Israel's pretention to be a country with a just legal system appears ridiculous in the face of the other justice system that applies to juveniles that are not Palestinian.
19 July 2011, 17July 2011, EDITORIAL Haaretz הארץ (Israel)
West Bank Palestinian minors accused of throwing stones do have a chance of being acquitted; the odds are about one in a thousand. According to a B'Tselem report published yesterday, just one juvenile defendant out of 835 was acquitted of stone-throwing over the past six years. The others were convicted, mostly through plea bargains. About 60 percent of the convicted minors served prison terms of four months or more. Among those who served sentences of a few days and up to two months in prison were 19 defendants who were 12 to 13 years old.
These are frightening statistics from every possible point of view. The rationale for sentencing the juveniles is well known: The Israel Defense Forces is responsible for the security and well-being of the public in the territories. It must protect civilians there, in addition to its own soldiers. Such protection is not possible without some measure of deterrence. The disparity, however, between theory and practice is outrageous. Israel's justice system throws the book at juvenile defendants, provided they are Palestinian.
Contrary to the contention made by the IDF Spokesman's Office, a report by the No Legal Frontiers organization that is summarized in today's Haaretz says the military juvenile court that has been established has hardly improved the defense of the rights of minors at all. The improper act of throwing stones is not only used in the territories. This type of violent conduct does indeed endanger life, with the potential to kill, seriously injure or to paralyze, particularly if it involves a heavy rock thrown from a tall building or a bridge, or from a speeding car.
If someone Jewish throws a stone, the injury inflicted is as bad as if it is thrown by an Arab. The need to punish and deter does not disappear when the scene shifts to the Israeli side of the Green Line.
Israel's pretention to be a country in which equality under the law prevails appears ridiculous in the face of the other justice system that applies to juveniles that are not Palestinian. There, every possible reasonable argument is presented in support of forgiving young people for their passing caprices and to allow them to enlist in the IDF and avoid a criminal record, in the spirit of compassion.
The violent Israeli youth who attacked soldiers and policemen who had been sent at the government's behest to Gaza and the northern West Bank to evacuate settlements six years ago did not have to wait long before their sentences were mitigated. The result is glaring in the cases of the current assaults on the IDF's West Bank division commander, Brig. Gen. Nitzan Alon, and Deputy State Prosecutor Shai Nitzan.
Mostrando postagens com marcador Green Lines. Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens com marcador Green Lines. Mostrar todas as postagens
terça-feira, 19 de julho de 2011
quarta-feira, 22 de junho de 2011
THE DANGER OF NETANYAHU'S NEW SETTLEMENT POLICY
The initiative to pare the defense minister's authority concerning construction in the West Bank blatantly violates the decision in 2005 by Sharon's government (to which Netanyahu was a partner) to adopt attorney Talia Sasson's report on the outposts.
22 June 2011 Haaretz Editorial הארץ (Israel)
A few days after he revealed his opinion that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict does not stem from a territorial dispute, and is therefore insoluble, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu decided to implement a horrific idea necessitated by his worldview. He decided to accelerate the race to occupy additional territories in the disputed areas by thinning out the means of supervision of the settlement project authorities.
On Sunday, the government decided that the Settlement Department of the World Zionist Organization - the long arm of construction matters in the West Bank - will no longer be required to obtain prior authorization from the defense minister.
Henceforth the department will be required only to "coordinate" its activities with the minister in charge of the territories. This decision by Netanyahu's government makes a mockery of the 2003 decision by Ariel Sharon government (to which Netanyahu was a partner) to freeze construction in the settlements and dismantle the outposts, as required by the road map to peace.
The initiative to pare the defense minister's authority concerning construction in the West Bank blatantly violates the decision in 2005 by Sharon's government (to which Netanyahu was a partner) to adopt attorney Talia Sasson's report on the outposts.
The report found that the Settlement Department had established dozens of outposts without state permission. In light of the grave findings, Sasson recommended limiting the department's activity beyond the Green Line to operating as a settlement organization solely for purposes of establishing or expanding a settlement the government had already decided to establish or expand.
She also recommended that the Finance Ministry adjust the department's budget in accordance with this recommendation. The decision now to expand the Settlement Department's freedom in the territories complements the government's decision from about two years ago to dedicate one-third of the department's budget to settlements in the territories.
In that same decision the department was required to request the defense minister's authorization for any building and infrastructure development in the territories, and insofar as is necessary authorization from the prime minister as well. The decision at this time to eliminate even the appearance of supervision of settlement building is hammering another nail into the coffin of the two-state solution.
22 June 2011 Haaretz Editorial הארץ (Israel)
A few days after he revealed his opinion that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict does not stem from a territorial dispute, and is therefore insoluble, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu decided to implement a horrific idea necessitated by his worldview. He decided to accelerate the race to occupy additional territories in the disputed areas by thinning out the means of supervision of the settlement project authorities.
On Sunday, the government decided that the Settlement Department of the World Zionist Organization - the long arm of construction matters in the West Bank - will no longer be required to obtain prior authorization from the defense minister.
Henceforth the department will be required only to "coordinate" its activities with the minister in charge of the territories. This decision by Netanyahu's government makes a mockery of the 2003 decision by Ariel Sharon government (to which Netanyahu was a partner) to freeze construction in the settlements and dismantle the outposts, as required by the road map to peace.
The initiative to pare the defense minister's authority concerning construction in the West Bank blatantly violates the decision in 2005 by Sharon's government (to which Netanyahu was a partner) to adopt attorney Talia Sasson's report on the outposts.
The report found that the Settlement Department had established dozens of outposts without state permission. In light of the grave findings, Sasson recommended limiting the department's activity beyond the Green Line to operating as a settlement organization solely for purposes of establishing or expanding a settlement the government had already decided to establish or expand.
She also recommended that the Finance Ministry adjust the department's budget in accordance with this recommendation. The decision now to expand the Settlement Department's freedom in the territories complements the government's decision from about two years ago to dedicate one-third of the department's budget to settlements in the territories.
In that same decision the department was required to request the defense minister's authorization for any building and infrastructure development in the territories, and insofar as is necessary authorization from the prime minister as well. The decision at this time to eliminate even the appearance of supervision of settlement building is hammering another nail into the coffin of the two-state solution.
segunda-feira, 13 de junho de 2011
Netanyahu's tidings of destruction
Indeed, the right wing considers recognition of the reality created in 1949 to be the chief enemy of Zionism. The dynamic of a conquering nationalism can never recognize that any situation created at any given time is final.
10 June 2011, Haaretz הארץ (Israel)
By Zeev Sternhell
Of all the tasks that the Israeli right has set for itself, the most important is expunging the foundational status of the War of Independence. For if a war that killed 1 percent of the population and gave rise to the State of Israel was nothing but one more in a long line of wars through which the land has been conquered again and again, from Zionism's early days until today, the two primary results of that war - the concept of citizenship and the new state's borders - truly have no special status.
By contrast, if we see the establishment of the state as a watershed event in Jewish national history - both because it engendered a new political and legal concept in the history of Zionism, that of citizenship, and because geopolitical borders were assigned to the new entity for the first time - then the enterprise of conquering the land has ended. And that, in the eyes of the right wing, is the real existential danger.
Indeed, the right wing considers recognition of the reality created in 1949 to be the chief enemy of Zionism. According to its worldview, Zionism must be a movement in a constant state of formation and creation, one that relies on the Jews' ability to impose their will on their surroundings. The dynamic of a conquering nationalism can never recognize that any situation created at any given time is final.
This, naturally, leads to the view that there's nothing sacred about the Green Line and that settling the land conquered in 1967 is no less legitimate than settling the Galilee or the Negev. That's the view Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu apparently forgot to expound on in Washington. But it's reasonable to assume that U.S. President Barack Obama is aware of what most members of the U.S. Congress either don't know or don't want to know, whether for electoral reasons or for reasons of convenience.
Members of Congress apparently haven't heard that Vice Prime Minister Moshe Ya'alon, who wants to be the leader of the entire Israeli right, has already asserted that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict cannot be resolved, and could therefore continue for another 100 years. Netanyahu's national security adviser, for his part, has asserted that the 1967 borders are unacceptable because they leave too many Jews outside Israel. But neither of them is perpetuating Netanyahu's big lie: that these borders are indefensible.
Unfortunately for the ruling right, the parameters of an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal were set many years ago, and they have been etched deeply into the Israeli and international consciousness. The current French initiative is just an expression of the European consensus, if not the global one. This means that Israel has only two options: willingly accept the finality of the situation as it was the day after the state's establishment, or reach the same point only after being forcibly dragged to it, while becoming a pariah and an object of revulsion along the way.
But the question of borders is only one aspect of the failure to recognize the War of Independence as a fundamental turning point; it also has a civic angle. The anti-democratic legislation that the Knesset has enacted over the past year, which targets basic civic equality and which borders on racism even if it is not actually racist, is a way of declaring that the essence of the state is that it belongs to Jews alone. At bottom, this view stems from seeing Jews as the sole owners of the Land of Israel.
This means the state doesn't exist to guarantee democracy, equality, human rights or even a decent life to all; it exists to guarantee Jewish rule over the Land of Israel and to make sure no additional political entity is established here. Everything is deemed permissible to reach that end, and no price is considered too high. That's essentially what former Mossad chief Meir Dagan was warning us about as well. And for that reason, no previous government has ever posed as great a danger to the public as Netanyahu's government does.
10 June 2011, Haaretz הארץ (Israel)
By Zeev Sternhell
Of all the tasks that the Israeli right has set for itself, the most important is expunging the foundational status of the War of Independence. For if a war that killed 1 percent of the population and gave rise to the State of Israel was nothing but one more in a long line of wars through which the land has been conquered again and again, from Zionism's early days until today, the two primary results of that war - the concept of citizenship and the new state's borders - truly have no special status.
By contrast, if we see the establishment of the state as a watershed event in Jewish national history - both because it engendered a new political and legal concept in the history of Zionism, that of citizenship, and because geopolitical borders were assigned to the new entity for the first time - then the enterprise of conquering the land has ended. And that, in the eyes of the right wing, is the real existential danger.
Indeed, the right wing considers recognition of the reality created in 1949 to be the chief enemy of Zionism. According to its worldview, Zionism must be a movement in a constant state of formation and creation, one that relies on the Jews' ability to impose their will on their surroundings. The dynamic of a conquering nationalism can never recognize that any situation created at any given time is final.
This, naturally, leads to the view that there's nothing sacred about the Green Line and that settling the land conquered in 1967 is no less legitimate than settling the Galilee or the Negev. That's the view Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu apparently forgot to expound on in Washington. But it's reasonable to assume that U.S. President Barack Obama is aware of what most members of the U.S. Congress either don't know or don't want to know, whether for electoral reasons or for reasons of convenience.
Members of Congress apparently haven't heard that Vice Prime Minister Moshe Ya'alon, who wants to be the leader of the entire Israeli right, has already asserted that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict cannot be resolved, and could therefore continue for another 100 years. Netanyahu's national security adviser, for his part, has asserted that the 1967 borders are unacceptable because they leave too many Jews outside Israel. But neither of them is perpetuating Netanyahu's big lie: that these borders are indefensible.
Unfortunately for the ruling right, the parameters of an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal were set many years ago, and they have been etched deeply into the Israeli and international consciousness. The current French initiative is just an expression of the European consensus, if not the global one. This means that Israel has only two options: willingly accept the finality of the situation as it was the day after the state's establishment, or reach the same point only after being forcibly dragged to it, while becoming a pariah and an object of revulsion along the way.
But the question of borders is only one aspect of the failure to recognize the War of Independence as a fundamental turning point; it also has a civic angle. The anti-democratic legislation that the Knesset has enacted over the past year, which targets basic civic equality and which borders on racism even if it is not actually racist, is a way of declaring that the essence of the state is that it belongs to Jews alone. At bottom, this view stems from seeing Jews as the sole owners of the Land of Israel.
This means the state doesn't exist to guarantee democracy, equality, human rights or even a decent life to all; it exists to guarantee Jewish rule over the Land of Israel and to make sure no additional political entity is established here. Everything is deemed permissible to reach that end, and no price is considered too high. That's essentially what former Mossad chief Meir Dagan was warning us about as well. And for that reason, no previous government has ever posed as great a danger to the public as Netanyahu's government does.
sexta-feira, 20 de maio de 2011
NETANYAHU'S ISRAEL IS ON COURSE TO BECOME A PARIAH STATE
20 May 2011, Haaretz (Israel) הארץ
Netanyahu heads for Washington as Israel to stop Israel's collision course with all our allies, who are no longer prepared to listen to his arguments about the country's security.
By Zeev Sternhell
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is going to Washington at what may be the last chance to turn the establishment of a Palestinian state from a global anti-Israel campaign into a joint Israeli, American and European project. The establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state is today a necessity, just as Zionism was a necessity. And about half of Israeli society apparently agrees with Western public opinion and Western governments on the principle that Palestinian Arabs have the same right to independence and sovereignty as do Israeli Jews.
Were Netanyahu a leader worthy of the name, one who understood the deep processes taking place under his nose and tried to make the most of them, he would not think and speak like a leader of the Betar youth movement. But on his upcoming trip to the United States, Netanyahu will prefer to rely on AIPAC, an organization that represents the right-wing minority of American Jews and symbolizes the Jewish community's disappearing past. There, just as in the Likud Central Committee, it is still possible to talk about the Land of Israel as belonging to the Jews alone.
It is precisely this approach, which ignores the rights of the Palestinians, that drives young people, intellectuals and liberals away. At universities, in the media and in the cultural world, these groups are already displacing the conservatives. The extent to which the Jewish right has lost its sway even in its stronghold, New York, can be gathered from its failure to prevent American playwright Tony Kushner from getting an honorary doctorate from the City University of New York.
Another incident, which was not publicized in the media but is even more significant, involved an attempt to prevent a young pro-Palestinian lecturer from getting a position at Brooklyn College. Under pressure from the pro-Israel right, the planned appointment was canceled by the school's president. But when the academic staff rose up in arms, the lecturer was given the job. If the right is unable to get the results it wants even in Brooklyn, it is easy to imagine its plight in other places.
To this must be added the international pressure for an academic and economic boycott of Israel, which has been generated by the recognition that there is no other way to force Israel to end the occupation. Closer to home, Deutsche Bahn's withdrawal from the project to lay a railway line between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem should have caused a shock. But here, we prefer to avoid reality.
Because of its blindness and imperviousness, Israel is gradually turning from a source of pride and an object of admiration into a nuisance, if not an object of outright hostility.
This is how, with our own hands, we turned the problem of the occupation into an issue for the entire Western world, and the Palestinians into the West's proteges: Faced with an occupying power that is simultaneously unresponsive and self-righteous, the West feels moral and political responsibility for the Palestinians' fate, just as in the past, Western public opinion felt deep sympathy for the Jewish state.
This feeling of responsibility has increased in recent years, after it became clear that the Israeli right has no intention of responding to Palestinian demands for freedom and independence. Under the guise of security considerations and the war on terror hides the real, ideological reason: In the right's view, recognizing the equal national rights of the Palestinians means forgoing exclusive Jewish ownership of the Land of Israel. From the point of view of members of the Israeli rejectionist front, recognizing the equality of Jewish and Arab rights on both sides of the Green Line is tantamount to betraying Jewish history.
But since the number of people who are still prepared to buy an argument of this kind is diminishing worldwide, Israel is on a collision course with all our allies and supporters. And at the end of this road, it is liable to become a pariah state.
Netanyahu heads for Washington as Israel to stop Israel's collision course with all our allies, who are no longer prepared to listen to his arguments about the country's security.
By Zeev Sternhell
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is going to Washington at what may be the last chance to turn the establishment of a Palestinian state from a global anti-Israel campaign into a joint Israeli, American and European project. The establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state is today a necessity, just as Zionism was a necessity. And about half of Israeli society apparently agrees with Western public opinion and Western governments on the principle that Palestinian Arabs have the same right to independence and sovereignty as do Israeli Jews.
Were Netanyahu a leader worthy of the name, one who understood the deep processes taking place under his nose and tried to make the most of them, he would not think and speak like a leader of the Betar youth movement. But on his upcoming trip to the United States, Netanyahu will prefer to rely on AIPAC, an organization that represents the right-wing minority of American Jews and symbolizes the Jewish community's disappearing past. There, just as in the Likud Central Committee, it is still possible to talk about the Land of Israel as belonging to the Jews alone.
It is precisely this approach, which ignores the rights of the Palestinians, that drives young people, intellectuals and liberals away. At universities, in the media and in the cultural world, these groups are already displacing the conservatives. The extent to which the Jewish right has lost its sway even in its stronghold, New York, can be gathered from its failure to prevent American playwright Tony Kushner from getting an honorary doctorate from the City University of New York.
Another incident, which was not publicized in the media but is even more significant, involved an attempt to prevent a young pro-Palestinian lecturer from getting a position at Brooklyn College. Under pressure from the pro-Israel right, the planned appointment was canceled by the school's president. But when the academic staff rose up in arms, the lecturer was given the job. If the right is unable to get the results it wants even in Brooklyn, it is easy to imagine its plight in other places.
To this must be added the international pressure for an academic and economic boycott of Israel, which has been generated by the recognition that there is no other way to force Israel to end the occupation. Closer to home, Deutsche Bahn's withdrawal from the project to lay a railway line between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem should have caused a shock. But here, we prefer to avoid reality.
Because of its blindness and imperviousness, Israel is gradually turning from a source of pride and an object of admiration into a nuisance, if not an object of outright hostility.
This is how, with our own hands, we turned the problem of the occupation into an issue for the entire Western world, and the Palestinians into the West's proteges: Faced with an occupying power that is simultaneously unresponsive and self-righteous, the West feels moral and political responsibility for the Palestinians' fate, just as in the past, Western public opinion felt deep sympathy for the Jewish state.
This feeling of responsibility has increased in recent years, after it became clear that the Israeli right has no intention of responding to Palestinian demands for freedom and independence. Under the guise of security considerations and the war on terror hides the real, ideological reason: In the right's view, recognizing the equal national rights of the Palestinians means forgoing exclusive Jewish ownership of the Land of Israel. From the point of view of members of the Israeli rejectionist front, recognizing the equality of Jewish and Arab rights on both sides of the Green Line is tantamount to betraying Jewish history.
But since the number of people who are still prepared to buy an argument of this kind is diminishing worldwide, Israel is on a collision course with all our allies and supporters. And at the end of this road, it is liable to become a pariah state.
quarta-feira, 20 de abril de 2011
ILLEGAL THEFT OF OLIVE TREES MUST BE STOPPED
For around a decade now, illegal trade in ancient olive trees - including uprooting, stealing and smuggling them from the West Bank into Israel - has reportedly been flourishing.
20.04.2011, Haaretz Editorial
The immoral wealthy have a new and tasteless toy: ancient olive trees adorning the gardens of their villas.
According to an investigative report by journalist Maya Zinshtein published in the Haaretz Hebrew edition on Monday, for around a decade now, illegal trade in ancient olive trees - including uprooting, stealing and smuggling them from the West Bank into Israel - has been flourishing.
It is a market worth millions of shekels a year, in which a single tree can command tens of thousands of shekels. The Haaretz report uncovered suspicions of criminal activities in this regard, along with an ugly greediness for pet trees that has nothing to do with the love of the land and its arboreal species.
Olive trees, one of the most beautiful and symbolic hallmarks of the land of Israel, have also become a status symbol for the upper thousandth percentile of the population. As a result, they are being uprooted from their natural surroundings, where they should have remained planted forever, ruining the landscape on both sides of the Green Line.
It is illegal to uproot and transport ancient trees without authorization. Many trees have been stolen from their owners in the territories, and in other cases, heavy pressure is brought to bear on Palestinian farmers to sell their trees, taking advantage of their powerlessness and making huge profits at their expense.
The government department in charge of enforcing the law pertaining to flora and fauna is partially paralyzed; a senior member of its staff owns a nursery, has a criminal record, and is suspected of taking bribes and of illegal trade in trees.
The state comptroller intends to soon publish a report on this department. But beyond the criminal nature of this commerce, the environmental and public aspects of this scandal cannot be ignored.
Uprooting ancient olive trees, which have been planted for centuries in public areas and have been an inseparable part of the scenery of the Galilee and the West Bank, and moving them to the private gardens of wealthy homeowners, rides roughshod over the landscape and heritage of this country.
Uprooting trees that farmers have tended for centuries and moving them to homes whose owners have no relationship to the land or to agriculture, is infuriating and improper. It is incumbent on the Agriculture Ministry and the Civil Administration to take immediate action to stop the theft of trees and the destruction of the landscape.
20.04.2011, Haaretz Editorial
The immoral wealthy have a new and tasteless toy: ancient olive trees adorning the gardens of their villas.
According to an investigative report by journalist Maya Zinshtein published in the Haaretz Hebrew edition on Monday, for around a decade now, illegal trade in ancient olive trees - including uprooting, stealing and smuggling them from the West Bank into Israel - has been flourishing.
It is a market worth millions of shekels a year, in which a single tree can command tens of thousands of shekels. The Haaretz report uncovered suspicions of criminal activities in this regard, along with an ugly greediness for pet trees that has nothing to do with the love of the land and its arboreal species.
Olive trees, one of the most beautiful and symbolic hallmarks of the land of Israel, have also become a status symbol for the upper thousandth percentile of the population. As a result, they are being uprooted from their natural surroundings, where they should have remained planted forever, ruining the landscape on both sides of the Green Line.
It is illegal to uproot and transport ancient trees without authorization. Many trees have been stolen from their owners in the territories, and in other cases, heavy pressure is brought to bear on Palestinian farmers to sell their trees, taking advantage of their powerlessness and making huge profits at their expense.
The government department in charge of enforcing the law pertaining to flora and fauna is partially paralyzed; a senior member of its staff owns a nursery, has a criminal record, and is suspected of taking bribes and of illegal trade in trees.
The state comptroller intends to soon publish a report on this department. But beyond the criminal nature of this commerce, the environmental and public aspects of this scandal cannot be ignored.
Uprooting ancient olive trees, which have been planted for centuries in public areas and have been an inseparable part of the scenery of the Galilee and the West Bank, and moving them to the private gardens of wealthy homeowners, rides roughshod over the landscape and heritage of this country.
Uprooting trees that farmers have tended for centuries and moving them to homes whose owners have no relationship to the land or to agriculture, is infuriating and improper. It is incumbent on the Agriculture Ministry and the Civil Administration to take immediate action to stop the theft of trees and the destruction of the landscape.
Assinar:
Comentários (Atom)