Mostrando postagens com marcador Ben Gurion. Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens com marcador Ben Gurion. Mostrar todas as postagens

quinta-feira, 30 de maio de 2019

Netanyahu Calls New Election: Deja Vu All Over Again



Bibi Netanyahu’s failure to cobble together a governing coalition despite 6 weeks of trying after the last election, is embarrassing.  The only thing more embarrassing is his end-run around Israeli law by passing, at the eleventh hour, a bill dissolving Knesset.  That denied President Rivlin, one of his arch nemeses, the opportunity to offer either another Likud MK or Blue and White Opposition leader, Benny Gantz, the right to form the next government.  It appears that more MKs (70) could agree on voting for their own demise than for legislation that would actually benefit the country.

Chemi Shalev, writing in Haaretz, likens all this to a zombie apocalypse:

Wednesday, just before midnight, was the Israeli Knesset’s witching hour. Possessed by a dybbuk bearing an uncanny resemblance to Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli parliament went bats, bonkers, berserk…and what have you. A whopping majority of over 70 MK’s voluntarily terminated themselves, less than two months after getting elected, in order to accommodate Netanyahu and his quest to avoid the long arm of the law.

…They could have easily safeguarded their Knesset seats, retained their hold on power and saved their own souls simply by picking another Likudnik to lead them. Instead they walked to their Knesset seats like zombies and voted to terminate themselves.

Though news reports call these development “unprecedented,” that doesn’t begin to describe just how bizarre these proceedings are. After serving for only a month, the new Knesset voted to dissolve itself.  Before this new record in infamy was set, to find the shortest previous Knesset term you’d have to go back 60 years to 1961, when, faced with the Lavon Affair, Ben Gurion resigned and disbanded the fourth Knesset, turning to new elections.

It may be pertinent to recall that in the elections to form the fifth Knesset, Ben Gurion returned as prime minister, only to resign in a fit of pique when his Party allies failed to offer him support.  That, in effect was the end of his career.  There may be a lesson there for the current holder of his position.

It’s certainly understandable that facing a scandal of the magnitude of the Lavon Affair, it was necessary to call new elections 60 years ago.  But now?  What can this Knesset and Israeli politics, in general, say for itself?  That it failed because its leader sought a Get-Out-of Jail-Free card in the form of a new law guaranteeing him retroactive immunity from prosecution?  And because its leader sought a law that would enfeeble the Supreme Court, which already had been drained of any independence after years of whittling away its former reputation for protecting human rights?

Netanyahu, who has always been fond of overreaching and often succeeded at it, couldn’t quite pull this one off.  Though he retained the loyalty of his Likud minions and the ultra-Orthodox, who saw him as their patronage gravy train, he couldn’t quite get over the hump and persuade Avigdor Lieberman to join him.  It’s not clear whether Lieberman balked out of principle (he claimed he wanted passage of a military draft bill that would end exemptions for ultra-Orthodox students) or out of pique (the two are long bitter rivals who nevertheless have managed to co-exist in various governments over the years).

Under these circumstances, you’d think the electorate would be disgusted and turn to the Opposition for something fresh and new.  That’s what would happen in almost every other democracy in the world.  But Israel isn’t a democracy and doesn’t obey such norms.  Political life there consists of two parties, Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum.  Both claim to be different.  But they aren’t.  There is some differences in nuance.  One speaks nicely but snarls under its breath. The other speaks crudely and snarls with venom.  So the public rightly asks–what’s the difference?  At least we know Netanyahu.  He’s a crook, but he’s our crook.

The cynicism of not only Israeli politics, but Israeli life in general, is all-pervasive.  That’s why the latest polls show that, if anything, Likud may pick up a seat in the next election, set for September 17th.  They would do so at the hands of the Opposition and thus seal the success of forming a new far-right ruling regime.  Which would mean, by the end of its next term, Israel will have been governed by the far-right for the past 45 years (except for a few years when Ehud Barak was PM).  Not that it would matter much if the Opposition was given a crack at governing.

quinta-feira, 3 de maio de 2012

JUSTICE REQUIRES ACTION TO STOP SUBJUGATION OF PALESTINIANS

May 1, 2012, Tampa Bay Times http://www.tampabay.com (USA)

By Desmond Tutu, special to the Times

A quarter-century ago I barnstormed around the United States encouraging Americans, particularly students, to press for divestment from South Africa. Today, regrettably, the time has come for similar action to force an end to Israel's long-standing occupation of Palestinian territory and refusal to extend equal rights to Palestinian citizens who suffer from some 35 discriminatory laws.

I have reached this conclusion slowly and painfully. I am aware that many of our Jewish brothers and sisters who were so instrumental in the fight against South African apartheid are not yet ready to reckon with the apartheid nature of Israel and its current government. And I am enormously concerned that raising this issue will cause heartache to some in the Jewish community with whom I have worked closely and successfully for decades. But I cannot ignore the Palestinian suffering I have witnessed, nor the voices of those courageous Jews troubled by Israel's discriminatory course.

Within the past few days, some 1,200 American rabbis signed a letter — timed to coincide with resolutions considered by the United Methodist Church and the Presbyterian Church (USA) — urging Christians not "to selectively divest from certain companies whose products are used by Israel." They argue that a "one-sided approach" on divestment resolutions, even the selective divestment from companies profiting from the occupation proposed by the Methodists and Presbyterians, "damages the relationship between Jews and Christians that has been nurtured for decades."

While they are no doubt well-meaning, I believe that the rabbis and other opponents of divestment are sadly misguided. My voice will always be raised in support of Christian-Jewish ties and against the anti-Semitism that all sensible people fear and detest. But this cannot be an excuse for doing nothing and for standing aside as successive Israeli governments colonize the West Bank and advance racist laws.

I recall well the words of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail in which he confesses to his "Christian and Jewish brothers" that he has been "gravely disappointed with the white moderate … who is more devoted to 'order' than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: 'I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action;' who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom. ..."

King's words describe almost precisely the shortcomings of the 1,200 rabbis who are not joining the brave Palestinians, Jews and internationals in isolated West Bank communities to protest nonviolently against Israel's theft of Palestinian land to build illegal, Jewish-only settlements and the separation wall. We cannot afford to stick our heads in the sand as relentless settlement activity forecloses on the possibility of the two-state solution.

If we do not achieve two states in the near future, then the day will certainly arrive when Palestinians move away from seeking a separate state of their own and insist on the right to vote for the government that controls their lives, the Israeli government, in a single, democratic state. Israel finds this option unacceptable and yet is seemingly doing everything in its power to see that it happens.

Many black South Africans have traveled to the occupied West Bank and have been appalled by Israeli roads built for Jewish settlers that West Bank Palestinians are denied access to, and by Jewish-only colonies built on Palestinian land in violation of international law.

Black South Africans and others around the world have seen the 2010 Human Rights Watch report which "describes the two-tier system of laws, rules, and services that Israel operates for the two populations in areas in the West Bank under its exclusive control, which provide preferential services, development, and benefits for Jewish settlers while imposing harsh conditions on Palestinians." This, in my book, is apartheid. It is untenable. And we are in desperate need of more rabbis joining the brave rabbis of Jewish Voice for Peace in speaking forthrightly about the corrupting decadeslong Israeli domination over Palestinians.

These are among the hardest words I have ever written. But they are vitally important. Not only is Israel harming Palestinians, but it is harming itself. The 1,200 rabbis may not like what I have to say, but it is long past time for them to remove the blinders from their eyes and grapple with the reality that Israel becoming an apartheid state or like South Africa in its denial of equal rights is not a future danger, as three former Israeli prime ministers — Ehud Barak, Ehud Olmert and David Ben Gurion — have warned, but a present-day reality. This harsh reality endured by millions of Palestinians requires people and organizations of conscience to divest from those companies — in this instance, from Caterpillar, Motorola Solutions and Hewlett Packard — profiting from the occupation and subjugation of Palestinians.

Such action made an enormous difference in apartheid South Africa. It can make an enormous difference in creating a future of justice and equality for Palestinians and Jews in the Holy Land.

Desmond Tutu, winner of the 1984 Nobel Peace Prize, is archbishop-emeritus of Cape Town, South Africa.

segunda-feira, 16 de abril de 2012

Israel’s state of siege: interior minister as border police

16 April 2012, Alternative Information Center http://www.alternativenews.org (Israel)

Michael Warschawski

Hundreds of security personnel are busy closing Israel’s borders to international citizens whose only goal is to come, see and testify. By doing so, our Interior Minister confesses that Israel has a lot to hide. Nothing new indeed.

(Photo: Israeli Minister of Interior Eli Yisha is busy closing Israel's borders to Nobel Prize winning authors and human rights activists)

I doubt if Israeli Minister of Interior Eli Yishai ever red one line of Gunter Grass’ literature, and I am almost sure he never heard about the Nobel Prize laureate before the latter published a poem on the danger that Israel represents for the future of our planet.

Nevertheless, Yishai put Gunter Grass on a black list and forbid his entry to Israel. By doing so, Yisha may hope to divert local public opinion from the upcoming conclusions of the Inquiry Commission on the huge fire in Mount Carmel last year, and the expected harsh recommendations on the failure of his ministry in this regard.

Poor Gunter Grass! The author of The Tin Drum, who is very much welcome in each and every country of our planet, will not be able to come to Israel! Yishai, however, did not keep only Grass out of the country. He closed the borders to several hundred activists who intended to come to Bethlehem – not to Israel –to express their solidarity with the Palestinian population which suffers under 44 years of colonial occupation. The problem that should have been dealt with a long time ago by the Palestinian Authority is the lack of possibility to reach the occupied Palestinian territory without having to pass through Israel's borders; as long as the Palestinians will not have sovereignty over their borders, in the West Bank as well as in Gaza, any talk about "a Palestinian state" is nonsense, even if they will be granted a seat in the United Nations. Statehood is, first of all, sovereignty over borders, and the absence of such sovereignty makes the "Palestinian state" a mere Bantustan.

In order to grasp the severe mental illness of the Israeli authorities, one should read the letter addressed by Amnon Shmueli, head of the immigration Authority at Israel’s Ben Gurion Airport, to the airlines companies and the open threats included in this document:

"To all Airlines

Subject: Denied entry

1. 1. Due to the statements of pro-Palestinian radicals to arrive on commercial flights from abroad to disrupt the order and confront security forces at friction [sic] points,, it was decided to deny their entry in accordance with our authority according to the Law of entry in Israel (1952)
2. 2. Attached is a list of passengers that are denied entry to Israel. In light of the above mentioned, you are ordered not to board them on your flights to Israel.
3. 3. Failure to comply with this directive will result in sanctions against the airlines [my emphasis, MW]
4. 4. This list is partial and at a later stage you will be advised of additional names.

Most likely there will be additional activists, that their names we will not be able to advice in advance, that their entry to Israel will be denied"

Poor us! Like with the Gaza-bound 2010 Freedom Flotilla, like with other flotillas and flytillas, hundreds of security personnel are busy closing Israel’s borders to international citizens whose only goal is to come, see and testify. By doing so, our Interior Minister confesses that Israel has a lot to hide. Nothing new indeed.


WELCOME TO PALESTINE INITIATIVE 2012

16 April 2012, Welcome to Palestine http://welcometopalestine.info (Palestine)

"We, the undersigned, endorse the call from the Welcome to Palestine 2012 Initiative for supporters of Palestinian human and national rights around the world to openly visit Palestine during Easter 2012.

"There is no way into Palestine other than through Israeli control points. Israel has turned Palestine into a giant prison, but prisoners have a right to receive visitors.

"Welcome to Palestine 2012 will again challenge Israel's policy of isolating the West Bank while the settler paramilitaries and army commit brutal crimes against a virtually defenceless Palestinian civilian population.

"We call on governments to support the right of Palestinians to receive visitors and the right of their own citizens to visit Palestine openly.

"The participants in Welcome to Palestine 2012 ask to be allowed to pass through Tel Aviv airport without hindrance and to proceed to the West Bank to take part in a project there for children to benefit from the right to education."

SIGNED: Sam Bahour, Tony Benn, Noam Chomsky, Jonathan Cook, Hedy Epstein, Ambassador Manuel Hassassian, Ronnie Kasrils, Nurit Peled. John Pilger, Nawal Al Sadaawi, Vauro Senesi, Desmond Tutu

Flytilla participants protest cancellation of tickets by airlines

15 April 2012, Alternative Information Center http://www.alternativenews.org (Israel)

Israel bans 'flytilla' activists but hundreds left in Europe … Israel on Sunday barred 43 pro-Palestinian activists who had flown in for a "Welcome to Palestine" campaign as hundreds more would-be protesters were stranded at airports across Europe.


As hundreds of police deployed at Israel's main international airport in a bid to stop activists from entering, Europe's main airlines faced a wave of passenger fury after cancelling some 300 tickets following heavy Israeli pressure.

By late afternoon, police said they had detained 43 passengers on suspicion of being part of the fly-in campaign, better known as the "flytilla," with all facing deportation.
Organisers of "Welcome to Palestine," now in its third year, had been expecting to welcome up to 1,500 people as part of a campaign to expose Israel's control of movement both into and out of the occupied territories.

But only three activists managed to reach a news conference held by organisers in the West Bank town of Bethlehem in the early evening.

Israel had vowed to prevent the activists' entry, warning airlines they would be forced to foot the bill for the activists' immediate return home in a move which saw many carriers toeing the line.

With airlines cancelling at least 300 passengers' tickets, scores of activists staged angry demonstrations at airports in several European capitals.

At Brussels airport, protests erupted after at least 100 French and Belgian nationals were unable to board flights with Brussels Airlines, Lufthansa and Swiss Air.
In Geneva, several dozen activists held an angry demonstration after around 45 people out of a group of 70 who had been planning to join the campaign were barred from boarding an easyJet flight.

Scores of activists also protested at Charles de Gaulle in Paris, where airport sources said 90 passengers had been prevented from boarding Lufthansa and Swiss Air flights for Tel Aviv.

Flanked by dozens of anti-riot police, they marched up to the Lufthansa counter to demand an "official written statement" as to why they had not been allowed to fly.

At Istanbul airport, another 50 activists were stranded after Turkish Airlines reportedly refused to allow them on board, Anatolia news agency reported.

In Vienna, Austrian Airlines said five passengers were barred from flights to Tel Aviv, and in Rome, Alitalia turned back seven Italian activists, press reports said.

Air France and two British budget carriers, Jet2.com and easyJet, also barred an unspecified number of passengers, with easyJet confirming it had prevented activists from flying to Israel from London and Switzerland.

Despite the success of its diplomatic campaign to pressure European carriers not to allow activists to board flights for Tel Aviv, Israel deployed hundreds of police at its main international airport with orders to "exercise restraint, but to intercept any troublemakers."

Sunday's arrests took place far from the whirring cameras with police detaining activists from France, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Canada and Portugal.

Thirty-one of those detained had refused to board planes back to their homelands, police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld told AFP.

"Twelve have been sent back to the destinations from which they arrived, and the rest have been transferred to a prison in Ramle (near Tel Aviv)," he said, adding that most of them were French.

In addition, Rosenfeld said, "nine Israelis were detained for being involved in public disturbances at the terminal."

More flights were scheduled to arrive from Europe in the evening and the police will remain on site, he added.

Israeli officials hailed their counter campaign as successful.

"A few activists attempted to arrive and create a provocation; dozens were arrested," Internal Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovich said according to Israeli media.

"My goal was to prevent a provocation and a public disruption, and that goal was achieved."

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told activists to concentrate on solving "real problems" in the region.

"We appreciate your choosing to make Israel the object of your humanitarian concerns," he said in a letter dated Saturday. "We know there were many other worthy choices. You could have chosen to protest the Syrian regime's daily savagery against its own people, which has claimed thousands of lives. "We therefore suggest that you first solve the real problems of the region, and then come back and share with us your experience," added Netanyahu.

"Have a nice flight."

At the Bethlehem news conference, organisers dismissed Netanyahu's letter as "ridiculous."

"When Israel says it is the sole democracy in the Middle East it contradicts itself by deporting people," Amira Musallem said.

"Democracy isn't only about women being able to talk freely."

One of the three activists who managed to attend the news conference slammed the Israeli internal security minister for saying the "Welcome to Palestine" campaign was provocation.

"We are not criminals," the activist said. "We should all be able to fight -- peacefully -- for what we believe in."

Last year, around 800 people tried to join the campaign, with many blocked from flying by airlines. Another 120 were denied entry by Israel and deported.

Second year of hysterical Israeli reaction to Welcome to Palestine

15 April 2012, Alternative Information Center http://www.alternativenews.org (Israel)

Sergio Yahni

The Israeli government has responded with laughable hysteria for the second year in a row to the Welcome to Palestine Initiative, in which hundreds of international activists openly declare their intention to visit Palestine when landing in Tel Aviv.

Statement, of dubious legality, which Israel's Ministry of Interior is forcing selected visitors to Israel to sign in response to the Welcome to Palestine Initiative

Since the eruption of the Second Intifada in September 2000, tens of thousands of international activists have come to the occupied Palestinian territory to learn about the Palestinian reality and to express their solidarity by participating in demonstrations and sharing the life and hardships of Palestinians living under Israeli occupation.

However, this is the second time that participants in the Welcome to Palestine initiative decided that when arriving to Israel’s Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv, they won't hide their intentions. In the eyes of the Israeli immigration authorities, this decision has transformed them into a "security threat."

In the first edition of Welcome to Palestine Prime Minister Netanyahu personally visited Ben Gurion Airport, on his way to Bulgaria and Romania, and instructed various government agencies, including Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch, Police Commissioner Yohanan Danino and other security officials to “act decisively against attempts to create a provocation at the airport". Netanyahu further instructed security forces to avoid unnecessary friction with the international activists.

Although such a visit did not occur on April 15, the signs of Israeli hysteria were there. The Oz Unit, Israel’s privatized immigration police, cancelled their planned strike and the Israeli police posted 650 policemen in the airport. While some of the police officers were in plainclothes, the images from Ben Gurion are reminiscent of a military coup.

Israeli authorities perceive in the arrival of the international activists a danger to Israel's image, which may undermine current efforts to “re-brand” Israel in international public opinion. However, there is no need for international activists to damage the attempts to re-brand Israel; it is enough to read a new statement visitors are requested to sign in order to be allowed into Israel.

“I undertake that a cant be a member of any pro Palestinian Organizations and not to be in contact with any other Members of any pro Palestinian organizations, as well I will not participate in pro Palestinian activities. I understand that if I will be caught doing one of these things, all relevant legal actions will be taken against me including deportation and refusal of entry to Israel” (Errors are in the original).

In international public opinion polls, Israel is one of the most abhorred countries in the world. The 2011 EastWest’s global nation brands perception index scored 150 out of 200 countries. Israel came in behind states such as Eritrea and Chad. The hysterical reaction to international activists arriving to Ben Gurion Airport and expressing their solidarity with the Palestinian people is not about to improve this image.


sexta-feira, 13 de abril de 2012

ISRAEL IS PARANOID ABOUT PRO-PALESTINIAN ACTIVISTS

12 April 2012, Haaretz הארץ (Israel)

Israel will not stand idly by as thousands of activists prepare to arrive on Sunday; it will not miss an opportunity to look ridiculous in the eyes of the world.

By Gideon Levy

And with what shall we frighten the Israeli public in advance of the seventh day of Passover? How will we provide the dose of fear to which it has long since become addicted? After a week of a quiet and safe vacation, we have to find something, after all. The Iranian threat has entered a negotiations freeze, terror is quiet, even the Grad missiles have diminished in number, there is no mass plague on the horizon and even the circumstances of the attack against the Jew in Kiev have not become sufficiently clear.

But Israel has not been abandoned, and the Israeli mind finally hit on something: the pro-Palestinian fly-in "provocation," as it has already been called. The minister of public security is convening feverish consultations, the airlines have received the "blacklist" prepared in advance by the omniscient security networks, the crime reporter - of course this is about crime, what else? - has already been sent to Ben-Gurion International Airport to greet the looming danger.

Israel is prepared for D-Day this coming Sunday. They say 2,500 activists will land in Israel and sow great fear. Although the crime reporter explained to the nation that the activists do not plan to bear arms or resort to violence, still, when it comes to danger, to terror, to scare-mongering, the forces are already prepared for the big day. The last time, about a year ago, it ended with 127 detainees who were immediately expelled, as they deserved, and the danger was nipped in the bud.

The intentions of the organizers - a visit to demonstrate solidarity with the Palestinian people, a trip directly from Ben-Gurion to Bethlehem without any violent intent - were immediately blurred and replaced with the usual Israeli accusation: terror and delegitimization. As we accuse any peace lover or human rights activist.

Had Israel not inflated the story to such terrifying dimensions, few people would have paid attention to this innocent protest. Had Israel also welcomed them warmly and sent them on their way to Bethlehem, that would have embarrassed them and even undermined their objective. But the State of Israel will not stand by idly. It certainly won't miss an opportunity to look ridiculous and even more contemptible in the eyes of the world. It will immediately turn them into personae non grata, as it did to Gunter Grass, as well as an airborne threat.

Entry into Israel is permitted only to its declared friends. Not a Spanish clown and not a German writer, certainly not human rights activists. An ignorant, extremist, Christian American right-winger is welcome; an intellectual, conscientious European left-winger is sent to the expulsion cell. Israel 2012.

In the case of flotillas as well as fly-ins, these are activists, most of whom mean well. The Swedish writer Henning Mankell turned to us before the most recent flotilla to Gaza: "For once report the truth. Don't you see that there is no declaration of war here, but a declaration of peace?" And of course his words fell on deaf ears. Mankell participated in two flotillas to Gaza, was expelled twice from Israel in disgrace, and published his harsh impressions in the world's leading newspapers.

Had Israel not confiscated his computer and his property and treated him like a terrorist, his impressions would have been different. Had Israel invited him to present its viewpoint, perhaps his criticism would have been less harsh. Mankell and his friends will not give up. Now another flotilla is being organized in Sweden, this time on a sailboat carrying flowers, which we will probably also treat as though it were an aircraft carrier about to attack Israel.

The roots of this paranoia are deep and thought-provoking. Were Israel convinced of the justice of its path, it wouldn't behave this way. If Israel really thought the occupation is just and legal, it wouldn't be frightened by every conscientious activist who opposes it. If it had nothing to hide, it would respectfully invite them to visit.

But when the ground is burning beneath our feet, and the fire of doubt and insecurity is consuming everything, the only response is a violent and unrestrained attack. On Sunday, when the farce of arrests and the grotesque expulsion take place once again, the activists will register another significant victory: Once again they will prove that Israel does have something to hide, that in spite of all its propaganda, Israel is well aware that there are skeletons in its closet and anyone who dares come near them will suffer the same fate - expulsion.


sexta-feira, 23 de março de 2012

LEADING SETTLER RABBI TELLS BARAK, BIBI: ‘NO TO IRAN WAR’

22 March 2012, Tikun Olam-תיקון עולם http://www.richardsilverstein.com (USA)

It’s not every day you read an article like this (Hebrew) in the Israeli press. Leading settler Rabbi Eliezer Melamed, one of the most senior of the religious Zionist rabbis, attacks the idea of an Israeli assault on Iran and rejects the notion that a nuclear Iran is an existential threat to Israel. In fact, he says, it is only one of many threats Israel faces and not necessarily the most dangerous. Because of that, the rabbi rejects the notion that a military attack on that nation is warranted.

Rabbi Eliezer Melamed, leading settler rabbi, opposes Iran strike (Nisim Lev)

He calls Ehud Barak and Bibi Netanyahu leaders with “inflated egos” and says ego and other personal motivations are propelling an attack. Melamed recommends that all other ministers voting on this issue should act in a calm, deliberate manner and not get carried away by the defense and prime minister’s fervor for war. He argues that Netanyahu suffers from a “trust gap,” and that the latter believes a successful attack against Iran will transform him into one of the great leaders of Israel on a par with Ben Gurion or Begin. For that reason, Bibi’s desire for personal glory and his motives must be distrusted.

Barak’s career, Melamed argues, is in free fall in contrast to his dreams of being a great leader, security expert, and figure capable of resolving international crises. The defense minister’s only opportunity to return to political leadership and become a winner in the eyes of the populace is through a successful assault on Iran.

Rabbi Melamed argues that while the impulse by nations to gain nuclear capability is undesirable, it appears impossible to prevent. He writes that even if Israel succeeded in destroying Iran’s nuclear program it would only delay that country gaining a weapon. In the rabbi’s view, Israel’s efforts should be directed not at attacking Iran, but at creating anti-missile defenses that could stop any Iranian attack on Israel. He favors deterrence over attack.

What’s especially important here is that Melamed is a settler rabbi, beloved of the nationalist camp. He favors all the things that my readers and I oppose in the Territories. But he carries great sway with those MKs and ministers who share his views. Therefore, he may carry weight in the debate over attacking Iran. As I’ve written before, I don’t care about the motivation for opposing an Iran strike. Taking the right position is more important than ideological purity. We can always oppose Rabbi Melamed on those issues that divide us at a later time.



domingo, 18 de março de 2012

NETANYAHU IS PREPARING ISRAELI PUBLIC OPINION FOR A WAR ON IRAN


15 March 2012, Haaretz הארץ (Israel)

In response to Netanyahu's AIPAC speech, Haaretz's editor-in-chief says that what looks like a preparation for war, acts like a preparation for war, and quacks like a preparation for war, is a preparation for war.

By Aluf Benn

Since his return from Washington, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has mainly been preoccupied with one thing: Preparing public opinion for war against Iran.

Netanyahu is attempting to convince the Israeli public that the Iranian threat is a tangible and existential one, and that there is only one effective way to stop it and prevent a "second Holocaust": An Israeli military attack on Iran's nuclear infrastructure, which is buried deep underground.

In his speech before the Knesset on Wednesday, Netanyahu urged his colleagues to reject claims that Israel is too weak to go it alone in a war against a regional power such as Iran and therefore needs to rely on the United States, which has much greater military capabilities, to do the job and remove the threat.

According to polls published last week, this is the position of most of the Israeli public, which supports a U.S. strike on Iran, but is wary of sending the IDF to the task without the backing of the friendly superpower.

Netanyahu presented three examples in which his predecessors broke the American directive and made crucial decisions regarding the future of Israel: the declaration of independence in 1948, starting the Six Day War in 1967 and the bombing of the nuclear reactor in Iraq in 1981.

The lesson was clear: Just as David Ben-Gurion, Levi Eshkol and Menachem Begin said "no" to the White House, Netanyahu also needs not be alarmed by President Obama's opposition to an attack on Iran. Netanyahu believes that, as in the previous incidents, the U.S. may grumble at first, but will then quickly adopt the Israeli position and provide Israel with support and backing in the international community.

If Netanyahu had submitted his speech as a term paper to his father the history professor, he would have received a very poor grade. In 1948, the U.S. State Department, headed by George Marshall, opposed the declaration of independence and supported a United Nations trusteeship for Palestine. But President Truman had other considerations.

Like Obama today, Truman was also a democratic president contending for his reelection, who needed the support of the Jewish voters and donors. Under those circumstances, Truman rejected Marshall's advice, and listened to his political adviser Clark Clifford, who pressured him to recognize the Zionist state. And indeed, Truman sent a telegram with an official recognition of Israel just 11 minutes after Ben-Gurion finished reading the Scroll of Independence. The U.S. opposition to the recognition of Israel was halted at the desk of the president, who repelled the explanations by the Secretary of State and the "Arabists" in his office.

In 1967, the official U.S. position called on Israel to hold back and refrain from going to war, but a different message was passing through the secret channels: go "bomb Nasser," reported Levi Eshkol's envoys to Washington, Meir Amit and Avraham Harman. This message tipped the scales in favor of going to war. In 1981, Begin did not bother asking the Americans their opinion before attacking Iraq, but lulled them to sleep and launched a surprise attack.

In these past incidents, Israel acted against the U.S. position formally, but made sure that the Americans will accept the results of the action and support it in retrospect. And indeed, the U.S. recognized Israel in 1948, allowed it to control the territories annexed in 1967, and made do with weak condemnations of the attack on the Iraq nuclear reactor in 1981.

That being the case, then Netanyahu is hinting that in his Washington visit, he received Obama's tacit approval for an Israeli attack against Iran – under the guise of opposition. Obama will speak out against it but act for it, just as the past U.S. administrations speak against the settlements in the territories but allow their expansion. And in this manner Netanyahu summarized the visit: "I presented before my hosts the examples that I just noted before you, and I believe that the first objective that I presented – to fortify the recognition of Israel's right to defend itself – I think that objective has been achieved."

This morning, the editor-in-chief of the Israel Hayom newspaper, Amos Regev, published on his front page an enthusiastic op-ed in support of a war against Iran. Regev writes what Netanyahu cannot say in his speeches: that we cannot rely on Obama – who wasn't even a mechanic in the armored corps - but only on ourselves. "Difficult, daring, but possible," Regev promised. We need not be alarmed by the Iranian response: the arrow would take down the Shahab missiles, and Hezbollah and Hamas would hesitate about entering a war. The damage would be reminiscent of the Iraqi scuds in the 1991 Gulf War - unpleasant, but definitely not too bad. The analysts are weak, but the soldiers and the residents of the Home Front have motivation. So onward, to battle!

To use Netanyahu's "duck allegory", what looks like a preparation for war, acts like a preparation for war, and quacks like a preparation for war, is a preparation for war, and not just a "bluff" or a diversion tactic. Until his trip to Washington, Netanyahu and his supporters in the media refrained from such explicit wording and made do with hints. But since he's been back, Netanyahu has issued an emergency call-up for himself and the Israeli public.

More on this topic
Netanyahu: Gaza violence shows Israel cannot afford to be lax on Iran nuclear threat
Obama: Window for diplomatic solution to Iran nuclear standoff is 'shrinking'

terça-feira, 6 de março de 2012

Universidade de Coimbra é parceira de "academia anti-terrorista" israelita


5 março 2012, Esquerda.net http://www.esquerda.net (Portugal)

A campanha internacional de boicote e desinvestimento contra o apartheid israelita denunciou a cooperação da Universidade de Coimbra com uma academia de ex-militares israelitas. O abaixo assinado apela ao fim desta parceria que é financiada pela UE.

Ligações entre Universidade de Coimbra e ex-militares da ocupação israelita são o alvo da campanha BDS.


O projeto SAFIRE (Abordagem Científica à Luta contra o Extremismo Radical) é pago pelos contribuintes europeus para dar aos governos, militares e agências de segurança privada o resultado da investigação sobre processos de radicalização com potencial violento. Para o Comité de Solidariedade com a Palestina, que promove o abaixo assinado, "a cooperação com uma academia especializada em “anti-terrorismo”, como a ISCA, consiste em dar a mão ao próprio aparelho repressivo sionista".

Para além do ISCA e da Universidade de Coimbra, estão envolvidas no Projeto Safire outras oito instituições da Holanda, França e Itália. O custo total do projeto estava orçado em 3.68 milhões de euros e o financiamento europeu cobre 2.91 milhões. A sua duração é de 42 meses, tendo começado em junho de 2010 e com fim agendado para novembro de 2013.

O abaixo-assinado começa por recordar a ilegalidade da ocupação israelita e as condições a que se sujeitam os estudantes universitários: "Em Abu Dis, por exemplo, o muro passa pelo meio do campus da universidade e atravessa o campo de futebol. Os estudantes universitários muitas vezes não conseguem chegar às suas universidades, o que acontece frequentemente em Birzeit. Estudantes árabes israelitas não podem apresentar teses relacionadas com a Naqba".

A campanha BDS (Boicote, Desinvestimento e Sanções a Israel) começou em 2005 e é semelhante àquela que ajudou a derrotar o regime de apartheid na África do Sul. Os promotores da iniciativa destacam o recente apoio à campanha por parte da Universidade de Joanesburgo, na África do Sul, "que cortou todas as suas ligações com a Universidade israelita Ben Gourion".

"Se a cooperação com instituições oficiais israelitas no âmbito universitário é já de si condenável e merecedora de boicote, a cooperação com uma academia especializada em “anti-terrorismo”, como a ISCA, consiste em dar a mão ao próprio aparelho repressivo sionista", acusa o documento. Para os subscritores, "esta “academia” situa-se no coração da história mais sanguinária de Israel e procura branquear a sua imagem cooperando com uma academia portuguesa que em 1969 sofreu os rigores da repressão fascista".

Com esta campanha, os promotores esperam que se repita a vitória conseguida no ano passado, quando o Festival de cinema Queer Lisboa desistiu de aceitar o habitual apoio da embaixada de Israel.

Artigos relacionados
Festival Queer de Lisboa abdica de patrocínio de Israel
Roger Waters adere ao boicote cultural a Israel

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


Texto da petição: PELO FIM DA COOPERAÇÃO ENTRE A UNIVERSIDADE DE COIMBRA E O APARTHEID ISRAELITA

Target: Universidade de Coimbra
Sponsored by: Comite de Solidariedade com a Palestina
Pelo fim da colaboração da Universidade de Coimbra com o Estado colonial israelita.Tendo tomado conhecimento de que a Universidade de Coimbra lançou um projecto de investigação conjunto com a organização israelita International Security and Counter-Terrorism Academy (ISCA), os abaixo-assinados consideram essa decisção um atentado contra as tradições da Universidade de Coimbra no que elas têm de profundamente anti-racistas, anti-colonialistas, democráticas e emancipatórias. E apelam, por esse motivo, ao cancelamento imediato e incondicional desse projecto.
ONDE ASSINAR: The Petition Site http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/cooperacao-universidade-coimbra-e-apartheid-israelita/


quinta-feira, 8 de dezembro de 2011

WHAT US AID TO ISRAEL BUYS AND WHY THAT NEVER CHANGES

Jews for Justice for Palestinians http://jfjfp.com (Britain)

29 November 2011, Palestine Chronicle http://palestinechronicle.com (USA)

America’s Aid for Israel’s Political ‘Continuum’

By Clive Hambidge*, Palestine Chronicle

A Military Conquest

‘… We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours … When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do will be to scurry round like drugged roaches in a bottle.’ (Rafael Eitan)*

A ‘moral articulation’ by successive American administrations as to the primary reason for their unilateral support of 0.001% of the world’s population, namely Israel, is not standing up to international law or American scrutiny. The perpetuated myth of an Israel surrounded by mortal enemies, battling heroically for its democratic rights against all odds fades as the world of right mindedness recognises in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip the daily abuse and horror for Palestinians under illegal occupation in Israel’s ‘battlefield’ to test new weaponry. That abuse, brought into sharp focus by the U.S Department of State in early 2004, is systematic; perpetrated by Israel in 2011 and paid for by U.S tax payers’ dollars in the form of indiscriminate, unwise and illegal aid according to America’s own laws. The reason? Unquestioning support for Israel’s militarised political continuum, where de jure occupation became de facto annexation, and where, according to Special Rapporteur Falk “the unbridled assault upon Palestinian rights” continues.

If one consciously moves in time backward and forward, that is in American/Israeli time, one finds the same pattern no matter the date. There is no change no progress. It is like watching a film, a play no matter where you cut, what montage you see, what curtain is lifted and what scene you view, it is the same film, the same play, the same day, from the same violent script. It is a continuum of brutal actions designed to oppress Palestinians enough to make them leave their own land. Pick a date at random and one finds the paradox of continuum. Israel is waiting for Godot:

“Estragon: All the dead voices.
Vladimir: They make a noise like wings.”

Matt Bowles, writing for the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, makes plain the facts: America for decades allowing Israel to place “US aid into its general fund, effectively eliminating any distinction between types of aid. [means] Therefore, U.S. tax-payers are helping to fund an illegal occupation, the expansion of colonial-settlements projects, and gross human rights violations against the Palestinian civilian population.” Facts continually denied by Israel, as it ruthlessly pursue ‘the doctrine of politics free from law’.

Israel’s persistent but illusory claim that its ‘international human rights treaty obligations do not apply in the OPT’ has been, according to Amnesty International, ‘rejected’ by the U.N Human Rights Committee, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination Against Women, the Committee Against Torture, the Committee on the Rights of the Child, the International Court of Justice’, and every conscionable citizen on the planet.

So to February 2004, the U.S Department of State in its Country Reports on Human Rights Practices makes clear the egregious human rights violations and status of Israel in the OPT 2003, “The international community does not recognize Israel’s Sovereignty over any part of the occupied territories.” All accredited missions are to be found rightfully, and legally, in Tel Aviv. “Israel’s overall human rights record in the occupied territories remained poor and worsened in the treatment of foreign human rights activists.” These abuses came in a fiscal year 2003 where Israel received from the U.S “a foreign military financing grant of $3.1 billion and a $600 million grant for economic security.” (Jewish Voice for Peace – JVP); U.S dollars used in the advancing of Israel’s policy of ‘continuum’ namely the illegal colonisation of Palestinian lands, the tormenting of its people and those that would assist them. Lest we forget, it was in March 2003 that Rachel Corrie, an American citizen performing a fundamental rule of law principle by campaigning for human rights in the OPT, lost her life under the tracks of a caterpillar bulldozer: ‘Made in the U.S.A’.

The U.S Department of State found in the bloody year of 2003 that amongst other violations of international law:

• “Israeli soldiers placed civilians in danger by ordering them [Palestinians] to facilitate military operations.”

• “Israeli forces sometimes arbitrarily destroyed, damaged, or looted Palestinian property”.

• “Israeli security forces often impeded the provision of medical assistance to Palestinian civilians.”

• “Israeli security forces harassed and abused Palestinian pedestrians.”

• “Israel conducted mass, arbitrary arrests in the West Bank during military operations, summoning and detaining males between the ages of 15 and 45”

• “Israel carried out policies of demolitions, strict curfews, and closures that directly punished innocent civilians … Israel often demolished homes after suspects had already been killed or arrested.”

• Israel “maintained” according to the Department of State “that such punishment of innocents would serve as a deterrent against future terrorist attacks.”

These insidious patterns have been sustained by all Israeli administrations and represent a ‘continuum’: a calculated militaristic policy of intimidation and worse toward the innocent civilians of Palestine. This being so, I must add my concerns to the concerns of the Rachel Corrie Foundation that “the State Departments Country Reports on Human Rights systematically exclude the State Departments own analysis of Israel’s failure to perform a credible investigation into the killing of Rachel Corrie,” and further concerns that “reports generated by international NGOs such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, which noted a pattern of negligence in Israeli investigations into civilians killed by the IDF, were ignored in the creation of the Country Reports.”

In recognition of the illegality of American Aid to Israel, the Rachel Corrie Foundation in its submission to the U.N Universal Periodic Review called upon the U.S to “enforce 22 U.S.C. 2304 (1994), protocol on Human Rights and Security Assistance, and the “Leahy Amendments” to the Foreign Operations Appropriations and Defence Appropriations Acts (e.g. P.L. 105-118 570), which prohibit the provision of security assistance to countries and military units that engage in a pattern of gross violations of human rights.” Where, according to JVP, “Massive military aid promotes militarism, which has led to a reliance on military, rather than diplomatic means to work for a solution to this ongoing conflict.”. The planned aim of ‘continuum’.

The Continuum
“Zionism is a colonising adventure and therefore it stands or falls by the question of armed force. There is no other ethic” (Jabotinsky)

The U.N Mission Report (UNMR) on the Israeli operation in Gaza between December 27th 2008 and 18th January 2009 highlights that all Israel’s operations must be viewed not as isolated moments in history where Israel feels threatened and then responds but, operation[s] that decidedly fit “into a continuum of policies aimed at pursuing Israel’s political objectives with regard to Gaza and the Occupied Palestinian Territory as a whole.” Reel back, fast forward, press hold, you find ‘continuum’: “After we become a strong force, as the result of the creation of a State, we shall abolish partition and expand to the whole of Palestine.” (Ben Gurion)

“The continuum is evident most immediately with the policy of blockade that preceded the operations [i.e Cast Lead] and that in the Mission’s view amounts to collective punishment intentionally inflicted by the Government of Israel on the people of the Gaza Strip.” (UNMR). Further, the Mission found “An analysis of the modalities and impact of the December-January military operations [also] sets them, in the Mission’s view, in a continuum with a number of other pre-existing Israel Policies with regard to the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The progressive isolation and separation of the Gaza Strip from the West Bank, a policy that began much earlier and which was consolidated in particular with the imposition of tight closures, restrictions on movement and eventually blockade, are among the most apparent.” ‘The plan that never changed’ is the continuum that ever is, until God forbid “There is no more Palestine. Finished . . .” (Moshe Dayan)

Nothing has changed since 2004, nothing has changed since 1948. And nothing has changed in 2011. Pick a date between 1948 and 2011 and one finds systematic abuse, atrocities, and deaths of Palestinian civilians. One might pick Operation ‘Defensive Shield’ 2002, Operation ‘Summer Rains’ 2006 or ‘Autumn Clouds’ November 2006, I have picked December 2008/January 2009 and ‘Cast Lead’ from Israel’s seasonal slaughter. Here’s a U.N Report of 2009.

The 2009 Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict concluded, “The Mission found numerous instances of deliberate attacks on civilians and civilian objects (individuals, whole families, houses, mosques) in violation of the fundamental international humanitarian law principle of distinction, resulting in deaths and serious injuries. In these cases the Mission found that the protected status of civilians was not respected and the attacks intentional, in clear violation of customary law reflected in article 51 (2) and 75 of Additional Protocol 1, article 27 of the Four Geneva Convention and articles 6 and 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In some cases the Mission additionally concluded that the attack was also launched with the intention of spreading terror among the civilian population.”

In addition, the Mission found all of this was planned meticulously by Israel, “legal opinions and advice were given throughout the planning stages and at certain operational levels during the campaign. There were almost no mistakes according to the Government of Israel. It is in these circumstances that the Mission [concluded] that what occurred in just over three weeks at the end of 2008 and the beginning of 2009 was a deliberately disproportionate attack designed to punish, humiliate and terrorize a civilian population, radically diminish its local economic capacity both to work and to provide for itself, and to force upon it an ever increasing sense of dependency and vulnerability.”

One would remind Israel’s planners of Article 7 of the Draft Code of Crimes Against the Peace and Security of Mankind (1996), “The official position of an individual who commits a crime against the peace and security of mankind, even if he acted as head of State or Government, does not relieve him of criminal responsibility or mitigate punishment.” And of these compassionate words thundering through the centuries from Caliph Abu Bakr to “the first Moslem Arab Army invading Christian Syria:

‘Do not commit treachery, nor depart from the right path. You must not mutilate, neither kill a child or aged man or woman. Do not destroy a palm tree, nor burn it with fire and do not cut any fruitful tree.’” (634 A.D)

After Cast Lead, Adalah, The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, reported that “During and after “Operation Cast lead”, human rights organizations asked the Attorney General (AG) to open an investigation based on prima-facie evidence of gross-violations of international law; the AG rejected our request. Previous requests to the Military Advocate General (MAG) to open investigations into numerous other cases were also denied.” Adalah further found “petitions filed to the Supreme Court against the MAG and AG’s policy of not opening criminal investigations into the killing of Palestinians remain pending years later. It also appears that the Supreme Court’s inaction has resulted in a brake on the submission of petitions by human rights organizations.”

“Israel cannot build a society based on the principles of democracy, human rights, and compliance with international law while brutally occupying another people and their land. The United States is currently paying for that occupation with its annual aid,” (JVP, Statement on Peace, U.S Military Aid and Israel, 2004.) and further, “When Palestinian doctors remove bullets from the bodies of Palestinian children, the bullets are typically stamped. Made in the U.S.A.” Nevertheless, and, in remorseless fashion the United States defies international opinion, its own law and international law in providing massive military aid to its client state Israel. America supplies the boots that fit the feet that press on the necks of Palestinians.

Massive Military Aid for Continuum
“The Arabs will have to go, but one needs an opportune moment for making it happen, such as war” (Ben Gurion)

The Congressional Research Service Report (CRSR) of 16th September 2010 U.S Foreign Aid to Israel reported, “Almost all U.S. bilateral aid to Israel is in the form of military assistance.” The Bush Administration unsurprisingly sanctioned an increase of 6 billion dollars in U.S military assistance to Israel in August 2007. And the Obama Administration, also unsurprisingly, responded to the Bush Neo Con reverberation by requesting $3 billion U.S in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) to Israel for fiscal year of 2011. So, add those figures in your moral mind space to this cumulative ‘conservative estimate’ given by the U.S organisation ‘If Americans Knew’** of “total direct aid to Israel [1949 to 2008] of $113. 8554 Billion. Massive by any standards.

Decades of murder and mayhem began with a trade loan in 1949 of $100.000. God only knows when and how it will end. Today the billions of US taxpayers dollars that pour through the ‘aid funnel’ are used to buy arms and equipment such as caterpillar bulldozers made in the U.S; indeed a stipulation by the U.S is that Israel uses “75% of its military aid from the U.S. It funnels this money to more than 1,000 U.S arms suppliers, which in turn lobby for policies that benefit them at the expense of peace in the Middle East.” (JVP).

According to the CRSR, by giving unconditional aid to Israel, America seeks to and “maintains …[Israel’s] qualitative military edge over potential threats, and prevent[s] a shift in the security balance of the region.” in fact that aggressive ‘military edge’ keeps Palestinians locked down in interminable suffering and the region a tinderbox. And make no mistake the ‘qualitative military edge’ is not for Israel but for The United States of America and its continued hegemonic ambitions through its proxy, Israel.

U.S blood money was/is for “a militarized Israel that will serve the U.S. interest of controlling the Petroleum reserves of the Middle East … policy debate in elite circles takes for granted, on all sides, the goal of maintaining U.S. control over Middle East petroleum resources and the flow of petrodollars.” (Chomsky, Fateful Triangle). If we take a sordid trip down Israel’s blood soaked memory lane we find U.S Aid increasing in direct proportion to Israel’s military aggression, perceived success therefore usefulness to American interests. Israel’s continuum is vital for American control over the oil reserves of the region.

Stephen Zunes, The Strategic Functions of U.S. AID to Israel, *** shows how U.S Aid shoots up after Israeli military successes and its long term strategic cooperation with America. From the “spectacular victory” in the 1967 war, through the Civil War in Jordan 1970-71 and the countering of ‘attacking Arab armies’ in 1973, to the “fall of the Shah, election of the right wing Likud, and the ratification of the Camp David Treaty in 1979”, through the years 1983-84 “when the United States and Israel signed memoranda of understanding on strategic cooperation and military planning.” U.S Aid kept rising 450%, 800%, increasing, sevenfold, quadrupling, as did Israel’s aggression. America force feeding Israel with military aid through the ‘aid funnel,’ whilst Palestinian children can scarcely keep mind, spirit, and body together.

Then came Clinton, Bush, Obama, all maintaining Israel’s ‘qualitative edge’, all maintaining Israel’s brutal military occupation. All, letting down the Palestinians’ lawful drive for legitimate Statehood. All U.S Aid equated with destruction, acquainted with death. The long suffering Palestinians sold out with ‘no objections’ from the ‘liberal left of America.’

Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush Senior, Clinton, Bush “I’m doing it for my daddy” junior, and Obama, all preserving ‘Continuity Of Government’ (C.O.G.) indeed, all cogs in the all consuming gas guzzling American machine. It will all end in tears and it won’t be Palestinian tears, for they have wept too much and for too long for their lost freedom and their lost children.

O Captain My Captain
“Our American friends offer us money, arms, and advice. We take the money, we take the arms, and we decline the advice.” (Moshe Dayan)

Questions are being asked of Captain America from unlikely and likely quarters. Walter Pincus of the Washington Post, “The question for the Obama administration, Congress and, in the end perhaps the American public, is given present economic problems, should the United States supply the money to make up for the reductions the Israelis are making in their own defence budget.” A financial question of course. A superior question, because a moral one, is if, the American public, who should be asked first, were informed of the extent, nature and illegality of U.S Aid to Israel, would the American public then sanction any military aid to Israel at all?

As Hassan Fouda of Northern California Friends of Sabeel reminds, “Congress is planning deep cuts in social security, unemployment compensation, educational grants and other programs that help vulnerable Americans. Transferring billions of taxpayer’s money to Israel now is immoral. Americans need to speak up and be heard.

Valuing Human Rights
Special Rapporteur [on Human Rights in the occupied territories] John Dugard stated, “It is pointless for the Special Rapporteur to recommend to the Government of Israel that it show respect for human rights and international humanitarian law … in these circumstances, the Special Rapporteur can only appeal to the wider international community to concern itself with the plight of the Palestinian people.” (2006). After the end of the Israeli military operation Cast Lead 2008-2009 in Gaza, John Ging the UNRWA Director of Operations recalled a discussion that he had with a teacher in Gaza about ‘strengthening human rights education in schools’. One would assume that the teacher had for obvious reasons a sceptical view of such an undertaking. In fact, recounts Ging “the teacher unhesitantly supported the resumption of human rights education.” She said, “This is a war of values, and we are not going to lose it.”

*Clive Hambidge is Human Development Director at Facilitate Global***. Contact him at:clive.hambidge@facilitateglobal.org.

This article was contributed to PalestineChronicle.com


* Rafael Eitan, former Chief of Staff of the Israel Defense Forces and later an MK and government minister

** If Americans Knew

*** The Strategic Functions of U.S. Aid to Israel

**** Facilitate Global

quarta-feira, 30 de novembro de 2011

A DAY IN NOVEMBER

THIS TUESDAY will be the 64th anniversary of a fateful day for our lives

26 November 2011, Gush Shalom גוש שלום http://zope.gush-shalom.org (Israel)

Uri Avnery אורי אבנרי

A day in November. A day to remember.

On November 29, 1947, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted, by 33 votes against 13 (with 10 abstentions), the Palestine Partition Plan.

This event has become a subject of endless debates, misinterpretations and outright falsifications. It may be worthwhile to peel away the myths and see it as it was.

BY THE end of 1947, there were in the country – then officially named Palestine - about 1.2 million Arabs and 635 thousand Jews. The gap between the two population groups had turned into an abyss. Though geographically intertwined, they lived on two different planets. With very few exceptions, they considered each other as mortal enemies.

This was the reality that the UN commission, charged with proposing a solution, found on the ground when it visited the country.

One of the great moments of my life is connected with this UNSCOP (“United Nations Special Committee on Palestine”). On the Carmel mountain chain, near kibbutz Daliah, I was attending the annual folk dance festival. Folk dances played a major role in the new Hebrew culture we were consciously striving to create. Most of these dances were somewhat contrived, even artificial, like many of our efforts, but they reflected the will to create something new, fresh, rooted in the country, entirely different from the Jewish culture of our parents. Some of us spoke about a new “Hebrew nation”.

In a huge natural amphitheater, under a canopy of twinkling summer stars, tens of thousands of young people, boys and girls, had gathered to cheer on the many amateur groups performing on the stage. It was a joyous affair, imbued with camaraderie, radiating feelings of strength and self-confidence.

No one of us could have guessed that within a few months we would meet again in the fields of a deadly war.

In the middle of the performance, an excited voice announced on the loudspeaker that several members of UNSCOP had come to visit. As one, the huge crowd stood up and started to sing the national anthem, Hatikvah (“the Hope”). I never liked this song very much, but at that moment it sounded like a fervent prayer, filling the space, rebounding from the hills of the Carmel. I suppose that almost all of the 6000 Jewish youngsters who gave their lives in the war were assembled for the last time on that evening, singing with profound emotion.

IT WAS in this atmosphere that the members of UNSCOP, representing many different nations, had to find a solution.

As everybody knows, the commission adopted a plan to partition Palestine between an independent “Arab” and an independent “Jewish” state. But that is not the whole story.

Looking at the map of the 1947 partition resolution, one must wonder at the borders. They resemble a puzzle, with Arab pieces and Jewish pieces put together in an impossible patchwork, with Jerusalem and Bethlehem as a separate unit. The borders look crazy. Both states would have been totally indefensible.

The explanation is that the committee did not really envision two totally independent and separate states. The plan explicitly included an economic union. That would have necessitated a very close relationship between the two political entities, something akin to a federation, with open borders and free movement of people and goods. Without it, the borders would have been impossible.

That was a very optimistic scenario. Immediately after the committee’s plan was adopted by the General Assembly, after much cajoling by the Zionist leadership, war broke out with sporadic Arab attacks on Jewish traffic on the vital roads.

When the first shot was fired, the partition plan was dead. The foundation, on which the whole edifice rested, broke apart. No open borders, no economic union, no chance for a union of any kind. Only abyssal, deadly, enmity.

THE PARTITION plan would never have been adopted in the first place if it had not been preceded by a historical event that seemed at the time beyond belief.

The Soviet delegate to the UN, Andrei Gromyko, suddenly made what can only be described as a fiery Zionist speech. He contended that after the terrible suffering of the Jews in the Holocaust, they deserved a state of their own.

To appreciate the utter amazement with which this speech was received, one must remember that until that very moment, Communists and Zionists had been irreconcilable foes. It was not only a clash of ideologies, but also a family affair. In Tzarist Russia, Jews were persecuted by an anti-Semitic government, and young Jews, both male and female, were in the vanguard of all the revolutionary movements.

An idealistic young Jew had the choice between joining the Bolsheviks, the social-democratic Jewish Bund or the Zionists. The competition was fierce and engendered intense mutual hatred. Later, in the Soviet Union, Zionists were mercilessly persecuted. In Palestine, local Communists, Jewish and Arab, were accused of collaborating with the Arab militants who attacked Jewish neighborhoods.

What had brought about this sudden change in Soviet policy? Stalin did not turn from an anti-Semite into a philo-Semite. Far from it. But he was a pragmatist. It was the era of medium-range missiles, which threatened Soviet territory from all sides. Palestine was in practice a British colony and could easily have become a Western missile base, threatening Odessa and beyond. Better a Jewish and an Arab state, than that.

In the following war, almost all my weapons came from the Soviet bloc, mainly from Czechoslovakia. The Soviet Union recognized Israel de jure long before the United States.

The end of this unnatural honeymoon came in the early fifties, when David Ben-Gurion decided to turn Israel into an inseparable part of the Western bloc. At the same time, Stalin recognized the importance of the new pan-Arab nationalism of Gamal Abd-al-Nasser and decided to ride on that wave. His paranoid anti-Semitism came again to the fore. All over Eastern Europe Communist veterans were executed as Zionist-imperialist-Trotskyite spies, and his Jewish doctors were accused of attempting to poison him. (Luckily for them, Stalin died just in time and they were saved.)

TODAY, THE partition resolution is remembered in Israel mainly because of two words: “Jewish state”.

No one in Israel wants to be reminded of the borders of 1947, which gave the Jewish minority in Palestine “only” 55% of the country. (Though half of this consisted of the Negev desert, most of which is almost empty even now.) Nor do Jewish Israelis like to be reminded that almost half the population of the territory allotted to them was Arab.

At the time, the UN resolution was accepted by the Jewish population with overflowing enthusiasm. The photos of the people dancing in the streets of Tel Aviv belong to this day, and not – as is often falsely claimed, to the day the State of Israel was officially founded. (At that time we were in middle of a bloody war and nobody was in the mood for dancing.)

We know now that Ben-Gurion did not dream of accepting the partition plan borders, and even less the Arab population within them. The famous army “Plan Dalet” early in the war was a strategic necessity, but it was also a solution to the two problems: it added to Israel another 22% of the country and it drove the Arab population out. Only a small remnant of the Arab population remained – and by now it has grown to 1.5 million.

But all that is history. What concerned the future are the words “Jewish state”. Israeli rightists, who abhor the partition resolution in any other context, insist that it provides the legal basis to Israel’s right to be recognized as a “Jewish state” – meaning in practice, that the state belongs to all the Jews around the world, but not to its Arab citizens, whose families have been living here for at least 13 centuries, if not far longer (depends who does the counting).

But the UN used the word “Jewish” only for lack of any other definition. During the British Mandate, the two peoples in the country were called in English “Jews” and “Arabs”. But we ourselves spoke about a “Hebrew” State (medina Ivrit). In newspaper clippings of the time, only this term can be seen. People of my age-group remember dozens of demonstrations in which we invariably chanted “Free Immigration – Hebrew State”. The sound of it still rings in our ears.

The UN did not deal with the ideological makeup of the future states. It certainly assumed that they would be democratic, belonging to all their inhabitants. Otherwise they would hardly have drawn borders that left a substantial Arab population in the “Jewish” state.

Israel’s declaration of independence bases itself on the UN resolution. The relevant sentence reads: “…AND ON THE STRENGTH OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY, (WE) HEREBY DECLARE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A JEWISH STATE IN ERETZ-ISRAEL, TO BE KNOWN AS THE STATE OF ISRAEL.”

The ultra-rightists who now dominate the Knesset want to use these words as a pretext for replacing democracy with a doctrine of Jewish nationalist-religious supremacy. A former Shin-Bet chief and present Kadima party MK has submitted a bill that would abolish the equality of the two terms “Jewish” and “democratic” in the official legal doctrine, and state clearly that the “Jewishness” of the state has precedence over its “democratic” character. This would deprive the Arab citizens of any remnant of equality. (At the last moment, in face of the public reaction, the Kadima party compelled him to withdraw the bill.)

THE 1947 partition plan was an exceptionally intelligent document. Its details are obsolete now, but its basic idea is as relevant today as it was 64 years ago: two nations are living in this country, they cannot live together in one state without a continuous civil war, they can live together in two states, the two states must establish close ties between each other.

Ben-Gurion was determined to prevent the founding of the Arab Palestinian state, and with the help of King Abdallah of Transjordan he succeeded in this. All his successors, with the possible exception of Yitzhak Rabin, have followed this line, now more than ever. We have paid – and are still paying – a heavy price for this folly.

On the 64th anniversary of this historic event, we must go back to its basic principle: Israel and Palestine, Two States for Two Peoples.

quarta-feira, 16 de novembro de 2011

Academics rally behind Ben-Gurion University prof. fined for refusing IDF duty

16 november 2011, Haaretz הארץ (Israel)

Prof. Idan Landau has refused reserve duty for past 11 years, has been imprisoned three times; first time university has taken steps against him.

By Talila Nesher

Hundreds of academics from Israel and abroad have urged Ben-Gurion University of the Negev to reverse a fine it imposed on one of its professors, over his refusal to serve in the Israel Defense Forces reserves.

About 230 senior university lecturers from Israeli institutions of higher learning and about another 100 from abroad have sent a letter to BGU President Rivka Carmi, calling on her to reconsider the decision to reduce the pay of Prof. Idan Landau for a week that he spent in jail for refusing to serve. Another 90 faculty members from BGU made a similar demand of Carmi.

Prof. Landau, who lectures in the university's linguistics department, was informed about two weeks ago that half of his salary would be withheld for the period during which he was imprisoned for refusing for reasons of conscience. Landau has refused to do reserve duty for the past 11 years and has been imprisoned previously three times, but the university had not taken any steps against him in the past. In May of this year, after he spent a week in jail, he made up the instructional time that he had missed.

Landau also claimed that he continued conducting research from prison. In late June, however, the university administration deducted half of Landau's salary for the week on the grounds that he had been absent.

"Landau was not punished by the university," university spokesman Amir Rozenblit said. "No sanctions were imposed upon him for his political beliefs or due to any stance on the part of the university regarding his decision not to serve in the reserves. Employees are paid a salary for work. Since Dr. Landau was in detention, he was not at the disposal of his employer and is therefore not entitled to a salary for that period."