a retaliatory measure for Malsin's reporting in Palestine, his long-term partner, Faith Rowold, a two-year volunteer with the Lutheran Church in Jerusalem, was also placed in a separate holding cell pending deportation. They have not been permitted contact ever since.

Nevertheless, foreign diplomats say there is little they can do in cases where Israel cites "security reasons" for denying a foreign-passport holder's entry, although it has yet to specify any allegations in Malsin's case. Israeli security officials, meanwhile, have quietly expressed concern to Ma'an over this latest exercise of power by the Interior Ministry.

Ma'an scrupulously maintains its editorial independence and aims to promote access to information, freedom of expression, press freedom, and media pluralism in Palestine. It has no other agenda. Israel's arbitrary detention of the head of its English Desk is an affront to journalists not only in Palestine, but also in Israel and abroad, who rely on Ma'an for its accuracy, impartiality, and independence.

For more information, please contact: George Hale (English)+972(0)52.785-4907 Raed Othman (Arabic)+972(0)59.925-8704 Hakim Abdul Salah (Hebrew)+972(0)59.895-1151

Poor pathetic Gaza

2009-12-29T12:52:00.002Z

Things are now so bad in Gaza - and the rest of the world just turns its back having never done more than weep crocodile tears. NCF member Sami sent us this today:

This is not humane. We need dignity
A year on from Operation Cast Lead, the Gaza blockade is preventing people from leading a minimally respectable civil life
Sami Abdel-Shafi
The Guardian, Tuesday 29 December 2009
Article history
On my way to visit a friend in the Abed Rabbo district, north of the Gaza Strip, the taxi driver handed me a small pack of biscuits for change. There are nearly no copper coins left here so cab drivers barter a half Israeli shekel for biscuits brought in from the tunnels between the southern city of Rafah and Egypt's northern Sinai. Some Gazans, who once earned a respectable living, resorted to melting coins and sold the copper for food supplies.
This was not the first time I was forced into arcane methods of barter. A few weeks ago I was told that oil filters for our British-made electricity generator could only be brought in through the tunnels. One alternative was to fit a refurbished car-engine filter to the generator.
We had wood-fired coffee next to the rubble of my friend's family's former homes – all levelled during Israel's three-week war on Gaza that started one year ago. His only source of income, a taxi, was crushed by Israeli tanks during the assault. He agonises about how his children no longer respect him as their father. He is unable to provide them with the security of a house and an independent family life; they lost everything.
The family is spread around relatives' homes. But the family's old man just moved into a 60sq m house built from mud and brick, standing next to the rubble of his 400sq m three-story house for which he saved for a lifetime. It was one of the first the UN Relief and Works Agency built after having seemingly lost hope in any Israeli intention to allow construction materials into Gaza. My friend's daughter earns the highest grades in her class and is eyeing a scholarship for one of the universities in Gaza when she leaves high school. But this young woman's resilience and motivation will go nowhere as long as Gaza is blockaded.
Almost nothing has been more deceitful than casting Gaza as a humanitarian case. This is becoming exponentially more problematic a year after the war. Gaza urgently needs far more than merely those items judged by the Israeli military as adequate to satisfy Gaza's humanitarian needs. This list of allowable items is tiny compared to people's needs for a minimally respectable civil life.
Gaza is not treated humanely; the immediate concerns about the situation have clearly given way to long-term complacency, while failed politics has now become stagnant. The humanitarian classification conceals the urgent need to address this. Moreover, many in the international community have conveniently resorted to blaming Palestinians for their political divisions, as though they were unrelated to Israel's policies – most notably Gaza's closure after Israeli disengagement in 2005.
It seems evident that most officials in the US, UK and other powerful nations in Europe and the Middle East do not – or perhaps cannot – pressure Israel to reverse its policy of forcing Palestinians into eternal statelessness. How Palestinians are forced into degrading living standards in Gaza, and how they have no means to repel the ongoing demolition and confiscation of property and land in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, is abhorrent. How Palestinians are still divided despite the increased suffering of their people is no less abhorrent. However, no one should fool themselves into believing that their reconciliation would alter Israel's policy.
The international community must surely adopt a new approach – where it would not be seen as acquiescent to Israel's policies. If the current policy continues then, at least, let it not be at the expense of Palestinian self-respect. Palestinians are a dignified people, as competitive and civilised as any other people in the world. It is far too humiliating for Palestinians to endure not only being occupied but to be made beggars
For years it has been impossible not to suspect that Israel does not want peace. Of late, the US-backed state has consistently created impossible conditions for fair and equal negotiations with the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, and it continues to undermine moderate voices and drive people towards extremism in Gaza. The fact that Palestinians still genuinely want peace should not allow Israel to reject the simplest rules of civility. The US and the EU should come to Gaza; then they could draw their own conclusions on an Israeli policy they have backed and funded without ever witnessing its consequences on ordinary civilians' lives. Surely then they could not fail to see that changing their policy is a moral imperative.

Negotiations underway to release Gilad Shalit

2009-11-27T14:49:00.001Z

This note came in today from the Conservative Friends of Israel. If the Shalit / Barghouti deal goes through, it signals the beginning of hope for a peace process:

· Israel and Hamas are currently trying to broker a deal that would end the three and a half year captivity of captured Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit.
· Details came to light on Sunday 22 November when Israeli President, Shimon Peres, signalled signs of movement in the stalled negotiations of Shalit’s release, stating that ‘real progress has been made…but the details must be kept behind the scenes’.
· Following this statement, Hamas sources confirmed that a deal could be sealed within days.
· It is thought that the deal will involve exchanging Shalit for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners.
· According to a Palestinian source, Israel will release a total of 1,150 Palestinian prisoners in the deal, which is due to take place in three stages.
· The first exchange will require 450 terrorists to be freed, after which Shalit will be transferred to Egypt.
· Israel will then release the rest of the prisoners in two stages, after which Shalit will be brought to Israel.
· The Palestinian source has also stated the Egyptian mediators are seeking to complete the deal as a comprehensive package in which Palestinian President, Mahmoud Abbas, will also be involved.
· The mediators want Abbas’ Fatah movement to reach a reconciliation agreement with Hamas which would include the announcement of a truce with Israel, and the opening of the Gaza Strip’s border crossings where Palestinian Authority policemen would be deployed.
· It is thought that the prisoner exchange will take place next week after the Muslim holiday of Id al-Adha, which ends on Monday.
· Amongst the Palestinian prisoners rumoured to be released is Fatah activist Marwan Barghouti, who is currently serving five life sentences in Israel for his role in a series of deadly terrorist attacks during the second intifadah.
· If Barghouti is released it could have far-reaching strategic implications on the internal Palestinian balance of power and attempts to strike a peace deal with Israel, as it is thought that he will run for President in the Palestinian elections.
· For several years the two main Palestinian factions – Fatah and Hamas – have been deadlocked in fierce rivalry that has led to the division of the Fatah-controlled West Bank from the Gaza Strip violently seized by Hamas in June 2007.
· However, the release of Barghouti may mark a turning point in the relations between the two factions if he succeeds Mahmoud Abbas as the head of Fatah and perhaps as Palestinian president.
· In recent days, Barghouti has been explicit in his support for Palestinian unity between rival factions, noting that this is the single most important challenge facing the Palestinian leadership.
· In addition, the exchange will considerably complicate attempts to re-start peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, as the prisoner release is being attributed to Hamas.
· Undoubtedly, Hamas will use the Shalit deal to re-shape the Palestinian internal balance of power by claiming that they brought Israel to its knees.
· The release of prisoners held in Israeli jails is a pivotal and symbolic part of Palestinian discourse across the political spectrum. Hamas will seek to portray a deal as a vindication of its path of violent resistance and terror.
· If they succeed in including Barghouti in the prisoner release, Hamas will hope to improve their image as a party acting for the greater Palestinian national interest.
· In seeking to abate the negative effects on Abbas, Israel has announced a 10 month settlement freeze on construction in the West Bank and pardoned terrorists, so as to immediately resume stalled peace talks.
· It is likely that further steps will be forthcoming in an effort to persuade Abbas to re-enter negotiations.
· It is also rumoured that Ahmad Sadat, a leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and Ibrahim Hamed, the former commander of Hamas’ military wing and the mastermind behind the 2002 terror bombing at the Moment café in Jerusalem, will be released as part of the prisoner exchange.

Parliament 22nd Oct 09 Egypt's Future an overview.

2009-10-22T14:38:00.012Z

Khalid Nadim had arranged these speakers on Egypt's future and where they should go from here. Nigel Evans MP said for him the key topics on Egypt's future were, Climate Change and Education, and that 2 Billion £'s was spent each year and where was it going?? and people should listen to one another and he felt that Jamal would take over from Mubarrack eventually.
The Brotherhood holds 15th of government seats, someone interjected from the audience. "Why was there no mention of the relationship of the Government, and Hamas and Fatah" this was a member of the Damiyeta Civil Society. Then it was mentioned that the money was coming from Iran from a Sunni province inside the Brotherhood. Iran is specifically supporting the Jundale report. Mr Tony Lerman again reiterated his support for the women of that area. The situation in Gaza: Egypt is playing a treacherous role at the Raffa crossing which could be seen as very sadistic. Islam seems to be in a juxposition role with religion being in the firing line and the Arabs are in control with their hand on the door handle, How far can they go? The Egyptian people are behind the people of Gaza, as Dr Maria Kuma said and she brought up the issue of Women, which became a "hot topic" as 64 seats had been allocated in June 2005 and 8 wealthy women had been appointed by the President but four ladies had been elected.

PLO betrays Palestinians

2009-10-09T23:10:00.002Z

This is too much. Sami sent us his latest article. Unbelievably poignant:

A diplomatic, political and legal disaster has left people in Gaza shocked and disillusioned, and the Palestinian National Authority (PNA), and its President look like they are trying to cover the sun in continuing to deny their responsibility for it.

In a move that stunned Palestinians, the representative of Palestine to the United Nations (UN) mission requested the postponement of a vote last week at the Human Rights Council to endorse the report of the fact-finding mission into the war on Gaza earlier this year. That was the mission – headed by Judge Goldstone – that highlighted Israeli breaches to international humanitarian law.

The Middle East Peace Process- The Latest

2009-10-01T15:46:00.005Z

Following the tripartite UN meeting; Mr Barack Obama declares his commitment to the Israeli Palestinian process with vigour and identifies the situation as “a key foreign policy priority”. Mr Obama certainly bought about a sense of urgency to the situation. The US secretary of state, Hilary Clinton, echoes the needed urgency at the UN general speech assembly, and describes the administration as “determined” in its efforts to reach a two-state solution. It has been recognised that to reach such an achievement is a difficult objective yet the US administration persists its demand to “end the occupation that began in 1967”.

A sense of cynicism is in the air, considering that the latest developments seem to be replaying historical footage. Reaching “peace” has always been at the forefront of priority, US determinism for change is a continual motion; and a collaborated promise from both Israeli and Palestinian leaders is a consistent exercise. All of which seems to remain within the confines of orchestrated speeches and friendly handshakes. Obama however promises that a resolution will be met with his personal efforts into the crisis. A promise of hope is expressed by Obama as he explains at the latest UN general assembly; “even though there will be setbacks, and false starts and tough days- I will not waiver in my pursuits of peace.”

Unlike his predecessors however, there is a change in attitude to the situation. Previously the US administration has viewed each problem independently; however Obama wishes to readdress the Middle Eastern crisis at an interconnected level. This link which has been highlighted by Obama suggests important developments into the future of the Middle East peace process and US interest. With the prolongation of the Arab Israeli conflict, comes a corresponding ignition of extremism into the wider region. With this association having been made, it is identifiable that the plight of the Palestinians plays into the hands of Islamic extremists.

The tripartite UN meeting ended with Obama initiating blunt warning towards Israel so as to at the very least freeze the Jerusalem settlement activity in the occupied west bank since this “undermines efforts to achieve peace”. With this put into plan, Obama wishes to gradually reach a more “permanent status”.

However it has been reported that such a warning has made little impact, considering that Israel has rejected Obama’s wishes and persists with its illegal settlement construction. Abbas in return has expressed his frustration and insists for Israel to “respect the roadmap to peace” and return to the initial boundaries before the 1967 war. Netanyahu is challenged with Obama’s claim that Jerusalem must be the capital of Palestine, and continues with his claim that Iran is currently a much more dangerous threat.

George Mitchell is due back in the region this coming week so as to re-engage in what seems to be a developing knot in the Middle East process plans, and to re-establish the “absolutely crucial” situation as Obama has described it.

If you want to visit Palestine

2009-09-27T09:28:00.002Z

Sara writes from Ramallah:

Thought you would be interested in this article from TIME.com: Israel's New Visa Rule for Foreigners: If You Want To Visit Palestine, Stay There - TIME

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1917917,00.html?artId=1917917?contType=article?chn=world

Comments: luckily I got a visa for both...but this is what I was telling you about before I left.

Israel Media Clips

2009-09-12T21:59:00.001Z

Sara sent these - from her new home in Ramallah. We miss her:

Key Issues
* Barak to authorize 500 housing units in settlements
Israel's plan to build up settlements before moratorium on building put in place is underway. Defense minister slated to authorize building of 450 to 500 housing units in the coming day. Building said to be concentrated in six or seven settlements in larger blocs. MK Shalom: What will we discuss in peace negotiations
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3772963,00.html

* Settlers: Barak move a mockery
For smaller settlement blocs, Barak's decision to green light 500 housing units does not come as good news. Yesha Council Director General Pinchas Wallerstein, 'No new tenders will be issued.' Corner-stone laying ceremony will be held Monday in E1 area
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3773036,00.html

* Ariel mayor: Building is matter of life and death
A settlement freeze is "stupid," Ariel Mayor Ran Nachman told a three-person research team from the State Department that toured a number of Jewish communities in the West Bank on Thursday… But [Netanyahu's] announcement on Thursday, which came in reaction to the US demand for a complete freeze in settlement activity, did not assuage settler leaders, including those within his own Likud Party such as Nachman and Gush Etzion Regional Council head Shaul Goldstein.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1251804496838&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter

* New settlement being built in Jordan Valley
Construction begins on 20 housing units in Maskiot settlement, intended for Shirat Hayam - Gush Katif evacuees, moments before planned freeze ; The new settlement, Maskiot, was the site of an IDF outpost established in the '80s. In 2002 it was abandoned and a number of religious students began living there…In December of 2006 Defense Minister Amir Peretz approved the construction of 100 housing units in the new settlement. The approval was condemned by many in the international community, and Peretz eventually rescinded his decision.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3772706,00.html

* Corner-stone laying ceremony for E1 neighborhood downgraded
Maaleh Adumim Municipality, police agree ceremony intended as 'act of protest against US' opposition to construction plan' to include only burial of vase, scroll
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3772969,00.html

* Netanyahu 'unfreezes' settlement terminology
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu instructed his aides and Likud ministers over the weekend to stop referring to Israel's commitments in a deal with US President Barack Obama as a "settlement freeze." Instead of a freeze (hakpa'ah in Hebrew), it will be referred to as a suspension (hash'ayah), a waiting period (hamtana), or even a cutback (tzimtzum) of Jewish construction in the West Bank. In English, the word freeze that Netanyahu used just two weeks ago in Europe will be replaced by the sanitized word "moratorium."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1251804505349&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

* Outposts will probably be removed in late October, say defense officials
The evacuation of illegal outposts in the West Bank will likely take place after the High Holy Days, in late October, defense officials said on Sunday. An official order to evacuate the outposts has yet to be issued by the Defense Minister Ehud Barak… The postponement was due to Barak's preference to first exhaust negotiations with the settlers before ordering a forced evacuation… Barak will also likely wait for Ramadan to end and for Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to return from his meeting with US President Barack Obama on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly later this month before carrying out the evacuations.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1251804505355&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

* Netanyahu: Israel to reach deal with U.S. on settlements this week
…Meanwhile, Defense Minister Ehud Barak was expected Sunday night to sign partial approval for 500 new housing units to be constructed in the West Bank, and authorize the rest the following morning. The new units were to be constructed in six settlement blocs, including Har Gilo, Upper Modi'in and Ariel.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1112679.html

* Leftist filmmaker urges Israeli artists to boycott Toronto Festival
Left wing Israeli filmmaker Udi Aloni has called on top Israeli artists to step out of their "political closet" and boycott the upcoming Toronto Film Festival over its spotlight on Tel Aviv… Aloni urged the filmmakers to choose sides, stipulating that if they were to choose opposition to West Bank occupation, they should also sign the petition to boycott the Toronto Film Festival… "The reason I chose to address you directly and publicly is, among others, the aggressive 'outing' campaign which you decided to run against Israeli celebrities during the large LGBT support rally in Tel Aviv last month," Aloni wrote in his appeal to Uchovsky and Fuchs. "Following the rally, I decided it was time for the political 'outing' of you two, addressing you once and for all with the question: Are you with us or with the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs?"
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1112696.html

* Arab League, Hamas slam Israel over settlements
During joint press conference with Hamas leader Mashaal in Cairo, Moussa says normalization of ties impossible as long as Israel 'persists in its intransigent position' concerning settlement freeze
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3772954,00.html

oPt
Poll: Hamas approval rating extremely low
While the numbers indicate ongoing, deep hostility toward Israel in the Arab world, the poll also shows signs that powerful players in the region, such as Hamas, are in deep trouble at home, and that the people living under their direct rule are becomingly increasingly vocal in their criticism….Hamas's approval rating has sunk to significantly low levels in the West Bank and even lower levels inside the Gaza Strip, according to a recent poll for The Israel Project that gathers Arab public opinion on a number of key issues…The poll, conducted by Stan Greenberg of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, included face-to-face interviews with hundreds of adults in Egypt, Jordan, the West Bank and Gaza, along with a series of focus groups in Cairo and Ramallah.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1251804506032&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Female Gaza lawyers not obligated to wear head scarf
Gaza Strip's Supreme Justice Council announces that its decision to impose traditional dress on female lawyers not issued as government decree, but personal opinion of justice council chairman.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3772882,00.html

Hamas commander threatens Schalit
A dispute between Hamas's political leaders and military commanders is hindering mediation efforts to reach a prisoner exchange agreement with Israel, sources close to Hamas revealed over the weekend.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1251804496956&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Hamas warns Arabs: Don't rush toward normalizing Israel ties
Hamas on Sunday warned Arab states to be wary of Israel's proposal to temporarily halt settlement construction in exchange for normalization of ties, describing it as a "dangerous equation".
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1112669.html

Internal Israeli, regional and Int'l affairs
Cabinet: No settlement freeze debate before UN session
'We cannot sit idle while prime minister determines the fate of the settlements,' Habayit Hayehudi chairman Orlev says
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3772886,00.html

Report: Jane Fonda joins boycott of Toronto film festival over homage to Israel
Jane Fonda, Danny Glover and Eve Ensler have joined the growing list of artists who are boycotting the Toronto film festival over a program honoring Tel Aviv's 100th anniversary, gossip blogger Perez Hilton reported on Friday. The three have added their names to a letter aimed at festival officials claiming that Tel Aviv was built on violence, ignoring the "suffering of thousands of former residents and descendants," Hilton reported.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1112482.html

Analysis and op-eds
Yossi Saris/ Netanyahu's creativity a slap in the face
…After all, Netanyahu is known in America as someone who deceives the entire world, the Israeli public and perhaps even himself. Successive Israeli governments have specialized in deceiving governments in Washington, out of loyalty to the deeply rooted Diaspora tradition that it's a good deed to cheat the tyrant…But Washington shouldn't worry. Instead, it should adopt Netanyahu's golden rule: If the Israelis give, they will get. And everyone already knows what is liable to happen if they don't give.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1112880.html

Akiva Eldar / Vision of 9/11
Whoever runs away from a compromise solution with his neighbors in September 2009 should not be surprised to find himself at the 1967 borders on September 11, 2011.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1112892.html

Y. Ben Meir / The real threat to the settlements
The real danger to this important enterprise and the main threat to its future is not Peace Now nor any other left-wing organization, but rather the far right in the guise of Women in Green or the hilltop youth and their ilk. Israel's unwillingness to restrain them, and the unwillingness of the settlements to vomit them out, fuel the fire of opposition to the whole ideal. The Israeli government must announce a one-year freeze on the settlements outside Jerusalem, and during this period must impose order in the West Bank once and for all. This is vital for the settlement movement.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1112889.html

Horse-trading the two-state solution

2009-09-04T09:26:00.000Z

The “movements in the right direction” taken last week by Benjamin Netanyahu and the new US stance seem to be positive developments. There is an apparent agreement over the two-state solution and necessary steps towards it becoming a reality are being taken. But how much of it is in earnest?

Netanyahu’s yielding attitude is an obvious outcome of US pressures; Israel needs its ally and Netanyahu cannot afford to refuse. On the other hand, Obama has vowed to make a change and (especially given his disappointing progress elsewhere) can not fail to deliver, and for results he needs Netanyahu.

Netanyahu’s promise to ‘freeze’ settlement building comes on the conditions that current building be carried through and that America take a firmer stance with regard to the threat of Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

On the Palestinian front people may be toying with the idea of recognition of Israel – a perpetual pre-condition for talks. It looks, however, like a growing attraction to Hamas as a potential partner for peace talks and a risk of Israel being pressured into inclusion of Hamas has given Fatah little choice but to appear more obliging merely to avoid being side-lined.

The chance of Israel-Palestine talks at the UN General Assembly later in the month is slim and in my opinion, even if talks do take place, progress towards peace will continue to be impeded as long as concessions are only made on the basis of self-interested horse-trading.

Iran and Bahrain in Media Spat

2009-09-02T10:56:00.002Z

An article by the Crown Prince of Bahrain, Sheikh Salam bin-Hamad al Khalifa, in the Washington Post in July has sparked a low-key row between Iran and its nearest Gulf neighbour.

In his article of the 26th of July, the Crown Prince adopted a conciliatory tone towards Israel, advocating “reaching out to the Israeli people” as a means of bypassing the current deadlock over Palestine.

It is unclear what the Crown Prince himself meant by “reaching out”, but according to a Guardian article of August 26th it appears that the USA, and possibly some Western European states, have done so by linking the two contentious issues of Iran’s nuclear disarmament and Israel’s steady encroachment into the West Bank. Over the last two weeks, Netanyahu has courted Western Europe with personal visits to the UK and Germany, and has implemented a form of de facto settlement freeze by refusing to approve new building permit applications in settlement areas. There is even talk of progress within the consistently fractious Israeli political establishment of a more formal year-long moratorium on settlements, in preparation for resuming direct talks with Palestinians.

The concessions given to Israel in return for such co-operation, however, may be harsh for Iran. A Telegraph article of August 25th, for example, suggests the possibility of a petroleum embargo, which would be devastating to a country which relies on up to 40% imported petroleum to keep its economy even in its current state.

It is no wonder that Iran is purportedly nervous. Israel has never been known to give away something for nothing, and the Iranian government must be wondering just what has been promised by western leaders to Netanyahu to extract even the current limited concessions. It is possible, though conjectural, that the Crown Prince of Bahrain’s offering in the Washington Post may have been seen by some Western foreign policy decision-makers as an Arab mandate to use the Iranian nuclear issue as a means of bargaining in the Middle East peace process.

Saudis call for Palestinian Peace

2009-08-11T10:12:00.003Z

The trouble with calling on Mahmoud Abbas to make peace with Gaza is he doesn't want to - nor does he want proper internal reform of Fatah - nor does he want Palestinian elections. The man us what he is. He will cling to power as long as elections can be avoided. Sad really.

The Council of Ministers on Monday expressed hope that the Palestinian factions would respond positively to the appeal made by King Abdullah to close ranks in the interest of a Palestinian nation, Higher Education Minister Khaled Al-Anqari, who is also acting minister of culture and information, said in a statement to the Saudi Press Agency.

ICG Report on Israel's Religious right & the question of Settlements

2009-07-21T12:13:00.004Z

The latest report from the ICG looks at the issue of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and the influence of the religious right on any action that is to be taken regarding them.

As pressure builds (most notably from the US) for Israel to suspend the growth of its settlements in the West Bank, it seems that the religious right is gaining in numbers, support and influence. There have been almost militant attacks by them on Palestinians in the West Bank and many in positions of authority have been almost powerless to condemn these acts. Many Israeli officials feel that any move towards disengagement in West Bank could results not only in Israeli Jew and Palestinian conflict but also unrest and violence among Jews.

The options proposed by the ICG on how to deal with this emerging but already powerful socio-religious group show that there are a number of firm yet tactful approaches to the religious right that could facilitate long-term peace and stability.

Hamas position

2009-06-17T19:35:00.003Z

The United States Institute for Peace has issued an appraisal by Paul L. Scham of the Gildenhorn Institute for Israel Studies and Osama Abu Irshaid of what they see as the Hamas position. It's interesting. This is the summary:

Although peaceful coexistence between Israel and Hamas is clearly •not possible under
the formulations that comprise Hamas’s 1988 charter, Hamas has, in practice, moved
well beyond its charter. Indeed, Hamas has been carefully and consciously adjusting
its political program for years and has sent repeated signals that it may be ready to
begin a process of coexisting with Israel.
As evidenced by numerous statements, Hamas is not hostile to Jews because of religion.
Rather, Hamas’s view toward Israel is based on a fundamental belief that Israel
has occupied land that is inherently Palestinian and Islamic.
For Hamas, “recognition” of Israel would represent a negation of the rightness of its
own cause and would be indefensible under Islam. It considers unacceptable for itself
the actions of those Muslim countries that have recognized Israel, such as Egypt and
Jordan, and those that have indicated their willingness to do so, such as Saudi Arabia
and the rest of the Arab League, because they have provided no theological justification
for their policies toward Israel.
Although Hamas, as an Islamic organization, will not transgress shari‘a, which it
understands as forbidding recognition, it has formulated mechanisms that allow
it to deal with the reality of Israel as a fait accompli. These mechanisms include
the religious concepts of tahadiya and hudna and Hamas’s own concept of
“Palestinian legitimacy.”
Tahadiya refers to a short-term calming period between conflicting parties during
which differences are not put aside. A tahadiya stopped most violence between Hamas
and Israel from June to December 2008.
Hudna is a truce for a specific period, which is based on the practice of the Prophet
Mohammad and on subsequent events in Muslim history. Hamas has indicated on a
number of occasions its willingness to accede to a hudna with Israel, assuming basic
Palestinian rights as set forth in the Arab Peace Initiative (API) are agreed to first.
Palestinian legitimacy is a term employed by Hamas to describe its willingness to consider
accepting a binding peace treaty, such as the proposal set forth in the API, so
long as the treaty is first ratified by the Palestinian people in a referendum. Although
Hamas would not directly participate in peace negotiations with Israel, Hamas has
indicated that it would be willing to be part of a Palestinian coalition government
with Fatah under which Fatah would negotiate the actual treaty.
Although a peace process under such circumstances might, for Israelis and Westerners,
seem involved, arcane, and of dubious utility, it is necessary to consider the
possibility of such a process because there is no realistic scenario under which Hamas
will disappear. Understanding the Islamic bases of Hamas’s policies and worldview will
be essential for the success of any process in which it is engaged.

Repressive?

2009-05-31T21:42:00.003Z

The Knesset has passed a first reading of a bill that makes it illegal to say that Israel is not a "Jewish State". Kind of tough for the million and a half Israeli Arabs who want to maintain some sort of sense of identity. Kind of tough for freedom of expression too. Israel's new right wing government may become more oppresive than most Israelis are used to. Israel used to be a liberal free-thinking sort of place. Curiously they're also making it illegal to say Israel is not a democracy. For why for goodness sake?

Swiss Role?

2009-05-25T10:40:00.000Z

King Abdullah has been holding talks with the Swiss President on Mid East Peace Process issues - whgich is interesting given the fact that we are about to have our annual NCF peace process conference in Caux, Switzerland. Maybe we can get the Swiss to open the thing. The Swiss have a unique role because they are not trapped - like the EU - by the "three conditions" nad can speak to Hamas - which they have been doing most effectively.

Talks between Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah and Swiss President Hans-Rudolf Merz yesterday focused on the Middle East peace process and security concerns with special reference to the global financial crisis.

Hurrying the End Game

2009-05-21T15:37:00.003Z

Peacenik Tony Klug is an inspirational character if a little naive sometimes. He's come out with the idea that the Israelis should submit their wish list and the Palestinians theirs and the Quartet arbitrate the outcome. Well, that's a rough idea of it - the full thing is on the link below. Point is (in my view) that we are on the long road to peace and there's no longer the same opportunity for a quick fix. We have to deal with the status quo I guess until the next war. Peace, if the State of Israel is to survive in an era of mutually assured destruction, has become inevitable. But not yet. We must now work towards a ten year timescale rather than a ten month timescale.

There is room for quick fixes like the one Tony propounds - but we should no longer depend on them.

UN accuses Israel of 'negligence or recklessness'

2009-05-06T23:31:00.005Z

Well, the UN are certainly going to be more unpopular than before in Israel - if that were possible:

A United Nations inquiry today accused the Israeli military of "negligence or recklessness" in its conduct of the January war in Gaza and said the organisation should press claims for reparations for deaths and damage.

The first investigation into the three-week war by anyone other than human rights researchers and journalists held the Israeli government responsible in seven separate cases in which UN property was damaged and UN staff and other civilians were hurt or killed.

Israel / USA heading for a clash

2009-05-05T22:27:00.002Z

Ephraim Sneh sends his article suggesting that Israel and the USA may be heading for a clash. Which is something we have been predicting - virtually unavoidable given a right wing government in Israel and a left wing government in the States and a tough-as-nails US Secretary of State:

Glimmers of concern have recently crept into conversations with various American officials about a possible clash between the Obama administration and the Netanyahu government. On the one hand, the U.S. president has reiterated his intention to implement an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement based on the existence of two independent states. On the other hand, official voices in the Israeli government are heralding an attempt to evade, thwart or at least delay such a move.

Israel is happy

2009-05-04T22:54:00.003Z

Tamar Hermann's excellent "Peace Index" is out again. Some of the findings are surprising:

On the eve of the state of Israel’s 61st Independence Day, despite all the security, economic, social, and political difficulties and despite the gloomy analyses in the media, the Jewish public is in a very good mood, with over 80% defining their personal mood as “very good” or “moderately good.” About two-thirds also assess the mood of the public as a whole as “very good” or “moderately good.” A segmentation of the answers to the questions on personal mood by voting for the Knesset shows that 75% or more of the voters for all the parties define their mood as well as the national mood as “very good” or “moderately good”; the exception is the voters for Torah Judaism, only half (personal) and about one-quarter (national) of whom feel that way.
A segmentation of the data by age, sex, religiosity, and income showed no gaps between the different groups. In other words, statistically at least, what we have here is a significant finding.

Netanyahu rather slow on the uptake

2009-05-03T14:12:00.002Z

Seems Netanyahu is doing nothing fast. No policies. No idea where he is going. In a complete muddle infact. Israel has always been badly governed or there'd have been peace decades ago. Difficult to see Obama changing things - and certainly not Bibi:

Obama has a plan for the restructuring of the Middle East, and one of its elements is an Israeli-Palestinian peace based on “Two States for Two Peoples”. Netanyahu argues that he is not in a position to respond, because he has no plan of his own yet. After all, he is quite new in office. Now he is working on such a plan. Very soon, in a week, or a month, or a year, he will have a plan, a real plan, and he will present it to Obama.

One Voice back in action

2009-04-28T20:06:00.002Z

We know one voice. They aren't the first to conduct a poll that says most Israelis and Palestinians favor a two state solution. Also - curiously - most Israelis think most Palestinians do not favor such a solution and vice versa.

The OneVoice Movement is an international mainstream grassroots movement with over 650,000 signatories in roughly equal numbers both in Israel and in Palestine, and 2,000 highly-trained youth leaders. It aims to amplify the voice of Israeli and Palestinian moderates, empowering them to seize back the agenda for conflict resolution and demand that their leaders achieve a two-state solution guaranteeing the end of occupation, establishing a viable independent Palestinian state, and ensuring the safety and security of the state of Israel - allowing both people to live in peace with all their neighbors.

Our Selective Moral Outrage

2009-04-21T23:32:00.000Z

So why then - really - does Israel face more opprobrium than Russia? Follow the link below to see something really interesting Felix submitted:

Few places on earth have been as systematically brutalized over the past decade as Chechnya. So you might have thought that the Russian government's decision last week to declare an end to its "counterterrorism" operations in the territory would have been an occasion for somber reflection in the Western media. Forget it. It's a 600-word news item at best.

"War on Terror": whose war?

2009-04-03T21:31:00.003Z

I’m sure many of us have been shocked by the extent of the damage and the vast number of casualties that have resulted from Israel’s recent strike on Gaza. Thinking about this, however, set my mind on a wider track. I found myself asking not only about this ‘war’ but also the every day occurrences that take place there. How could someone fire off rockets at random into what they know to be a residential area? How can a soldier look into the face of a child through the barrel of a gun? How can one man completely strip another of his dignity in front of his family? How could someone refuse medical care to the sick? How could one nation pen in another and wipe out the infrastructure upon which thousands of people depend, taking 1,300 lives in the process?...

I think a part of the answer is in the words that we use. Particularly the word ‘terrorist’.

The current ‘war on terror’, basically permits any action against a terrorist or terrorist organisation; in today’s political arena phrases such as ‘do whatever is necessary’ or ‘take any possible measure’ don’t sound uncommon. Calling someone a terrorist can depersonalise a human being to the extent that one could commit all kinds of atrocities and torture against them without our collective conscience batting an eyelid. Everything that is carried out within an environment of alert due to terrorism is somehow treated as an exception to the rules, quite literally. We have seen examples of countries creating altogether new rules and laws in response to a state of alert due to terrorism threats or fears. Here in Britain, along with America, people can be arrested and held without charge or trial which goes against a fundamental principle that our government has upheld for decades. Guantanamo bay is another obvious example, where acts of torture are committed against people who have not had a proper trial which would, in any other case be unthinkable in American prisons. So it’s all nice and clear cut that we can deal with terrorism with whatever means necessary, even if it goes outside of the usual system of rules. All that’s left to do, then, is work out who is a terrorist. For as long as we can be sure that a given person is a terrorist, our conscience can rest unmoved in the face of any measure of brutality or atrocity carried out against them. This however, raises a whole host of grey issues.

No one definition of ‘terrorism’ has ever been universally accepted but people certainly have ideas about what or who qualifies. I decided, however, that a good place to begin at least would be the Oxford English dictionary. The definition given here is: ‘an organised system of violence and intimidation esp. for political ends; the state of fear and submission caused by this’. At least two of the factors mentioned in the above definition would probably be universally accepted; firstly, that terrorism involves violence; and secondly that it is driven by political motives. America, however, seems to have developed its own definition of terrorism, (which in fact seems to be in a constant state of flux) which includes a third fundamental premise perhaps not specified in any other definition and that is that terrorism is something which is not carried out by internationally recognised states. Title 22 of the United States Code, Section 2656f(d) contains the following definition:

“The term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant* targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience…”

*for purposes of this definition the term ‘noncombatant’ is interpreted to include, in addition to civilians, military personnel who at the time of the incident are unarmed and/or not on duty.
*We also consider as acts of terrorism attacks on military installations or on armed military personel when a state of military hostilities does not exist at the site, such as bombings against US bases.

Well rocket fire into civilian areas coming from a stateless organisation certainly counts as terrorism, even rocket fire into military bases would, so long as it can be argued that either the soldiers are unarmed or off duty or that ‘a state of military hostilities does not exist’. This definition demarcates organisations such as Hamas as terrorist without a doubt. Would this be the same if the Palestinians had a state and Hamas an official army? Since it is impossible for Palestinians, being stateless, to enter into a legitimate ‘war’ with Israel on an even footing, any military operation or violent activity that a Palestinian authority may enter into can only be defined, according to the US, as terrorism; something that, by definition, the state of Israel is incapable of committing. Ehud Olmert reiterates this as he addresses the Palestinian people at the time of the first of the recent air attacks “Citizens of Gaza, you are not our enemies, and the terrorist organisations are your enemies as they are ours”. So technically, the Palestinian people in general are not the enemies of Israel, but Hamas as an organisation is. But the question is; where does one end and the other begin in the mind of the Israeli government?

When it comes, then, to how we can identify the enemy of Israel, an Israeli military spokesman sheds some light on the matter saying “anything that has a relationship with Hamas is a legitimate target”. Exactly where this leaves the majority of the Palestinian people who lawfully and democratically elected Hamas as their leaders is concerning to say the least. In fact, a spokesman for the IDF clarified further that “our definition is that any person involved in terrorism inside Hamas is a legitimate target. This includes military financial establishments along with political establishments that offer logistical support and funding and human resources to the terrorist wing”. This definition is just as alarming, leaving interpretation open to the extent that any establishment that supports Hamas even if it is not directly military is a legitimate target. In practice, however, this definition seems to have stretched even further to include any establishment founded by Hamas, who lets not forget, have set up schools, hospitals, universities etc…

Hamas argue that the fact that it is compulsory for every Israeli to serve in the army serves as a justification for hitting civilian targets. I am not sure that this logic only works one way. How is Hamas seen in the Israeli psyche? Going back to the fact that the Palestinians are not a state, they cannot therefore have an officially recognised army to which soldiers can join or be conscribed. For this reason, any one who enters in to resistance activity of any kind is going to have no official label other than ‘civilian’. Anyone who fights with Hamas, apart from their direct leaders, is going to be simply an average Palestinian Jo, as it were. This fact can allow the Israelis to read it in reverse; that every average Palestinian Jo is a potential combatant and therefore terrorist. Of course this mentality holds a fundamental philosophical flaw. In parallel: even if one could say that all pigs are pink, for example, this certainly wouldn’t mean that all pink things were pigs! However, looking in from the outside, one can’t help but wonder if this is what is going on inside that soldier’s mind as he points the gun at a child’s head, or throws a Palestinian woman to the floor at a check point.

Language is an extremely powerful instrument, not to be underestimated. Think about how our reactions change when words relating to statehood are contrasted with words that do not accompany a state: an army becomes a militia group; soldiers and troops are transformed into armed militants or gunmen; a government becomes Islamist leadership. These are just a few of the terms that struck me as I scanned through the pages of Ha-Aretz, a leading Israeli newspaper. If we can carefully construct the attitude that really most Palestinians are hostile in some way and subtly use language that gradually dehumanises the individual and eventually the entire nation, we can use words such as ‘terrorist’ to mask our actions and avoid facing a sense of guilt or shame for how we are dealing with such people. Once the whole nation is being subtly referred to as less than official, less than recognised, less than human, it is easy to lose all sense of public conscience about how you treat those people. We have seen it before in history (I need not mention which example stands out above the rest). Can it be justified, then, to use the terms ‘terrorists’ or ‘war on terror’ as a mask of our guilt? Or to use them as an excuse to avoid more constructive means to solve the problem?

Sadly this process of dehumanising the ‘other’ is happening both ways round in this crisis. Unfortunately for Israel, the recent air strikes against Gaza has simply further transformed their country into a faceless iron fist. This will only fan the flames of extremism; the sense of desperation to step up and do something; and the further alienation of all human interaction and feeling. I found that the film ‘Promises’ sheds some light on this very issue and lays out an interesting challenge. The documentary introduces us to a group of Palestinian children and then a group of Israeli children. As they speak about the other side there is no glimmer of understanding that there are any real people the other side of the barrier. They speak from the plastic hatred they have been brought up to feel. When they actually come together and have a game of football, however, there is a moment of promise when they realise that this enigmatic ‘other’ is simply made up of kids and their families who are just like themselves.

I see the Obama Administration’s decision to drop the phrase ‘war on terror’ as a very positive step. This phrase has been used as a mask to cover up horrific acts of violence and aggression. It has been brandished about as an excuse for inaction and the justification for the horrendous consequences of this. It provides a pretext for the torture and ill treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo bay without charge. It validated a brutal attack on Iraq under false motives and on spurious evidence, the results of which are still tearing the country apart. It is time to let drop the thin veil that the West tries to hide behind. It is time that phrases such as ‘enemy combatant’, which strip another human being of all human value, were thrown out. By dropping such phrases and closing down Guantanamo Bay, Obama is clearly distancing himself from the Bush administration and its raison d’etre. In terms of international relations and particularly relationships with the Arab world, such moves have come not a moment too soon.

I find it interesting that in the Oxford dictionary definition of the word ‘terrorism’, the perpetrator is ‘an organised system of violence’ which sounds to me as though it could be a state as well as any other organisation. I think Zeib Boin, the deputy defence minister of Israel, described it remarkably well when he said “terror is terror is terror, what is important is not the definition or the sources of the terror but the results”.

Another sad killing

2009-04-02T19:14:00.004Z

A terrorist killed an Israeli settler child, Shlomo Nativ (pitured), on the West Bank today. So very very sad and pointless. He killed him with an axe. What future for this world if we deteriorate to this sort of thing. Marwan Barghouti used to say that settlers were legitimate targets because they were Israel's first line of defence. But children? Who can ever justify killing children in any circumstance, whatever the provocation?

VIEW ARTICLE HERE

Netanyahu's compromise

2009-03-29T00:35:00.005Z

It looks as if Netanyahu will form a new government with Lieberman as Foreign Minister and Barak as Defence Minister. Ominous. Egypt is not happy. The Israeli left is not happy. The Palestinians aren't too happy either. And to be honest I doubt whether Bibi Netanyahu is happy. He'd have preferred a government of national unity. This line up puts him on a collision course with Obama's America, committed as it is to reinvigorating the peace process.

Arab FMs' meeting aimed at building consensus

2009-02-05T11:47:00.006Z

I have spent the past week in Gaza and just arrived in Tel Aviv. The mood here in Tel Aviv is hawkish. Yesterday my best guess was that Israel would attack Gaza Friday (tomorrow). Didn't know of course but do know that Egypt has told all journalists who came in from Rafa to leave today because Rafa will be closed from Friday - which is ominous. Ordinary people in Gaza are very frightened.

Today I am more upbeat. The Israeli negotiating team flies to Cairo this morning and it looks like disaster may have been averted and a cease-fire is about to be signed after all. Which means that the closure of Eretz is just the Egyptians getting tough alongside the Israelis and they will then offer the re-opening of Eretz as a carrot in return for Palestinian - Palestinian peace.

Inside Gaza Hamas popularity has dropped to an all time low - they are now just as unpopular as Fatah. The only group to have increased in popularity (other than the independents) is Islamic Jihad.

Meanwhile the Arab Foreign Ministers meeting in Abu Dahabi remains as ineffective as might be expected:

Kuwait News Agency - 05 February, 2009
Dubbing the meeting of Arab foreign ministers in Abu Dhabi as preplanned and not done impromptu, Egyptian foreign minister Ahmad Abulgheit on Wednesday emphasized the utter need for Arab-Arab conciliation ahead of a regular Arab summit scheduled to take place at a later date in Doha. He said it was imperative that the Palestinians get the chance to put their house in order, noting that the status of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) be kept as is and the Egyptian and Arab peace initiatives be upheld.

U.S.-allied Arab states back Abbas in Hamas row

2009-02-04T10:26:00.004Z

Writing from Gaza: This business of making an issue of the PLO as the sole representative of the Palestinian people is ridiculous. First, the PLO is unreformed and does not include Hamas and can therefore never really truly represent all Palestinians. Regrdless of which Hamas has contradicted the idiot in Damascus and said it does recognise the PLO. Despite which Abu Mazin is filled with so much gross hubris that he makes an issue of this. Pathetic. And trhe Arab states back him - very pathetic.

Khaleej Times - 04 February, 2009
Foreign ministers of U.S.-allied Arab states meeting in Abu Dhabi on Tuesday said they were seeking to consolidate Arab support for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in his row with Islamist group Hamas.“Our aim is to boost Arab solidarity, to mobilise our backing for the Arab peace initiative and to bolster support for the Palestinian Authority under the leadership of President Mahmoud Abbas,” the United Arab Emirates Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed al-Nahayan told Reuters.

Find a just solution to Mideast conflict

2009-02-02T13:19:00.003Z

The NCF is in Gaza. Poor place. Broken. What we need now is Palestinian - Palestinian peace without which there is new future and George Mitchell might as well go home:

Arab News - 02 February, 2009
Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah yesterday held talks with US Middle East envoy George Mitchell and called for intensive international efforts to find a just solution to the protracted Palestinian-Israeli conflict.King Abdullah and Mitchell discussed “new developments in the Palestinian issue and the Middle East peace process and stressed the importance of intensifying global efforts to reach a just and comprehensive solution,” the Saudi Press Agency (SPA) said.

Diplomacy won't work?

2009-01-15T15:38:00.002Z

Felix sends us this article by Michael Rubin of AEI. It provides the other side of the coin on Gaza and deserves looking at - Click on the text below to see the piece in full:

As the crisis in Gaza enters its second week, international diplomats are seeking a cease-fire. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has called the situation "unacceptable" and demanded that "regional and international partners [do more] to end the violence and encourage a political dialogue." Amnesty International has demanded that the United States pressure Israel to stop its aerial bombardment. European and Arab diplomats hope that other states--perhaps Syria and Iran--will pressure Hamas to agree to a cease-fire.
It won't work. Knee-jerk diplomacy--demanding a truce regardless of the cause of the fighting--does more to accelerate conflict than to resolve it.

Pathetic Resolutions

2009-01-15T14:26:00.003Z

What a waste of space that UN resolution on Gaza was. Have you read it? A vapid and pointless effort. The USA drafted it and then failed to sign it. What a joke. Palestinian Bishop Riah H Abu El Assal commented:

The Security Council Resolution seems not to be worth the paper it was written on. No wonder neither party was ready to comply with it. Playing with words, using vague terms is the business of politicians. Hence the saying: “politics is the art of postponing the inevitable.”

You can access the full text of the resolution here

Cease Fire

2009-01-12T02:07:00.002Z

The Next Century Foundation adds its voice to calls for an immediate cease fire between the Palestinian Authority and the State of Israel. The NCF is concerned at the real possibility that current events in Gaza, of themselves profoundly saddening, may soon spiral towards a wider Middle East war in the absence of a cease-fire. The key elements to be delivered in a cease-fire are:

FROM ISRAEL - The return of access for incoming trucks to pre-closure levels.

FROM THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY - No rockets.

These were the key elements of the failed six month cease-fire that expired on December 19th.

The NCF has a valid permit to travel to Gaza and will do so shortly as part of its continuing program of Gaza visits to promote the severely fragmented Middle East Peace Process. The prayers and efforts of all people of goodwill are needed for all those caught up in the current war. Even in the event that an early cease-fire is reached and there is no wider regional war, this current Gaza war will have a severe impact on future relations between the USA and the Arab and Muslim world.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOTE: The terms of commitment under the cease-fire that expired on December 19th are below (we reproduce the full text of the agreement).

Ceasefire Understanding between Hamas and Israel
as Mediated by Egypt

1- Mutual agreement to cease all military activities by the start of “zero hour” on Thursday, June 19, at 6:00AM.

2- Duration of ceasefire is six months according to agreement concluded among the national parties under Egyptian auspices.

3- Ceasefire will be implemented under national consensus and under the Egyptian auspices.

4- After seventy two hours from the start of the ceasefire, the crossing points will be opened to allow 30% more goods to enter the Gaza strip.

5- Ten days after that (i.e., 13 days after ceasefire begins), all crossings would be open between Gaza and Israel, and Israel will allow the transfer of all goods that were banned or restricted to go into Gaza.

6- Egypt will work to expand the ceasefire into the West Bank later.

Saudi police break up pro-Gaza protest

2008-12-30T12:13:00.003Z

The Middle East is getting angry. I find it hard to imagine how all this serves the long term interests of the people of Israel. One thing is clear, the peace process is now set back a decade.

Reuters - 30 December, 2008
Witnesses said Saudi police fired rubber bullets to break up a pro-Palestinian protest on Monday, injuring up to eight people, but a government official denied the report.Residents said between 200 and 300 people took part in the march in Saudi Arabia's oil-producing Eastern Province.Many protesters held pictures of Palestinians wounded in Israel's military offensive against the Gaza Strip, which has killed more than 300 Palestinians since it began on Saturday.

Gaza

2008-12-29T21:50:00.002Z

Poor Gaza. When are civilian deaths on this scale not collctive punishment = whatever the provocation? December 19th was the date of the end of the cease-fire - and no one had made any attempt to extend it. Not Israel. Not Palestine. Nor had anyone made any attempt to homor it. Not Palestine and certainly not Israel. This came in from an organisation called Avaaz:

The Gaza crisis has exploded -- put your name to our emergency petition demanding a ceasefire. We'll deliver it immediately to the UN Security Council, the Arab League, the US and other world leaders!
Take Action NowAs we watch the Gaza bloodshed with horror, appalled at how the crisis is spiraling further out of control, one thing is clear -- this violence will only lead to further civilian suffering and an escalation of the conflict. There must be another way. Over 280 are dead so far in the Gaza Strip and hundreds more injured -- rockets are striking Ashdod deep inside Israel for the very first time, and the sides are mobilising for invasion. A global outcry has begun, but it'll take more than words -- the immediate violence won't end, nor will wider peace be secured, without firm action from the international community.Today, we're launching an emergency campaign which will be delivered to the UN Security Council and key world powers, urging them to act to ensure an immediate ceasefire and address the growing humanitarian crisis -- only with robust international oversight and action can civilians on all sides be protected and real steps be taken toward a wider peace. Follow this link now to sign the emergency petition and send it to everyone you know: http://www.avaaz.org/en/gaza_time_for_peace/?cl=162568193&v=2609 After Gaza's bloodiest day in recent memory and eight or more years of ineffective US and global diplomacy, we need to get world leaders to do more than issue statements if they're to ensure a lasting ceasefire.1 Through the UN Security Council and other international bodies, the world can provide the help and pressure needed to stop the violence and change the situation on the ground in Gaza -- preventing the rockets and incursions, re-opening crossing-points under international oversight so that instead of weapon-smuggling, the 1.5 million ordinary people of Gaza can get the fuel, food and medicines they so desperately need.All sides to the conflict will continue to act as they have in the past if they believe that the world will stand by and allow them to do so. We mobilised for a ceasefire in 2006's Israel-Lebanon war and succeeded, but this time the international community must not delay -- let's raise a truly worldwide outcry. 2009 is a year that things can be different. As we face this crisis, and the possibilities of a new year, it's time for us everywhere to work together to stop this violence.With hope and determination,Brett, Ricken, Alice, Ben, Pascal, Paul, Graziela, Paula, Luis, Iain and the whole Avaaz team 1 Further actions could include: a formal resolution from the Security Council rather than issuing a press statement as was done on 28 December 2008; explicit private and public international pressure on the parties to end the hostilities including developing clear terms for the resumption of negotiations; proper international oversight of the Rafah border; and in time, a detailed Security Council resolution setting out the terms in international law for a permanent peace between Israel and Palestine. For background, see this Jerusalem Post article, "No international pressure to end op": http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1230456497503&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull)

The Dates Of Wrath

2008-11-19T15:55:00.002Z

Obviously Israel's recent incursion into Rafah, and consequently the end of the 5 month ceasefire, was a pretty bad piece of news. However, since William has already commented on this, I shall draw your attention to recent British moves to correct European law regarding imports from Israel. Essentially, Israel has a deal with the EU concerning its imports, whereby lower tariffs are placed on them than most non-EU nations. However, these were only supposed to be products from within the green line, and there have been allegations that some of these (including dates and wine) are the produce of West Bank settlements.

This links up with another row over supermarket displays advertising products (such as, again, dates) as the produce of Israel. Even goods which are labelled as "West Bank" could still be from settlements and therefore no informed ethical consuming can take place from this knowledge alone. Thus, British attempts to get these correctly labelled are part of a wider attempt to reduce the economic power of the settlements - described by the government as "are illegal and...an obstacle to peace". Haaretz has described this British objection as using a mere "technicality" in the trade treaty. This is ludicrous as the government of Israel agreed to the "Green Line" rather than any other borders. Israeli businesses know they are in the wrong and attempt to hide the fact by creating headquarters in Jerusalem for operations which in fact utilise land outside of that which is allowed by the mutually agreed treaty.

This is a small matter that may in fact set an important precedent in trade relations between the EU and Israel, and for West Bank settlements . We should hope that the letter of the law is observed for, as the saying of one supermarketgoes, every little helps.

Gaza Troubles

2008-11-17T19:43:00.002Z

After five months the Gaza cease fire is over. It was inevitable I guess but very sad. Israel decided it had had enough and wanted to go back to war. But when you consider that Ismail Haniyah has recognised Israel within its 67 borders on behalf of Hamas it seems such a shame that we can't see some better progress.

Sheikh Jarar eviction

2008-11-11T23:36:00.002Z

Further to Alexander's blog below, this seems to be becoming a habit. Now an Arab family evicted in Sheikh Jarar. But to be honest there are worse crimes. The Gaza seige is collective punishment. But there is muh less fuss made about that.

Sheikh Jarar eviction

Interregnum

2008-11-06T13:27:00.005Z

The Middle-East peace process appears to be, as so often seems the case, in a state of arrest. The comparative calm of the five month truce was recently violated by both sides. Four Palestinian-owned buildings in East Jerusalem were demolished in one day by order of the Israeli governent. However, a development that may prove to have a more harmful effect on the procss is Tzipi Livni's failure to form a governing coalition. Unwilling to cave in to unreasonable demands from minor parties, she has asked Presiden Shimon Peres to call early elections. She trails Benjamin Netanyahu in the polls and, if successful, his administration could prove disastrous for the peace process. Ehud Olmert announced in July that it was his intention not to stand in September's elections. Since the new polls caused by Livni's coalition failure are scheduled for February 2009, and an effective government may not be formed until even later, due to wrangling over coalitions, Israel will have been under a lame duck leadership for six months!

This power vacuum is complemented by the period of transition that America is currently going through. While this can be a useful time for a President-Elect to form a strong cabinet, ultimately it is an error in the US Constitution that was only partly cleaned up when the inauguration date was moved back from March to January after the disastrous interregnum between Presidents Hoover and F.D. Roosevelt. George W. Bush, and many in his administration, desperately want to create peace between the Palestinians and Israelis before January 20th, and thereby repair his already tattered legacy. With the great expectation surrounding Barrack Obama's Presidential election victory, it is probably more sensible to hope that the tentative ceasefire can be reasonably well maintained until his inuaguration. Condaleeza Rice et al can do little to affect the situation and we should trust that Bush exercises his power, now unbridled by party loyalty or election worries, sparingly. Little can be done until all sides have resolved their internal struggles and electoral processes.

Our Obama

2008-11-03T11:26:00.004Z

Israel is excited beyond reason by the US elections - the Israel establishment trembles at the prospect of an Obama victory - despite the fact that the man has grovelled in the dust before Apac and assured Israel of his unending love. Interesting. Is there method in their madness? Is an Obama victory dangerous? Well it does not herald an era of peace - sadly. But it does mean that the advocates of Armageddon and unending war have lost their ace card.

The sweet smell of success

2008-10-23T15:38:00.005Z

The Israel Defence Force have recently started to employ a new weapon called "skunk". This involves the firing of a putrid liquid from a water cannon and is principally used as a crowd control device. While the horrible smell lingers for up to three days and is somewhat indiscriminate in its targets, this organic substance must be a better option than rubber bullets and tear gas.

To sniff out the source of this, please click here.

I hope that others may be able to contribute superior punch lines than mine.

Summing Up

2008-10-06T20:17:00.002Z

Fascinating to suddenly find Olmert reborn now that his days are numbered. Wonderful really. Uri Avnery, crusty old peacenik that he is, has his own cynical take on it of course:

I read the sensational interview that Ehud Olmert gave this week, on the eve of the Jewish New Year, to the newspaper "Yediot Aharonot".

AT THE end of his political career, after resigning from the prime ministership, while waiting for Tzipi Livni to set up a new government, he said some astounding things - not astounding in themselves, but certainly when they come from his mouth.

Balance of Terror

2008-09-30T13:37:00.003Z

Our old friend Jackie Hugi sent us his latest article. Not so sure I agree with him though. Iran is the new Mid East superpower and we have to think of our policies against that backdrop.

Ma’ariv (p. B3) by Jacky Hugi (op-ed) -- Israel was up in arms once again. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stood before the UN General Assembly and made promises, as he is wont to do, about the End of Times. “The Zionists have no way of saving themselves from the gutter that they and their supporters have dug for themselves,” he read, and established that the Zionist regime was on a steep slope and that the day of its crash was imminent. Israel, once again, found itself reeling and confused when faced with the whip lashes dealt by the little man from Tehran. President Shimon Peres wasted a great part of his speech at the same podium to rejoin Ahmadinejad’s Shana Tova best wishes. The most decorated soldier in IDF history, Ehud Barak, in the heat of coalition talks, described the Iranian president’s speech as “hateful remarks” and an “insane incident.” The newspapers, as usual, reported about the “horror show” and the surfer commenters stormed their keyboards.

For ten years Israel has been engaged overtly and covertly in a supreme effort to damage the Iranian nuclear program. The average Israeli is commanded to fear, but if you ask him what is so terrible about it, he won’t always be able to provide you with a good answer. The IDF’s hands, say high-ranking officers, will be tied on the day Tehran obtains a nuclear weapon. If that is the case, it is our right to know how that conclusion was drawn and what its significance is. Will every military operation, every assassination or raid in an enemy country, provoke a nuclear attack on Israel? Nuclear weapons do not necessarily afford their owners protection from conventional attacks. Syria and Egypt knew about the existence of Dimona and nevertheless launched a major offensive against Israel in 1973.

If you don’t have a persuasive argument that is devoid of electoral calculations, don’t scare us for nothing. We still remember Saddam Hussein’s chemical weaponry capabilities, by virtue of which you persuaded us all to wear gas masks, only to learn later that their effectiveness was questionable. The more veteran Israelis still remember the terror that gripped the young country in 1958 when Cairo and Damascus announced that they were uniting into the United Arab Community, which collapsed and was forgotten of after just three years. And those who argue that the Iranian regime is too insane to allow for its future actions to be predicted, is invited to stand in the central city squares in Amman, Riyadh or Damascus. From there, Israel appears no less wild, violent and occupying.

There are some people who latch onto Ahmadinejad’s statements about the imminent end of Israel to deduce that Iran intends to destroy Israel with nuclear weapons. That is a blind assessment that needs to be proven convincingly. Until explained, it will remain pure demagoguery that exploits the existential fears of the Jewish people. There is a clear balance of terror between the two countries: the Iranians know that if they attack Israel with nuclear weapons they will be leaving themselves prone to a counterattack in kind. And if that is a mistake and the IDF hasn’t been able to manufacture an option of responding, then we have a much bigger problem than the Iranian threat.

Israel will continue to exist even in the face of a nuclear Iranian. If there are any existential dangers that it faces, then their seeds were planted long ago within Israel and not way out yonder in the Persian Gulf. The campaign against the Iranian nuclear program has been inflated far beyond its true proportions by a military establishment that has forgotten the advantages of smart raids, a political leadership that accepts the military’s perspective in full and a media that puts out explosive headlines because of marketing needs and not because they stem from a professional point of view.

The time has come for Israel to set aside its obsession with Ahmadinejad in order to address more urgent problems in education and values. If it is nevertheless hard to kick the security habit, the generals and their employers are kindly requested to provide satisfactory answers to the residents of southern Israel. Once the truce with Gaza is over, the entire area will be vulnerable to the rockets in the Palestinian factions’ arsenals. Hamas has Grad rockets, which are Katyusha rockets for all intents and purposes. Anyone who continues to promote the Iranian spin while Ashkelon is being showered with rockets is liable to find that he is entirely irrelevant.

Kadima's Choice

2008-09-16T14:36:00.002Z

Well here we go - days away from a new Israeli Premier. Will it be Mofaz the warrior of Tzipi the conciliator? A great deal hangs in the balance.

On Wednesday, the party's rank and file will elect Ehud Olmert's replacement as Party Chairman, who will then almost automatically become Prime Minister, unless he or she fails to put together a governing coalition - in which case new elections will take place, probably at the beginning of 2009. Until then Olmert would still act as a lame duck Prime Minister.
The real choice is between two candidates: Tzipi Livni and Shaul Mofaz. They could hardly be more different.

Hamas boy converts

2008-09-12T19:30:00.003Z

This is an interesting story. Hamas, though popular, is sometimes overly brutal. The consequences are sometimes to engender fear - and sometimes, as in this instance, rebellion:

I was transferred to a prison where Palestinian prisoners from all factions were held. Even though the prison is run by the Israelis, the prisoners manage affairs on their own. Each faction plays a role in the management of the prisoners' affairs. Hamas was the majority in the prison. This was not the case at the beginning of the Intifada, when Fatah was the majority, but later, Hamas became the majority and had control of the prison – especially over its own people, who were the majority. This was the beginning of my awakening.

Hizbollah

2008-09-08T14:48:00.003Z

People seem to be blagging up prospects for war in the Middle East. God forbid. I for one don't think it will happen. Stories like the following are difficult to check. They may well be true - indeed there is no particular reason to suppose otherwise. Though there is a lot of disinformation being scattered around the Middle East at the moment by the various intelligence agencies.

Hezbollah has been quietly deploying its arsenal of offensive missiles and anti-aircraft missiles in Christian and Sunni areas of Lebanon in an attempt to involve all of Lebanon in the coming war. RPS has learned that the deployment in Christian areas has been blessed by Gen. Michael Aoun.

Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed

2008-09-02T18:17:00.002Z

I met Jabril Rajoub this trip. But it is odd to hear him arguing for a one state solution. This is fast becoming a common - if disturbing - theme. It bothers me that this should be the case.

Akiva Eldar - Haaretz - A petition [pressuring Abu Mazen to halt the negotiations and demand that Israel annex the territories with all their residents] was published last week and among its signatories are leading figures in the pragmatic Palestinian camp such as Jibril Rajoub

Not all is Bad in Gaza

2008-08-31T14:04:00.002Z

Some things are improving in Gaza. See Sami Abdul Shafi's article on the link below. There is at least some semblance of security now Palestinian-Palestinian conflict is at an end. But there is growing concern amongst the people that Israel is not delivering on it's commitment under the terms of the cease-fire. Hamas says it will honour the cease-fire regardless. But last night I attended an Islamic Jihad rally. 800 armed men were on parade in Khan Younis. Afterwards I spoke to their leadership. They said that if Israel didn't lighten up on the closures as per their cease-fire commitment, Islamic Jihad would resume the rocket attacks. Personally I give it until the end of the year. If by then there is no significant easing of the restrictions on the importation of goods and raw materials into Gaza - we will end up back where we were.

SAMI ABDUL SHAFI's ARTICLE

The Gaza Peace Boats

2008-08-29T19:08:00.005Z

Writing from Gaza the people were given an emotional lift by the two peace boats that came in from Cyprus. They left behind nine human rights workers in Gaza. It is important really because in the absence of any delivery of the Israeli side's commitment under the cease fire (30% of blockaded products to be allowed in during the first seven days) prospects for the continuation of the cease fire are at best fragile. Some argue that economic conditions were better in Gaza before the cease fire so there are those that argue it is pointless and that Israel only respects force. Difficult really. I don't really understand why Israel prefers the cease fire not to hold. But will have to hear the Israeli side when I get to Tel Aviv.