April 11, 2012, Shalom Rav http://rabbibrant.com (USA)
A Blog by Rabbi Brant Rosen
Please, please take 30 minutes of your time to watch this presentation by Israeli peace activist, Miko Peled, author of the recently published book, "The General’s Son."
Among other things, Peled’s ideas and convictions carry a profound sense of moral authority because he comes with impeccable Zionist credentials. His grandfather, Avraham Katznelson, was a prominent Zionist leader and signer of the Israeli Declaration of Independence. His father Matti Peled was a major Israeli military leader who fought in the 1948 War of Independence and was an Aluf (“Major-General”) during the 1967 Six-Day War. He later became a scholar of Arabic literature, a leftist politician, and a prominent Israeli advocate of peace talks with the PLO.
Miko is following in his father’s footsteps in more ways than one. In reading his book, it is so clear to me that he is an Israeli through and through and very much a product of his family’s remarkable history. At the same time, he has carried his father’s work of moral witness firmly into the 21st century.
In the video above, he addresses what he considers the fundamental myths of Israeli society: the “Land Without a People for a People Without a Land” myth of 1948, the “War of Survival” myth of 1967, and the myth of “Israeli democracy.” He also speaks eloquently about the moral outrage of the war in Gaza and the issue of Palestinian terror. (Tragically, Peled’s family has first-hand experience with the latter subject: his niece Smadar was killed by a Palestinian suicide bomber in Jerusalem in 1997).
Please watch the clip and send the link on. Moral heroes such as Miko Peled deserve the widest possible audience.
PS: I’m thrilled to be able to say that the publisher of “The General’s Son,” Just World Books, will be soon publishing my book – a curated anthology of “Shalom Rav” posts and comments from 2008-2010. Much more on this soon – stay tuned!
Mostrando postagens com marcador PLO. Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens com marcador PLO. Mostrar todas as postagens
quinta-feira, 12 de abril de 2012
segunda-feira, 9 de abril de 2012
Israel’s dumb Zionist atomic bomb
8 April 2012, Alternative Information Center (AIC) http://www.alternativenews.org (Israel)
Uri Yaakobi-Keller
One of the most recent “achievements” about which the Israeli government brags is the diversion of international attention to Iran and its development of nuclear weapons, a situation perceived as an end of the world by the Israeli mainstream.
It is possible that, to a certain extent, this is indeed an achievement of the Israeli public relations machine, and as evidence the world was a bit more apathetic than usual to last month’s Israeli bombings of Gaza (not that the world is normally so sensitive). However, the overall Israeli position toward Iran, just like its “achievement”, contains the fundamental flaws existing in the overall Israeli perspective.
Zionism, which established and rules Israel, is a not so special national movement in comparison to others like it from the 19th century. Like similar movements, it aspired to establish national hegemony and what has forever guided it is military force and not all sorts of contentions concerning justice or rights. The Zionist explanation, which transformed into Israeli public relations, is that the Holocaust of European Jews occurred as “we were not sufficiently strong to prevent it”.
According to this, the behaviour of the Zionist movement - and the state of Israel which was controlled by parts of the Zionist movement and its supporters - was forever founded on an obsession with power and military rule, all the while ignoring the long-term situation and political implications of Israeli actions.
To this day the Israeli mainstream does not understand what is so bad about the deportation of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in 1948, as numerous other movements and countries in the world did much worse things. On the face of it there is a modicum of truth in this contention; only a few years earlier, at the end of World War II, the deportation of peoples on an ethnic basis was still occurring in Europe itself. What Israel finds difficult to understand is that whilst there were indeed times in which deportations and horrific acts were accepted, today these acts are now defined as “war crimes” and “crimes against humanity” and they are finally considered a barbaric anachronism – so that today not all problems can be solved with the sword.
The Israeli obsession with power and the blindness it inflicts on the Zionist state led Israel to numerous strategic, tactical and political errors in the past. So it was, for example, in Lebanon, where Israel offhandedly declared war against Hizbullah only because it could, and so it was with the strengthening of the Hamas movement by Israel in order to weaken the PLO and Fatah, and so it was with the fundamental Israeli error which led to the current situation.
Decades ago already Israel clarified to the world that it possesses nuclear weapons. The step of attaining nuclear arms appears in the Israeli mainstream as a substantial achievement for the Israeli military power. It is almost pitiful that a majority of Israelis do not understand that as a direct result, the other regional powers also wish to gain similar weapons.
The Americans managed to sufficiently bribe Egypt so it wouldn’t go down this route; this is, of course, before the American puppet regime of Mubarak fell, so who knows what will occur now. Syria was apparently never sufficiently strong and wealthy to develop such weapons. The Saudi power has always been founded on petroleum money and friendship with the United States. Iran, in contrast, is simply doing the most logical thing – if Israel, the most aggressive country in the region for the past six decades, is doing it, there is no reason that Iran will not attempt to attain nuclear bombs (which will, of course, force Egypt and Saudi Arabia to reconsider their previous decision on this matter).
In a recent article in Haaretz, Uri Avnery notes there is no chance that Israel will attack Iran – the United States will not permit it due to the implications of war with Iran on the price of oil, and because Iran’s nuclear weapons are almost a done deal and Israel must begin to get used to the idea. This is almost true. The coming months, with a heating up of the American presidential election campaign and a short time following the November 2012 elections, are the most dangerous period from the perspective of Israeli actions.
While all candidates for the American presidency are competing to be virulently pro-Israeli, Israel traditionally feels the most freedom (whilst ignoring, which is also a tradition, the long-term political implications of its actions). It is not by chance that Operation Cast Lead occurred just a bit less than four years ago – only a few months after the election of a new American president, and that the most deadly attack on Gaza since then is happening now. There is too big of a chance that the two clowns of Netanyahu-Barak, who control Israel, in a typical Zionist move lacking all long-term thought, will decide to attack Iran in order to grasp at Israel’s dying military hegemony in the region.
The implications of such a move will be disastrous for Israel in the best case scenario, and for the entire world in the worst case, and in any event will not prevent the Iranian attainment of nuclear weapons, but will simply delay it. Israeli missed the real opportunity to prevent a nuclear arms race in the Middle East when it decided to develop its own nuclear weapons.
Translated to English by the Alternative Information Center (AIC)
Uri Yaakobi-Keller
One of the most recent “achievements” about which the Israeli government brags is the diversion of international attention to Iran and its development of nuclear weapons, a situation perceived as an end of the world by the Israeli mainstream.
It is possible that, to a certain extent, this is indeed an achievement of the Israeli public relations machine, and as evidence the world was a bit more apathetic than usual to last month’s Israeli bombings of Gaza (not that the world is normally so sensitive). However, the overall Israeli position toward Iran, just like its “achievement”, contains the fundamental flaws existing in the overall Israeli perspective.
Zionism, which established and rules Israel, is a not so special national movement in comparison to others like it from the 19th century. Like similar movements, it aspired to establish national hegemony and what has forever guided it is military force and not all sorts of contentions concerning justice or rights. The Zionist explanation, which transformed into Israeli public relations, is that the Holocaust of European Jews occurred as “we were not sufficiently strong to prevent it”.
According to this, the behaviour of the Zionist movement - and the state of Israel which was controlled by parts of the Zionist movement and its supporters - was forever founded on an obsession with power and military rule, all the while ignoring the long-term situation and political implications of Israeli actions.
To this day the Israeli mainstream does not understand what is so bad about the deportation of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in 1948, as numerous other movements and countries in the world did much worse things. On the face of it there is a modicum of truth in this contention; only a few years earlier, at the end of World War II, the deportation of peoples on an ethnic basis was still occurring in Europe itself. What Israel finds difficult to understand is that whilst there were indeed times in which deportations and horrific acts were accepted, today these acts are now defined as “war crimes” and “crimes against humanity” and they are finally considered a barbaric anachronism – so that today not all problems can be solved with the sword.
The Israeli obsession with power and the blindness it inflicts on the Zionist state led Israel to numerous strategic, tactical and political errors in the past. So it was, for example, in Lebanon, where Israel offhandedly declared war against Hizbullah only because it could, and so it was with the strengthening of the Hamas movement by Israel in order to weaken the PLO and Fatah, and so it was with the fundamental Israeli error which led to the current situation.
Decades ago already Israel clarified to the world that it possesses nuclear weapons. The step of attaining nuclear arms appears in the Israeli mainstream as a substantial achievement for the Israeli military power. It is almost pitiful that a majority of Israelis do not understand that as a direct result, the other regional powers also wish to gain similar weapons.
The Americans managed to sufficiently bribe Egypt so it wouldn’t go down this route; this is, of course, before the American puppet regime of Mubarak fell, so who knows what will occur now. Syria was apparently never sufficiently strong and wealthy to develop such weapons. The Saudi power has always been founded on petroleum money and friendship with the United States. Iran, in contrast, is simply doing the most logical thing – if Israel, the most aggressive country in the region for the past six decades, is doing it, there is no reason that Iran will not attempt to attain nuclear bombs (which will, of course, force Egypt and Saudi Arabia to reconsider their previous decision on this matter).
In a recent article in Haaretz, Uri Avnery notes there is no chance that Israel will attack Iran – the United States will not permit it due to the implications of war with Iran on the price of oil, and because Iran’s nuclear weapons are almost a done deal and Israel must begin to get used to the idea. This is almost true. The coming months, with a heating up of the American presidential election campaign and a short time following the November 2012 elections, are the most dangerous period from the perspective of Israeli actions.
While all candidates for the American presidency are competing to be virulently pro-Israeli, Israel traditionally feels the most freedom (whilst ignoring, which is also a tradition, the long-term political implications of its actions). It is not by chance that Operation Cast Lead occurred just a bit less than four years ago – only a few months after the election of a new American president, and that the most deadly attack on Gaza since then is happening now. There is too big of a chance that the two clowns of Netanyahu-Barak, who control Israel, in a typical Zionist move lacking all long-term thought, will decide to attack Iran in order to grasp at Israel’s dying military hegemony in the region.
The implications of such a move will be disastrous for Israel in the best case scenario, and for the entire world in the worst case, and in any event will not prevent the Iranian attainment of nuclear weapons, but will simply delay it. Israeli missed the real opportunity to prevent a nuclear arms race in the Middle East when it decided to develop its own nuclear weapons.
Translated to English by the Alternative Information Center (AIC)
sexta-feira, 12 de agosto de 2011
How will the tent protest movement respond to gov’t plan to address housing crisis through expanded settlements?
11 August 2011, Mondoweiss http://mondoweiss.net (USA)
Adam Horowitz
The J14 "tent protests" focused on housing and economic issues in Israel continue to grow, and the government is starting to respond. Several commentators, including Joseph Dana on the London Review of Books blog and Abir Kopty here in Mondoweiss, have taken the movement to task for ignoring the occupation and the needs of Palestinians inside Israel even as it professes to focus on social justice issues. Protest organizers have claimed their protest is "apolitical" and have avoided commenting on the occupation out of a desire to maintain a patchwork coalition that represents both elements of the left and right within Israeli Jewish society.
The days of this "strategic ambiguity" however may be coming to an end. Interior Minister Eli Yishai has signed off on the construction of thousands of new settlement units in Jerusalem, half of which are in the occupied territories. Ynet reports:
Sources in the Interior Ministry said that Yishai views the projects as one of the solutions to Jerusalem's housing plight, adding that the recent induction of the National Housing Committees' Law, has allowed for the projects' authorization process to be accelerated.
The article goes on to quote Peace Now as saying the government is "cynically using the current housing crisis in Israel to promote construction in the settlements". True as this may be, the question remains - how will the J14 movement respond?
Adam Horowitz
The J14 "tent protests" focused on housing and economic issues in Israel continue to grow, and the government is starting to respond. Several commentators, including Joseph Dana on the London Review of Books blog and Abir Kopty here in Mondoweiss, have taken the movement to task for ignoring the occupation and the needs of Palestinians inside Israel even as it professes to focus on social justice issues. Protest organizers have claimed their protest is "apolitical" and have avoided commenting on the occupation out of a desire to maintain a patchwork coalition that represents both elements of the left and right within Israeli Jewish society.
The days of this "strategic ambiguity" however may be coming to an end. Interior Minister Eli Yishai has signed off on the construction of thousands of new settlement units in Jerusalem, half of which are in the occupied territories. Ynet reports:
Sources in the Interior Ministry said that Yishai views the projects as one of the solutions to Jerusalem's housing plight, adding that the recent induction of the National Housing Committees' Law, has allowed for the projects' authorization process to be accelerated.
The article goes on to quote Peace Now as saying the government is "cynically using the current housing crisis in Israel to promote construction in the settlements". True as this may be, the question remains - how will the J14 movement respond?
quarta-feira, 15 de junho de 2011
The parameters of change in Egypt’s foreign policy
In place of the old policies which were designed to safeguard the regime's interests, new approaches to the Palestinian question and other regional issues are being drawn up that will reflect Egypt's new voice
13 Jun 2011, Al Ahram Online
Emad Gad
After the ouster of Hosni Mubarak and the formation of Essam Sharaf’s cabinet which brought in Nabil El-Arabi as foreign minister, there has been much talk about core changes in Egypt’s foreign policy. These analyses are based on statements by El-Arabi regarding Egypt’s readiness to restore relations with Iran, and readings of statements by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warning about alterations in Egypt’s foreign policies, as well as signs of these modifications.
Meanwhile, several factors came together to form a picture that is being promoted as an example of the deep nature of these changes in Egyptian foreign policy, as if Egypt has joined the “opposing axis” or is on its way to join the ranks of “snubbed” countries or the camp hostile to the West, such as Iran. These factors include Egypt’s request to revise the price of natural gas exported to Israel, Cairo’s sponsorship of the reconciliation process between Fatah and Hamas and the decision to permanently open the Rafah border crossing starting on 28 May.
A closer look at these claims reveals that these are deliberate statements intended to group elements together to prove actual and expected changes in Egypt’s foreign policy. Let us first deconstruct these elements and discuss Egypt’s foreign policy during Mubarak’s era. Mubarak manipulated Egypt’s foreign policy in the last five years to create a succession scenario for his son Gamal. To this end, he used the results of the Palestinian 2006 parliamentary elections – which brought in Hamas as a majority – to send messages to the West, and the US in particular, asserting that any honest and transparent elections will bring Islamists into power. The people of Egypt are not “mature” enough to exercise democracy, he argued, and allowing political Islam to take over the helm would harm the interests of the West and dissolve the peace treaty with Israel.
Israel’s war against Lebanon also broke out in 2006, and private Egyptian newspapers distributed photos of Hassan Nasrallah, which gave Mubarak another card to play in the plot of succession by saying that Egyptian public opinion is fanatical and could usher in figures who oppose the West and Israel. Therefore, it would be best not to demand democracy or human rights in Egypt until the people become more seasoned.
After that, Mubarak arrived at a pact with the US whereby he was left to his own devices regarding domestic issues, since he knew his people best, particularly how to control them and safeguard US interests and the peace treaty with Israel. In return, Egypt would apply any regional policies dictated by Washington, which indirectly means Israel.
Once Mubarak was removed from power this pact collapsed, and Egyptian foreign policy was liberated from the limitations of the succession project and adopted the policies of a major regional power with a dignity and independence which commands respect and appreciation. Cairo began implementing foreign policies which serve Egypt’s interests, not the interests of the succession scenario and was no longer hostage to it. This is the actual change has that occurred in Egypt’s foreign policy, namely liberation from a pact to sell Egypt’s regional role to serve the succession scenario.
In terms of relations with Israel, this has not officially changed at the core; the main change here is the aspiration of the Egyptian people for a foreign policy that befits revolutionary Egypt an expression of the dignity of an exceptional people. This was met with an expected hostile campaign by Israel, similar to ones which occured whenever the ruler of Egypt changes; it happened when Sadat left and it was especially acute after the overthrow of a regime which was described as “a strategic asset” for Israel.
The issue of Egyptian natural gas going to Israel is a matter of corruption and wasting Egyptian resources. The Egyptian Ministry of Petroleum sold Egypt’s natural gas to the East Mediterranean Gas Company (EMG) owned by Hussein Salem, who managed Mubarak’s finances, and we don’t know at what price the gas was bought or sold to Israel. Egypt’s demand to revise the price of gas exports is legitimate and is not a hostile move against Israel. I doubt Egypt would refuse to sell natural gas to Israel at world prices.
As for Palestinian national reconciliation, change occurred for all parties. Egypt was liberated from the pact of selling Egypt’s regional role for services in the succession project; meanwhile the positions of Hamas and Fatah were transformed after the spirit of Tahrir Square swept through Gaza and Ramallah where demonstrators chanted: “The people demand an end to divisions”. These are the slogans of Tahrir Square which carried a discreet threat to the rulers there, and confirmed the aspirations of the Palestinian people for freedom, democracy and ending divisions.
Hamas revised its position when the head of its Political Bureau refused Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad’s request to condemn anti-regime protests, which are sponsored by the Muslim Brotherhood there. Mishaal refused to denounce his group’s parent-movement and had to find another home for Hamas’s Political Bureau away from Damascus, which has stopped protecting the bureau and its members.
Fatah and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas also altered their position after years of extending his hand in peace to Israel, and was repaid by humiliation and derision for being a weak president who does not have control over the Gaza Strip. Everyone changed, which made the conclusion of the Egyptian proposal possible as it stands. The parties agreed to sign and postponed many problematic issues until the interim period although there is no guarantee they will be resolved.
The natural outcome of this is permanently re-opening the Rafah border crossing, which had been open from 2005 until Hamas took over power in Gaza in June, 2007. In the period that followed, it was open two days a weeks to allow Palestinians through since it is a crossing for individuals not trucks. Abu Mazen no longer objects to opening the border crossing as part of the reconciliation process, and in return for Hamas’s agreement to reconcile and let the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) control negotiations with Israel until a political settlement is reached according to international legitimacy.
This settlement would be proposed to the Palestinian parliament or the Palestinian people in a referendum. Several European countries, such as France, Germany and Britain, understood the deal and welcomed the reconciliation agreement. Washington did not strongly object but asked for more time to look into the matter before commenting, which is a positive sign.
As for Egyptian-Iranian relations, these are too complicated to restore in a short period, because the boycott is not only in Cairo’s hands but is also based on complex ties since the Iranian revolution in 1979. There are dozens of unresolved issues which require a long time to settle, mostly regarding the dynamic of interaction between two regional powers. Revolutionary Egypt’s decision to expel an Iranian diplomat is an example of the deep complications in bilateral relations.
Yes, there are core changes in Egypt’s foreign policy, namely an end to selling Egypt’s regional role for the benefit of the succession scenario. Accordingly, a new foreign policy was drawn to represent a major regional power which wants to restore its influential role based on its capabilities and the implications of such a role. Anyone who understands this transformation will be able to maintain their ties with Egypt, and anyone who does not or insists on misunderstanding will continue to talk about root changes in Egypt’s foreign policy and jeopardise their bilateral relationship with revolutionary Egypt.
13 Jun 2011, Al Ahram Online
Emad Gad
After the ouster of Hosni Mubarak and the formation of Essam Sharaf’s cabinet which brought in Nabil El-Arabi as foreign minister, there has been much talk about core changes in Egypt’s foreign policy. These analyses are based on statements by El-Arabi regarding Egypt’s readiness to restore relations with Iran, and readings of statements by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warning about alterations in Egypt’s foreign policies, as well as signs of these modifications.
Meanwhile, several factors came together to form a picture that is being promoted as an example of the deep nature of these changes in Egyptian foreign policy, as if Egypt has joined the “opposing axis” or is on its way to join the ranks of “snubbed” countries or the camp hostile to the West, such as Iran. These factors include Egypt’s request to revise the price of natural gas exported to Israel, Cairo’s sponsorship of the reconciliation process between Fatah and Hamas and the decision to permanently open the Rafah border crossing starting on 28 May.
A closer look at these claims reveals that these are deliberate statements intended to group elements together to prove actual and expected changes in Egypt’s foreign policy. Let us first deconstruct these elements and discuss Egypt’s foreign policy during Mubarak’s era. Mubarak manipulated Egypt’s foreign policy in the last five years to create a succession scenario for his son Gamal. To this end, he used the results of the Palestinian 2006 parliamentary elections – which brought in Hamas as a majority – to send messages to the West, and the US in particular, asserting that any honest and transparent elections will bring Islamists into power. The people of Egypt are not “mature” enough to exercise democracy, he argued, and allowing political Islam to take over the helm would harm the interests of the West and dissolve the peace treaty with Israel.
Israel’s war against Lebanon also broke out in 2006, and private Egyptian newspapers distributed photos of Hassan Nasrallah, which gave Mubarak another card to play in the plot of succession by saying that Egyptian public opinion is fanatical and could usher in figures who oppose the West and Israel. Therefore, it would be best not to demand democracy or human rights in Egypt until the people become more seasoned.
After that, Mubarak arrived at a pact with the US whereby he was left to his own devices regarding domestic issues, since he knew his people best, particularly how to control them and safeguard US interests and the peace treaty with Israel. In return, Egypt would apply any regional policies dictated by Washington, which indirectly means Israel.
Once Mubarak was removed from power this pact collapsed, and Egyptian foreign policy was liberated from the limitations of the succession project and adopted the policies of a major regional power with a dignity and independence which commands respect and appreciation. Cairo began implementing foreign policies which serve Egypt’s interests, not the interests of the succession scenario and was no longer hostage to it. This is the actual change has that occurred in Egypt’s foreign policy, namely liberation from a pact to sell Egypt’s regional role to serve the succession scenario.
In terms of relations with Israel, this has not officially changed at the core; the main change here is the aspiration of the Egyptian people for a foreign policy that befits revolutionary Egypt an expression of the dignity of an exceptional people. This was met with an expected hostile campaign by Israel, similar to ones which occured whenever the ruler of Egypt changes; it happened when Sadat left and it was especially acute after the overthrow of a regime which was described as “a strategic asset” for Israel.
The issue of Egyptian natural gas going to Israel is a matter of corruption and wasting Egyptian resources. The Egyptian Ministry of Petroleum sold Egypt’s natural gas to the East Mediterranean Gas Company (EMG) owned by Hussein Salem, who managed Mubarak’s finances, and we don’t know at what price the gas was bought or sold to Israel. Egypt’s demand to revise the price of gas exports is legitimate and is not a hostile move against Israel. I doubt Egypt would refuse to sell natural gas to Israel at world prices.
As for Palestinian national reconciliation, change occurred for all parties. Egypt was liberated from the pact of selling Egypt’s regional role for services in the succession project; meanwhile the positions of Hamas and Fatah were transformed after the spirit of Tahrir Square swept through Gaza and Ramallah where demonstrators chanted: “The people demand an end to divisions”. These are the slogans of Tahrir Square which carried a discreet threat to the rulers there, and confirmed the aspirations of the Palestinian people for freedom, democracy and ending divisions.
Hamas revised its position when the head of its Political Bureau refused Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad’s request to condemn anti-regime protests, which are sponsored by the Muslim Brotherhood there. Mishaal refused to denounce his group’s parent-movement and had to find another home for Hamas’s Political Bureau away from Damascus, which has stopped protecting the bureau and its members.
Fatah and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas also altered their position after years of extending his hand in peace to Israel, and was repaid by humiliation and derision for being a weak president who does not have control over the Gaza Strip. Everyone changed, which made the conclusion of the Egyptian proposal possible as it stands. The parties agreed to sign and postponed many problematic issues until the interim period although there is no guarantee they will be resolved.
The natural outcome of this is permanently re-opening the Rafah border crossing, which had been open from 2005 until Hamas took over power in Gaza in June, 2007. In the period that followed, it was open two days a weeks to allow Palestinians through since it is a crossing for individuals not trucks. Abu Mazen no longer objects to opening the border crossing as part of the reconciliation process, and in return for Hamas’s agreement to reconcile and let the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) control negotiations with Israel until a political settlement is reached according to international legitimacy.
This settlement would be proposed to the Palestinian parliament or the Palestinian people in a referendum. Several European countries, such as France, Germany and Britain, understood the deal and welcomed the reconciliation agreement. Washington did not strongly object but asked for more time to look into the matter before commenting, which is a positive sign.
As for Egyptian-Iranian relations, these are too complicated to restore in a short period, because the boycott is not only in Cairo’s hands but is also based on complex ties since the Iranian revolution in 1979. There are dozens of unresolved issues which require a long time to settle, mostly regarding the dynamic of interaction between two regional powers. Revolutionary Egypt’s decision to expel an Iranian diplomat is an example of the deep complications in bilateral relations.
Yes, there are core changes in Egypt’s foreign policy, namely an end to selling Egypt’s regional role for the benefit of the succession scenario. Accordingly, a new foreign policy was drawn to represent a major regional power which wants to restore its influential role based on its capabilities and the implications of such a role. Anyone who understands this transformation will be able to maintain their ties with Egypt, and anyone who does not or insists on misunderstanding will continue to talk about root changes in Egypt’s foreign policy and jeopardise their bilateral relationship with revolutionary Egypt.
segunda-feira, 30 de maio de 2011
ISRAEL’S SIEGE FREED GAZA’S YOUTH
26 May 2011, The Electronic Intifada (USA)
Mohammed Rabah Suliman* (Gaza Strip)
Palestinians were in disbelief over the news of a reconciliation deal between the two largest Palestinian factions, Hamas and Fatah, brokered by Egypt which, meanwhile, repeated that ending the siege is a priority. Palestinian youth living in the besieged Gaza Strip were quick to start envisioning a new life in a Gaza free from both from the political divisions and the siege.
In 2006, Hamas won the Palestinian legislative elections, beating Fatah into second place. Fatah has long dominated the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and controlled the Palestinian Authority since it was created after the 1993 Oslo accords. Hamas is not a member of the PLO.
A year later, a short-lived Palestinian national unity government uniting the factions fell apart amid US-supported efforts to undermine it, and Hamas ousted Fatah from the Gaza Strip in a distressing fierce ground battle.
Ever since, the population of Gaza has been destined to live under severe hermetic siege imposed by Israel along with the former Egyptian government of ousted President Hosni Mubarak.
Plenty of reports were written addressing the humanitarian crisis that resulted from this siege, along with Israel’s aggressive policies toward Palestinian civilians. Solidarity convoys have cascaded into Gaza one after another in an attempt to alleviate the suffering inflicted upon the Palestinians as a result of the siege.
For the youth in Gaza, one thing, however, has been bizarrely disregarded, which is the positive side of Israel’s siege of the Gaza Strip.
Despite its many severely negative results, Israel’s siege of Gaza has offered Palestinian youth a service none had offered before. It offered new paths for us in our struggle for freedom, deepened our patriotic sentiment and finally created an environment that fosters a collective sense of selflessness and cooperation. It has created a young generation that truly cares.
Back in 2006, when Israel’s policies to besiege Gaza were still new, the people of Gaza were still unable to estimate the magnitude of the debacle ahead of them. Shortly after, prices started to shoot up, crossing borders became difficult, ubiquitous power cuts mercilessly dominated every aspect of life.
It was unthinkable, even for the Palestinians in Gaza, that they would be able to carry on with their new life for a long time.
Perhaps that was Israel’s logic. They might have thought: “They won’t be able to tolerate the base life we will force them to live under, we will suffocate them from every direction, we will cause them so much pain to bear. Soon they will blow up from within.”
But we didn’t. And unexpectedly, almost four years since the siege has started, and despite pervasive misery, human suffering and collective punishment, life still goes on.
For us, the youth in Gaza, life under siege was profoundly different. Unable to cope with its oppressiveness, life at first was intolerably tormenting. Anger and frustration were the outcome of our dashed hopes each time we came to realize the fact that ending this siege was anything but foreseeable.
Helpless, we were left to the vast amount of darkness surrounding our minds and bodies. Every now and then, we could escape this suffering momentarily as we loosened ourselves of our oppressive surroundings. This meant spending some time by the Gaza seashore dotted with Israeli warships at night, or at some cafe nearby where the musical bubbling of our water pipes were inescapably mingled with the unnerving hums of a few frenzied power generators.
However, no matter how much we tried to separate ourselves from the political context surrounding us, we couldn’t. We were thrown back into it by the huge extent of misery imposed upon us.
Many of us thus were left with a political mindset which ultimately triggered us into fruit-bearing action.
Plenty of Gaza youth have had an interest in politics, following up on news, reading reports and analyses. Reading has become the last and sole resort when we had nothing else to do. Soon we were demanding more and more books to read.
Reading has struck a new light in the dark; it has blown new winds into the stillness, and added flavor to our humdrum lives. It was too beautiful to resist. Besides reading, many Gaza youth remarkably developed an interest in documenting Israeli atrocities against the Palestinians through writing, blogging, making films and networking. Israel was their interest. Everything that has to do with Israel was worth stopping for; it was a sign of sophisticated interest. On the ground, hyper-activism was largely manifest in the immense variety of activities carried out and administered by youth groups, social movements and networks.
One of the remarkable youth groups newly initiated inside Gaza is the Palestine Youth Advocacy Network “PYAN”— which is also a word in Arabic that could mean exposition, representation, rhetoric or radiance, all of which have to do with the nature of work the team undertakes.
The network defines itself as “a fresh movement towards democratic endeavors in Palestine and breaking misconceptions about the occupied territories through global dialogue and reporting from the ground.” It operates regularly, holding workshops in coordination with international and local institutions with the intention of “[playing] an innovative role in assisting the Palestinian youth get the knowledge and acquire the skills needed to be up to the challenge of advocating their cause and sacred rights in the face of the misinformation imposed by the western mainstream media.”
Samah Saleh, a cofounder of PYAN, told me what role the siege has played in setting up the advocacy network and the abundance of other youth groups:
“The siege has everything to do with the emergence of PYAN. Gaza has been under siege for about four years, quite the same years young Gazans my age [have] been busy attempting to understand the interaction of global, regional and internal politics on their lives. In Gaza, the siege was the elephant in the room and Gazans were on their own, living, defying the siege’s intrusion on their every life, no matter how simple. We formed PYAN to be the platform of Gaza’s youth that addresses their urgent need to bring their stories out of besieged Gaza to the world.”
It isn’t quite appealing to speak of the inhumane siege without focusing on Israel’s crimes against Palestinian civilians. But having already blasted away any cliched representation of ourselves as terrorists, we now refuse to be continuously framed as dying of hunger or retreating to a corner and sitting in the dark. Our ability to turn each suffering into a source of inspiration preserves our dignity and fuels our unstoppable determination.
*Mohammed Rabah Suliman, 21, is a Palestinian student and blogger from Gaza. He studies English Literature at the Islamic University and blogs at Gaza Diaries of Peace and War at http://msuliman.wordpress.com. He can be followed on Twitter at http://twitter.com/#!/imPalestine.
Mohammed Rabah Suliman* (Gaza Strip)
Palestinians were in disbelief over the news of a reconciliation deal between the two largest Palestinian factions, Hamas and Fatah, brokered by Egypt which, meanwhile, repeated that ending the siege is a priority. Palestinian youth living in the besieged Gaza Strip were quick to start envisioning a new life in a Gaza free from both from the political divisions and the siege.
In 2006, Hamas won the Palestinian legislative elections, beating Fatah into second place. Fatah has long dominated the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and controlled the Palestinian Authority since it was created after the 1993 Oslo accords. Hamas is not a member of the PLO.
A year later, a short-lived Palestinian national unity government uniting the factions fell apart amid US-supported efforts to undermine it, and Hamas ousted Fatah from the Gaza Strip in a distressing fierce ground battle.
Ever since, the population of Gaza has been destined to live under severe hermetic siege imposed by Israel along with the former Egyptian government of ousted President Hosni Mubarak.
Plenty of reports were written addressing the humanitarian crisis that resulted from this siege, along with Israel’s aggressive policies toward Palestinian civilians. Solidarity convoys have cascaded into Gaza one after another in an attempt to alleviate the suffering inflicted upon the Palestinians as a result of the siege.
For the youth in Gaza, one thing, however, has been bizarrely disregarded, which is the positive side of Israel’s siege of the Gaza Strip.
Despite its many severely negative results, Israel’s siege of Gaza has offered Palestinian youth a service none had offered before. It offered new paths for us in our struggle for freedom, deepened our patriotic sentiment and finally created an environment that fosters a collective sense of selflessness and cooperation. It has created a young generation that truly cares.
Back in 2006, when Israel’s policies to besiege Gaza were still new, the people of Gaza were still unable to estimate the magnitude of the debacle ahead of them. Shortly after, prices started to shoot up, crossing borders became difficult, ubiquitous power cuts mercilessly dominated every aspect of life.
It was unthinkable, even for the Palestinians in Gaza, that they would be able to carry on with their new life for a long time.
Perhaps that was Israel’s logic. They might have thought: “They won’t be able to tolerate the base life we will force them to live under, we will suffocate them from every direction, we will cause them so much pain to bear. Soon they will blow up from within.”
But we didn’t. And unexpectedly, almost four years since the siege has started, and despite pervasive misery, human suffering and collective punishment, life still goes on.
For us, the youth in Gaza, life under siege was profoundly different. Unable to cope with its oppressiveness, life at first was intolerably tormenting. Anger and frustration were the outcome of our dashed hopes each time we came to realize the fact that ending this siege was anything but foreseeable.
Helpless, we were left to the vast amount of darkness surrounding our minds and bodies. Every now and then, we could escape this suffering momentarily as we loosened ourselves of our oppressive surroundings. This meant spending some time by the Gaza seashore dotted with Israeli warships at night, or at some cafe nearby where the musical bubbling of our water pipes were inescapably mingled with the unnerving hums of a few frenzied power generators.
However, no matter how much we tried to separate ourselves from the political context surrounding us, we couldn’t. We were thrown back into it by the huge extent of misery imposed upon us.
Many of us thus were left with a political mindset which ultimately triggered us into fruit-bearing action.
Plenty of Gaza youth have had an interest in politics, following up on news, reading reports and analyses. Reading has become the last and sole resort when we had nothing else to do. Soon we were demanding more and more books to read.
Reading has struck a new light in the dark; it has blown new winds into the stillness, and added flavor to our humdrum lives. It was too beautiful to resist. Besides reading, many Gaza youth remarkably developed an interest in documenting Israeli atrocities against the Palestinians through writing, blogging, making films and networking. Israel was their interest. Everything that has to do with Israel was worth stopping for; it was a sign of sophisticated interest. On the ground, hyper-activism was largely manifest in the immense variety of activities carried out and administered by youth groups, social movements and networks.
One of the remarkable youth groups newly initiated inside Gaza is the Palestine Youth Advocacy Network “PYAN”— which is also a word in Arabic that could mean exposition, representation, rhetoric or radiance, all of which have to do with the nature of work the team undertakes.
The network defines itself as “a fresh movement towards democratic endeavors in Palestine and breaking misconceptions about the occupied territories through global dialogue and reporting from the ground.” It operates regularly, holding workshops in coordination with international and local institutions with the intention of “[playing] an innovative role in assisting the Palestinian youth get the knowledge and acquire the skills needed to be up to the challenge of advocating their cause and sacred rights in the face of the misinformation imposed by the western mainstream media.”
Samah Saleh, a cofounder of PYAN, told me what role the siege has played in setting up the advocacy network and the abundance of other youth groups:
“The siege has everything to do with the emergence of PYAN. Gaza has been under siege for about four years, quite the same years young Gazans my age [have] been busy attempting to understand the interaction of global, regional and internal politics on their lives. In Gaza, the siege was the elephant in the room and Gazans were on their own, living, defying the siege’s intrusion on their every life, no matter how simple. We formed PYAN to be the platform of Gaza’s youth that addresses their urgent need to bring their stories out of besieged Gaza to the world.”
It isn’t quite appealing to speak of the inhumane siege without focusing on Israel’s crimes against Palestinian civilians. But having already blasted away any cliched representation of ourselves as terrorists, we now refuse to be continuously framed as dying of hunger or retreating to a corner and sitting in the dark. Our ability to turn each suffering into a source of inspiration preserves our dignity and fuels our unstoppable determination.
*Mohammed Rabah Suliman, 21, is a Palestinian student and blogger from Gaza. He studies English Literature at the Islamic University and blogs at Gaza Diaries of Peace and War at http://msuliman.wordpress.com. He can be followed on Twitter at http://twitter.com/#!/imPalestine.
domingo, 22 de maio de 2011
US BOAT TO GAZA IN AGENCE GLOBAL
10 May 2011, Jewish Voice for Peace http://jewishvoiceforpeace.org (USA)
by Huwaida Arraf, Noam Chomsky and Gabriel Schivone*
A year ago this month, Israel shocked the world when it attacked a humanitarian convoy on its way to Gaza in international waters, killing 9 civilians, injuring dozens more, and kidnapping hundreds. Today -- as Hamas and Fatah negotiate internal unity and Egypt moves to permanently open Gaza’s southern border, consequences of the Arab Spring -- the international solidarity movement musters an even greater flotilla of ships to challenge Israel’s illegal actions against the Palestinians. As anticipated, Israel promises to do everything it can to once again stop an organized, nonviolent force of civil society standing with Palestinians in their struggle for equal rights and self-determination.
Threatening to hijack boats in international waters and kill or kidnap passengers is, of course, a serious crime. But Israel’s threats and actual uses of force are nothing new. For decades, Israel has been hijacking international vessels throughout the Mediterranean and kidnapping or killing passengers. To understand the current situation involving civil resistance to Israeli policy, a glance at Israel’s aggressive history in international waters is in order.
In 1976, according to Knesset member Mattiyahu Peled, the Israeli Navy began to capture boats belonging to Lebanese Muslims -- turning them over to Lebanese Christian allies, who killed the owners -- in an effort to abort a movement towards reconciliation that had been arranged between the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Israel.
Then after a prisoner exchange in November 1983, a front-page story in the New York Times mentioned 37 Arab prisoners who had been held at the notorious Ansar prison camp, and who “had been seized recently by the Israeli Navy as they tried to make their way from Cyprus to Tripoli [Lebanon].”
In June, 1984, Israel hijacked a ferryboat operating between Cyprus and Lebanon five miles off the Lebanese coast with a burst of machinegun fire and forced it to Haifa, where nine people were removed and held, including one woman and a schoolboy returning from England for a holiday in Beirut. Two passengers were released two weeks later, while the fate of the others remained unreported.
In its report on the Israeli “interception” (more accurately, hijacking) of the ferryboat, the Times observes that prior to the 1982 war, “the Israeli Navy regularly intercepted ships bound for or leaving ports of Tyre and Sidon in the south and searched them for guerillas,” as usual accepting Israeli claims at face value. Syrian “interception” of civilian Israeli ships on a similar pretext might be regarded a bit differently.
On April 25, 1985, several Palestinians were kidnapped from civilian boats operating between Lebanon and Cyprus and sent to secret destinations in Israel, a fact that became public knowledge (in Israel) when one was interviewed on Israeli television, leading to an appeal to the High Court of Justice for information; presumably there were others, unknown.
In late-July 1985, Israeli gunboats attacked a Honduran-registered cargo ship a mile from the port of Sidon, delivering cement according to its Greek captain, setting it ablaze with 30 shells and wounding civilians in subsequent shore bombardment when militiamen returned the fire. The mainstream press did not even bother to report that the following day Israeli gunboats sank a fishing boat and damaged three others, while a Sidon parliamentarian called on the UN to end U.S.-backed Israeli “piracy.”
It is considered Israel’s prerogative to carry out hijacking of ships and kidnappings, at will -- with the approval of opinion in the United States -- whatever the facts may be.
When a popular nonviolent uprising by Palestinians in the occupied territories began in December 1987, Israel responded with harsh violence, mass beatings and deportations. After Israel ignored a January 1988 United Nations Security Council resolution calling on the state to “ensure the safe and immediate return” of deportees, the PLO organized a Ship of Return for 130 deportees to sail from Cyprus to Israel. More than five hundred international supporters and journalists also intended to sail -- including Israelis who risked arrest for boarding the ship.
Menacing reactions to the ship plans by Israeli heads of state were reported and passed without comment by the major media. Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir called the planned voyage “a declaration of war” -- remarking the ship would be carrying “murderers (and) terrorists” -- while Defense Minister Rabin added that Israel was “compelled not to let [the organizers] achieve their purpose, and we will do that in whatever ways we find.”
Following Israel’s vows to prevent the voyage, the ship was bombed in port before sailing. After the explosion, the Times quoted an Israeli Transport Ministry official who remarked that, should another ship attempt to sail against Israel’s will, “its fate will be the same.”
The next attempt came twenty years later, in August 2008. This time it was the newly formed Free Gaza Movement, a group of international Palestinian solidarity activists, who decided to gather ships to violate Israel’s criminal siege of Gaza, imposed after Hamas was democratically elected in January 2006. Shortly before the ships sailed, leading Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz reported on discussions of defense officials who concluded that “allowing the ships to reach the Gaza Coastline could create a dangerous precedent.”
Despite Israel’s threats to stop the voyage, two small fishing boats, “Free Gaza” and “Liberty,” successfully reached the Gaza coast, becoming the first vessels to reach Gazan shores in over 41 years. The Free Gaza movement would organize four more successful sea voyages to Gaza over the next four months. During and in the months following Israel’s massive 22-day assault on Gaza in December-January 2008-09, which killed more than 1400 people, Israeli naval forces violently thwarted three Free Gaza vessels, culminating with Israel’s massacre of civilians aboard the Gaza Freedom flotilla last May.
Israel has arrested, beaten, gassed, tortured, deported and killed internationals -- essentially a taste of the measures it inflicts daily against the Palestinians. But nothing has succeeded in deterring the international solidarity movement from resisting Israel’s violence and aggression, and nonviolently supporting the Palestinian freedom struggle. Despite the impunity with which Israel operates, thanks to firm U.S. support and participation, civil resistance to Israel’s actions continues to grow exponentially.
International law looks good on paper, but its enforcement requires political will. As the Civil Rights and other social change movements in the United States and elsewhere have shown, citizen action is an important part of creating political will, limited only by the choice to act. People acting together in the name of freedom, human rights, and democracy, can constitute a powerful force that even the most oppressive regimes cannot withstand.
The success of the next flotilla -- and all those to follow -- will largely depend on the will and choice of the international community to resist U.S.-backed Israeli crimes in the occupied territories and on the sea -- and to stand with Palestinians until the death and the suffering ends and a lasting and honorable peace is achieved.
*Huwaida Arraf is the Chair of the Free Gaza Movement and a passenger on Flotilla 2. Noam Chomsky is on the Board of Advisors of the Free Gaza Movement and an Institute Professor of Linguistics and Philosophy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Gabriel Schivone is a passenger on Flotilla 2, an Arizona coordinator of Jewish Voice for Peace, and a member of Students for Justice in Palestine.
by Huwaida Arraf, Noam Chomsky and Gabriel Schivone*
A year ago this month, Israel shocked the world when it attacked a humanitarian convoy on its way to Gaza in international waters, killing 9 civilians, injuring dozens more, and kidnapping hundreds. Today -- as Hamas and Fatah negotiate internal unity and Egypt moves to permanently open Gaza’s southern border, consequences of the Arab Spring -- the international solidarity movement musters an even greater flotilla of ships to challenge Israel’s illegal actions against the Palestinians. As anticipated, Israel promises to do everything it can to once again stop an organized, nonviolent force of civil society standing with Palestinians in their struggle for equal rights and self-determination.
Threatening to hijack boats in international waters and kill or kidnap passengers is, of course, a serious crime. But Israel’s threats and actual uses of force are nothing new. For decades, Israel has been hijacking international vessels throughout the Mediterranean and kidnapping or killing passengers. To understand the current situation involving civil resistance to Israeli policy, a glance at Israel’s aggressive history in international waters is in order.
In 1976, according to Knesset member Mattiyahu Peled, the Israeli Navy began to capture boats belonging to Lebanese Muslims -- turning them over to Lebanese Christian allies, who killed the owners -- in an effort to abort a movement towards reconciliation that had been arranged between the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Israel.
Then after a prisoner exchange in November 1983, a front-page story in the New York Times mentioned 37 Arab prisoners who had been held at the notorious Ansar prison camp, and who “had been seized recently by the Israeli Navy as they tried to make their way from Cyprus to Tripoli [Lebanon].”
In June, 1984, Israel hijacked a ferryboat operating between Cyprus and Lebanon five miles off the Lebanese coast with a burst of machinegun fire and forced it to Haifa, where nine people were removed and held, including one woman and a schoolboy returning from England for a holiday in Beirut. Two passengers were released two weeks later, while the fate of the others remained unreported.
In its report on the Israeli “interception” (more accurately, hijacking) of the ferryboat, the Times observes that prior to the 1982 war, “the Israeli Navy regularly intercepted ships bound for or leaving ports of Tyre and Sidon in the south and searched them for guerillas,” as usual accepting Israeli claims at face value. Syrian “interception” of civilian Israeli ships on a similar pretext might be regarded a bit differently.
On April 25, 1985, several Palestinians were kidnapped from civilian boats operating between Lebanon and Cyprus and sent to secret destinations in Israel, a fact that became public knowledge (in Israel) when one was interviewed on Israeli television, leading to an appeal to the High Court of Justice for information; presumably there were others, unknown.
In late-July 1985, Israeli gunboats attacked a Honduran-registered cargo ship a mile from the port of Sidon, delivering cement according to its Greek captain, setting it ablaze with 30 shells and wounding civilians in subsequent shore bombardment when militiamen returned the fire. The mainstream press did not even bother to report that the following day Israeli gunboats sank a fishing boat and damaged three others, while a Sidon parliamentarian called on the UN to end U.S.-backed Israeli “piracy.”
It is considered Israel’s prerogative to carry out hijacking of ships and kidnappings, at will -- with the approval of opinion in the United States -- whatever the facts may be.
When a popular nonviolent uprising by Palestinians in the occupied territories began in December 1987, Israel responded with harsh violence, mass beatings and deportations. After Israel ignored a January 1988 United Nations Security Council resolution calling on the state to “ensure the safe and immediate return” of deportees, the PLO organized a Ship of Return for 130 deportees to sail from Cyprus to Israel. More than five hundred international supporters and journalists also intended to sail -- including Israelis who risked arrest for boarding the ship.
Menacing reactions to the ship plans by Israeli heads of state were reported and passed without comment by the major media. Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir called the planned voyage “a declaration of war” -- remarking the ship would be carrying “murderers (and) terrorists” -- while Defense Minister Rabin added that Israel was “compelled not to let [the organizers] achieve their purpose, and we will do that in whatever ways we find.”
Following Israel’s vows to prevent the voyage, the ship was bombed in port before sailing. After the explosion, the Times quoted an Israeli Transport Ministry official who remarked that, should another ship attempt to sail against Israel’s will, “its fate will be the same.”
The next attempt came twenty years later, in August 2008. This time it was the newly formed Free Gaza Movement, a group of international Palestinian solidarity activists, who decided to gather ships to violate Israel’s criminal siege of Gaza, imposed after Hamas was democratically elected in January 2006. Shortly before the ships sailed, leading Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz reported on discussions of defense officials who concluded that “allowing the ships to reach the Gaza Coastline could create a dangerous precedent.”
Despite Israel’s threats to stop the voyage, two small fishing boats, “Free Gaza” and “Liberty,” successfully reached the Gaza coast, becoming the first vessels to reach Gazan shores in over 41 years. The Free Gaza movement would organize four more successful sea voyages to Gaza over the next four months. During and in the months following Israel’s massive 22-day assault on Gaza in December-January 2008-09, which killed more than 1400 people, Israeli naval forces violently thwarted three Free Gaza vessels, culminating with Israel’s massacre of civilians aboard the Gaza Freedom flotilla last May.
Israel has arrested, beaten, gassed, tortured, deported and killed internationals -- essentially a taste of the measures it inflicts daily against the Palestinians. But nothing has succeeded in deterring the international solidarity movement from resisting Israel’s violence and aggression, and nonviolently supporting the Palestinian freedom struggle. Despite the impunity with which Israel operates, thanks to firm U.S. support and participation, civil resistance to Israel’s actions continues to grow exponentially.
International law looks good on paper, but its enforcement requires political will. As the Civil Rights and other social change movements in the United States and elsewhere have shown, citizen action is an important part of creating political will, limited only by the choice to act. People acting together in the name of freedom, human rights, and democracy, can constitute a powerful force that even the most oppressive regimes cannot withstand.
The success of the next flotilla -- and all those to follow -- will largely depend on the will and choice of the international community to resist U.S.-backed Israeli crimes in the occupied territories and on the sea -- and to stand with Palestinians until the death and the suffering ends and a lasting and honorable peace is achieved.
*Huwaida Arraf is the Chair of the Free Gaza Movement and a passenger on Flotilla 2. Noam Chomsky is on the Board of Advisors of the Free Gaza Movement and an Institute Professor of Linguistics and Philosophy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Gabriel Schivone is a passenger on Flotilla 2, an Arizona coordinator of Jewish Voice for Peace, and a member of Students for Justice in Palestine.
terça-feira, 10 de maio de 2011
Over 300 Palestinians, Israelis Meet in Historic Conference in Hebron
8 May 2011, The Alternative Information Center (AIC) Israel http://alternativenews.org/english
Over 300 Palestinians and Israelis met in Hebron on Saturday (7 May) in the first ever public conference between Israeli socio-political activists and the Palestinian political parties.
The conference, entitled A Joint Struggle for an End to the Israeli Occupation and Racism, was jointly conducted by the Palestinian Left in Hebron, the Alternative Information Center (AIC) and Tarabut-Hithabrut, a social political movement in Israel.
“This is a historic occasion and a milestone in Palestinian-Israeli relations,” notes Nassar Ibrahim, co-Director of the Alternative Information Center (AIC). “This is the first time in the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that the Palestinian political and social movements invite Israeli social movement activists to jointly conduct a public conference based on a clear political understanding,” Ibrahim adds. “This was not a conference of NGOs but of Palestinian and Israeli activists who wish to build a peace together that is forged from justice and shared values.”
“Hebron is a microcosm of Israeli colonialism and racism, so the decision to invite Israeli activists here is a most significant one,” said Fahmi Shahin, Coordinator of the Permanent Bureau of the National and Political Forces in the Hebron Governate.
Kamal Hmeid, Governor of the Hebron District, welcomed conference participants, greeting the Israeli activists to Hebron and outlining Israeli colonial policies in the city that include settlements in the heart of Hebron, the Separation Wall, ongoing military presence, by-pass roads, checkpoints and closures. Governor Hmeid received strong applause when he noted the hope rendered by the recent Palestinian reconciliation agreement, and when he commended the steadfastness of all Hebron residents who withstand direct, daily attacks on their personal and national rights.
“We were excited and moved to create a joint space of discussion and action together with Palestinian activists from the national movement,” said Marcello Weksler of Tarabut-Hithabrut’s Executive Committee. “We are planning a joint evaluation meeting for next week, during which we will discuss next steps – this conference was the beginning and not the end.”
Israeli activists attending the conference are active in a number of social-political struggles within Israel, fighting for education, culture, work and labour rights, housing, Palestinian minority/national rights, feminism, environment, animal rights and economic justice, amongst others.
“The international community and international solidarity movement should be promoting meetings such as this,” added Ahmad Jaradat from the AIC, a resident of the Hebron district and one of the main forces behind this conference. “Western attempts at normalization through the Oslo process are a proven failure. After so many wasted years of so-called peace talks, isn’t it time to promote a real, sustainable peace between Palestinians and Israelis?”
Conference participants issued a joint statement at the end of the day which emphasized the rights necessary for a just and sustainable peace, the importance of Palestinian unity, support for the Palestinian popular struggle and creation of a democratic Middle East through democratic and popular struggles, the necessity of the democratic and progressive forces within Israel and the importance of a joint Palestinian-Israeli struggle for justice. The complete final statement in English may be viewed here.
Material from the conference, including videos and presentations, will be on the AIC website over the coming several weeks
Over 300 Palestinians and Israelis met in Hebron on Saturday (7 May) in the first ever public conference between Israeli socio-political activists and the Palestinian political parties.
The conference, entitled A Joint Struggle for an End to the Israeli Occupation and Racism, was jointly conducted by the Palestinian Left in Hebron, the Alternative Information Center (AIC) and Tarabut-Hithabrut, a social political movement in Israel.
“This is a historic occasion and a milestone in Palestinian-Israeli relations,” notes Nassar Ibrahim, co-Director of the Alternative Information Center (AIC). “This is the first time in the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that the Palestinian political and social movements invite Israeli social movement activists to jointly conduct a public conference based on a clear political understanding,” Ibrahim adds. “This was not a conference of NGOs but of Palestinian and Israeli activists who wish to build a peace together that is forged from justice and shared values.”
“Hebron is a microcosm of Israeli colonialism and racism, so the decision to invite Israeli activists here is a most significant one,” said Fahmi Shahin, Coordinator of the Permanent Bureau of the National and Political Forces in the Hebron Governate.
Kamal Hmeid, Governor of the Hebron District, welcomed conference participants, greeting the Israeli activists to Hebron and outlining Israeli colonial policies in the city that include settlements in the heart of Hebron, the Separation Wall, ongoing military presence, by-pass roads, checkpoints and closures. Governor Hmeid received strong applause when he noted the hope rendered by the recent Palestinian reconciliation agreement, and when he commended the steadfastness of all Hebron residents who withstand direct, daily attacks on their personal and national rights.
“We were excited and moved to create a joint space of discussion and action together with Palestinian activists from the national movement,” said Marcello Weksler of Tarabut-Hithabrut’s Executive Committee. “We are planning a joint evaluation meeting for next week, during which we will discuss next steps – this conference was the beginning and not the end.”
Israeli activists attending the conference are active in a number of social-political struggles within Israel, fighting for education, culture, work and labour rights, housing, Palestinian minority/national rights, feminism, environment, animal rights and economic justice, amongst others.
“The international community and international solidarity movement should be promoting meetings such as this,” added Ahmad Jaradat from the AIC, a resident of the Hebron district and one of the main forces behind this conference. “Western attempts at normalization through the Oslo process are a proven failure. After so many wasted years of so-called peace talks, isn’t it time to promote a real, sustainable peace between Palestinians and Israelis?”
Conference participants issued a joint statement at the end of the day which emphasized the rights necessary for a just and sustainable peace, the importance of Palestinian unity, support for the Palestinian popular struggle and creation of a democratic Middle East through democratic and popular struggles, the necessity of the democratic and progressive forces within Israel and the importance of a joint Palestinian-Israeli struggle for justice. The complete final statement in English may be viewed here.
Material from the conference, including videos and presentations, will be on the AIC website over the coming several weeks
CONCLUDING DECLARATION OF THE CONFERENCE: A JOINT STRUGGLE FOR AN END TO THE OCCUPATION AND RACISM
Sunday, 8 May 2011, the Alternative Information Center (AIC) Israel http://alternativenews.org (Israel)
Towards ending Israeli occupation and the racist policies
Towards a strategy of joint solidarity work to support the struggle of the Palestinian people
1- The preparatory committee concluded the work of the conference under the slogan “A Joint Struggle for an End to the Occupation and Racism” on May 7th, 2011, following the presentations, discussion of the papers and recommendations of those attending the conference.
2 – The conference opened with the Palestinian National Anthem, followed by a moment of silence for the martyrs. The opening session included a welcome by the Alternative Information Center (AIC) and the conference’s preparatory committee, followed by a number of greetings by Hebron’s governor Kamel Hameed, secretary-general of Palestinian People’s Party Bassam Salihi representing Palestinian progressive parties, representative of Tarabut-Hithabrut Johayna Saifi, and a message from Mizrahi Jewish activists to the Arab world.
3 – The conference sessions included the presentation of a number of papers that covered the following dimensions:
- The current political situation: opportunities and challenges
- Popular resistance to the occupation and racism
- The experience of campaigns against the occupation and racism
- The reality and future horizons of the joint struggle against racism and the occupation
4 – The papers, in addition to the discussions that followed by conference members, emphasized the following:
* The Palestinian progressive forces in Hebron, the Alternative Information Center (AIC) and Tarabut-Hithabrut, are partners in the struggle for a free and democratic Middle East, free of all forms of hegemony and colonialism, especially Zionism, as well as of the dictatorial regimes and their oppressive policies and orders. We insist that we are not calling for a “new Middle East,” that is, one shaped by Israeli political and economic control and and subject to international corporations in the service of foreign powers. What we call for is the renewal of the Middle East through its peoples in revolt who are capable of changing current reality and building their future. The current revolutions in the Arab world strengthen our confidence in the power of democratic and popular struggles to build that future.
*A necessary prerequisite for victory of the Palestinian people over the Israeli aggressive enterprise is ending the Palestinian internal division and reinstating national unity. Accordingly, the conference congratulates the conclusion of the national dialogue in Cairo, Egypt last Wednesday (May 4th, 2011), in which an agreement was reached to end internal division and to rebuild Palestinian national unity.
*The conference calls on the Palestinian people to continue to mobilize in support of national dialogue by fortifying national unity and removing any obstacles to the implementation of the Cairo agreement, thus consolidating the common ground of resisting the occupation and colonization and struggling for the creation of a Palestinian independent and sovereign state in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.
* The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is a result of the Zionist colonial enterprise, whose main victim is the Palestinian people, in addition to the Jews who are dependent on it. The main profiteers from this enterprise are, however, the economic, political and military elites in Israel, as well as colonialism and international imperialism. Meanwhile, the peoples are paying the price. It is therefore necessary to resist the Zionist colonial enterprise - the only way to build a just and permanent peace for all.
* In order to end the conflict it is essential to end end the occupation -- to dismantle all settlements, to realize the Palestinian refugees’ legitimate rights according to UN Resolution 194 and to recognize the Palestinian people’s right to full independence. Just and permanent peace goes beyond the solutions to political and military issues; it is based on the putting an end to colonialism, that is, the colonial Israeli occupation in the occupied Palestinian territories, as well as the abolition the colonial order inside Israel and its political, social and cultural manifestations.
* Reinforcing the vast popular struggle is one of the basic tenants for joint struggle against the Israeli occupation, colonialism, settlements and the policies of apartheid. Such a struggle requires the participation of political and social movements, as well as individual activists from inside Israel. In addition, the popular struggle carries profound social and educational value, contributing to strengthening the collective struggle on both the Palestinian and Israeli levels.
* The conference emphasizes its adherence to popular resistance against the occupation and colonization as a legitimate form of struggle with a significant presence of international solidarity activists as well as progressive and democratic Israeli forces. The conference calls on all political forces to direct their energy and activities to serve the goals of popular mobilization. Additionally, the conference emphasizes the complementary relationship between the official and popular efforts in strengthening Palestinian steadfastness through aiding prisoners, martyrs and detainees of popular mobilization, drawing special attention to areas affected by the Separation Wall and settlements through implementating projects for protecting these areas and Palestinian land rights.
* The conference also affirms the position of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. We call for general elections to the PLO’s National Council on the basis of proportional representation, as well as the implementation of reforms that will solidify the leading role of the PLO’s Executive Committee and reinforcing the principle of collective leadership.
* On the occasion of the 63rd anniversary of the Palestinian Nakba, the conference stresses its support of the Palestinian refugees’ right of return to their confiscated homes and properties according to UN Resolution 194, and its refusal to recognize the exclusive Jewish nature of the State of Israel.
* The conference stresses the importance of the democratic and progressive forces inside Israel struggling against the occupation and Zionism, actively struggling and mobilizling for ending the occupation and the policies of expropriation and colonization, and for defending the rights of the Palestinian people. Their role inside Israel consists in working and struggling for defending the rights of all the oppressed and exploited - Arabs and Jews, men and women, viewing such a struggle as an integral part of the process of rejecting all forms of oppression and occupation and an objective condition for liberation and a just peace in the region. Accordingly, one should take account of the political, social and cultural specific conditions in a way that does not contradict the goals and principals of joint struggle.
*The conference calls on international, social and political movements to continue pressuring Israel for complying with international law, as well as exerting pressure on their own governments in order to activate and extend the boycott against Israel, considering it an important weapon in our battle for freedom and independence.
5 – The conference ended by saluting the martyrs, prisoners and all those whose lives were negatively affected by the Israeli occupation. We also salute our people holding steadfastly in Jerusalem, the West Bank, Gaza Strip, within the Green Line and everywhere in exile. We confirm that the path of struggle will continue until we reach our freedom, create the Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, return the refugees and end the occupation, colonization and aggression.
Towards ending Israeli occupation and the racist policies
Towards a strategy of joint solidarity work to support the struggle of the Palestinian people
1- The preparatory committee concluded the work of the conference under the slogan “A Joint Struggle for an End to the Occupation and Racism” on May 7th, 2011, following the presentations, discussion of the papers and recommendations of those attending the conference.
2 – The conference opened with the Palestinian National Anthem, followed by a moment of silence for the martyrs. The opening session included a welcome by the Alternative Information Center (AIC) and the conference’s preparatory committee, followed by a number of greetings by Hebron’s governor Kamel Hameed, secretary-general of Palestinian People’s Party Bassam Salihi representing Palestinian progressive parties, representative of Tarabut-Hithabrut Johayna Saifi, and a message from Mizrahi Jewish activists to the Arab world.
3 – The conference sessions included the presentation of a number of papers that covered the following dimensions:
- The current political situation: opportunities and challenges
- Popular resistance to the occupation and racism
- The experience of campaigns against the occupation and racism
- The reality and future horizons of the joint struggle against racism and the occupation
4 – The papers, in addition to the discussions that followed by conference members, emphasized the following:
* The Palestinian progressive forces in Hebron, the Alternative Information Center (AIC) and Tarabut-Hithabrut, are partners in the struggle for a free and democratic Middle East, free of all forms of hegemony and colonialism, especially Zionism, as well as of the dictatorial regimes and their oppressive policies and orders. We insist that we are not calling for a “new Middle East,” that is, one shaped by Israeli political and economic control and and subject to international corporations in the service of foreign powers. What we call for is the renewal of the Middle East through its peoples in revolt who are capable of changing current reality and building their future. The current revolutions in the Arab world strengthen our confidence in the power of democratic and popular struggles to build that future.
*A necessary prerequisite for victory of the Palestinian people over the Israeli aggressive enterprise is ending the Palestinian internal division and reinstating national unity. Accordingly, the conference congratulates the conclusion of the national dialogue in Cairo, Egypt last Wednesday (May 4th, 2011), in which an agreement was reached to end internal division and to rebuild Palestinian national unity.
*The conference calls on the Palestinian people to continue to mobilize in support of national dialogue by fortifying national unity and removing any obstacles to the implementation of the Cairo agreement, thus consolidating the common ground of resisting the occupation and colonization and struggling for the creation of a Palestinian independent and sovereign state in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.
* The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is a result of the Zionist colonial enterprise, whose main victim is the Palestinian people, in addition to the Jews who are dependent on it. The main profiteers from this enterprise are, however, the economic, political and military elites in Israel, as well as colonialism and international imperialism. Meanwhile, the peoples are paying the price. It is therefore necessary to resist the Zionist colonial enterprise - the only way to build a just and permanent peace for all.
* In order to end the conflict it is essential to end end the occupation -- to dismantle all settlements, to realize the Palestinian refugees’ legitimate rights according to UN Resolution 194 and to recognize the Palestinian people’s right to full independence. Just and permanent peace goes beyond the solutions to political and military issues; it is based on the putting an end to colonialism, that is, the colonial Israeli occupation in the occupied Palestinian territories, as well as the abolition the colonial order inside Israel and its political, social and cultural manifestations.
* Reinforcing the vast popular struggle is one of the basic tenants for joint struggle against the Israeli occupation, colonialism, settlements and the policies of apartheid. Such a struggle requires the participation of political and social movements, as well as individual activists from inside Israel. In addition, the popular struggle carries profound social and educational value, contributing to strengthening the collective struggle on both the Palestinian and Israeli levels.
* The conference emphasizes its adherence to popular resistance against the occupation and colonization as a legitimate form of struggle with a significant presence of international solidarity activists as well as progressive and democratic Israeli forces. The conference calls on all political forces to direct their energy and activities to serve the goals of popular mobilization. Additionally, the conference emphasizes the complementary relationship between the official and popular efforts in strengthening Palestinian steadfastness through aiding prisoners, martyrs and detainees of popular mobilization, drawing special attention to areas affected by the Separation Wall and settlements through implementating projects for protecting these areas and Palestinian land rights.
* The conference also affirms the position of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. We call for general elections to the PLO’s National Council on the basis of proportional representation, as well as the implementation of reforms that will solidify the leading role of the PLO’s Executive Committee and reinforcing the principle of collective leadership.
* On the occasion of the 63rd anniversary of the Palestinian Nakba, the conference stresses its support of the Palestinian refugees’ right of return to their confiscated homes and properties according to UN Resolution 194, and its refusal to recognize the exclusive Jewish nature of the State of Israel.
* The conference stresses the importance of the democratic and progressive forces inside Israel struggling against the occupation and Zionism, actively struggling and mobilizling for ending the occupation and the policies of expropriation and colonization, and for defending the rights of the Palestinian people. Their role inside Israel consists in working and struggling for defending the rights of all the oppressed and exploited - Arabs and Jews, men and women, viewing such a struggle as an integral part of the process of rejecting all forms of oppression and occupation and an objective condition for liberation and a just peace in the region. Accordingly, one should take account of the political, social and cultural specific conditions in a way that does not contradict the goals and principals of joint struggle.
*The conference calls on international, social and political movements to continue pressuring Israel for complying with international law, as well as exerting pressure on their own governments in order to activate and extend the boycott against Israel, considering it an important weapon in our battle for freedom and independence.
5 – The conference ended by saluting the martyrs, prisoners and all those whose lives were negatively affected by the Israeli occupation. We also salute our people holding steadfastly in Jerusalem, the West Bank, Gaza Strip, within the Green Line and everywhere in exile. We confirm that the path of struggle will continue until we reach our freedom, create the Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, return the refugees and end the occupation, colonization and aggression.
Assinar:
Comentários (Atom)