THIS TUESDAY will be the 64th anniversary of a fateful day for our lives
26 November 2011, Gush Shalom גוש שלום http://zope.gush-shalom.org (Israel)
Uri Avnery אורי אבנרי
A day in November. A day to remember.
On November 29, 1947, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted, by 33 votes against 13 (with 10 abstentions), the Palestine Partition Plan.
This event has become a subject of endless debates, misinterpretations and outright falsifications. It may be worthwhile to peel away the myths and see it as it was.
BY THE end of 1947, there were in the country – then officially named Palestine - about 1.2 million Arabs and 635 thousand Jews. The gap between the two population groups had turned into an abyss. Though geographically intertwined, they lived on two different planets. With very few exceptions, they considered each other as mortal enemies.
This was the reality that the UN commission, charged with proposing a solution, found on the ground when it visited the country.
One of the great moments of my life is connected with this UNSCOP (“United Nations Special Committee on Palestine”). On the Carmel mountain chain, near kibbutz Daliah, I was attending the annual folk dance festival. Folk dances played a major role in the new Hebrew culture we were consciously striving to create. Most of these dances were somewhat contrived, even artificial, like many of our efforts, but they reflected the will to create something new, fresh, rooted in the country, entirely different from the Jewish culture of our parents. Some of us spoke about a new “Hebrew nation”.
In a huge natural amphitheater, under a canopy of twinkling summer stars, tens of thousands of young people, boys and girls, had gathered to cheer on the many amateur groups performing on the stage. It was a joyous affair, imbued with camaraderie, radiating feelings of strength and self-confidence.
No one of us could have guessed that within a few months we would meet again in the fields of a deadly war.
In the middle of the performance, an excited voice announced on the loudspeaker that several members of UNSCOP had come to visit. As one, the huge crowd stood up and started to sing the national anthem, Hatikvah (“the Hope”). I never liked this song very much, but at that moment it sounded like a fervent prayer, filling the space, rebounding from the hills of the Carmel. I suppose that almost all of the 6000 Jewish youngsters who gave their lives in the war were assembled for the last time on that evening, singing with profound emotion.
IT WAS in this atmosphere that the members of UNSCOP, representing many different nations, had to find a solution.
As everybody knows, the commission adopted a plan to partition Palestine between an independent “Arab” and an independent “Jewish” state. But that is not the whole story.
Looking at the map of the 1947 partition resolution, one must wonder at the borders. They resemble a puzzle, with Arab pieces and Jewish pieces put together in an impossible patchwork, with Jerusalem and Bethlehem as a separate unit. The borders look crazy. Both states would have been totally indefensible.
The explanation is that the committee did not really envision two totally independent and separate states. The plan explicitly included an economic union. That would have necessitated a very close relationship between the two political entities, something akin to a federation, with open borders and free movement of people and goods. Without it, the borders would have been impossible.
That was a very optimistic scenario. Immediately after the committee’s plan was adopted by the General Assembly, after much cajoling by the Zionist leadership, war broke out with sporadic Arab attacks on Jewish traffic on the vital roads.
When the first shot was fired, the partition plan was dead. The foundation, on which the whole edifice rested, broke apart. No open borders, no economic union, no chance for a union of any kind. Only abyssal, deadly, enmity.
THE PARTITION plan would never have been adopted in the first place if it had not been preceded by a historical event that seemed at the time beyond belief.
The Soviet delegate to the UN, Andrei Gromyko, suddenly made what can only be described as a fiery Zionist speech. He contended that after the terrible suffering of the Jews in the Holocaust, they deserved a state of their own.
To appreciate the utter amazement with which this speech was received, one must remember that until that very moment, Communists and Zionists had been irreconcilable foes. It was not only a clash of ideologies, but also a family affair. In Tzarist Russia, Jews were persecuted by an anti-Semitic government, and young Jews, both male and female, were in the vanguard of all the revolutionary movements.
An idealistic young Jew had the choice between joining the Bolsheviks, the social-democratic Jewish Bund or the Zionists. The competition was fierce and engendered intense mutual hatred. Later, in the Soviet Union, Zionists were mercilessly persecuted. In Palestine, local Communists, Jewish and Arab, were accused of collaborating with the Arab militants who attacked Jewish neighborhoods.
What had brought about this sudden change in Soviet policy? Stalin did not turn from an anti-Semite into a philo-Semite. Far from it. But he was a pragmatist. It was the era of medium-range missiles, which threatened Soviet territory from all sides. Palestine was in practice a British colony and could easily have become a Western missile base, threatening Odessa and beyond. Better a Jewish and an Arab state, than that.
In the following war, almost all my weapons came from the Soviet bloc, mainly from Czechoslovakia. The Soviet Union recognized Israel de jure long before the United States.
The end of this unnatural honeymoon came in the early fifties, when David Ben-Gurion decided to turn Israel into an inseparable part of the Western bloc. At the same time, Stalin recognized the importance of the new pan-Arab nationalism of Gamal Abd-al-Nasser and decided to ride on that wave. His paranoid anti-Semitism came again to the fore. All over Eastern Europe Communist veterans were executed as Zionist-imperialist-Trotskyite spies, and his Jewish doctors were accused of attempting to poison him. (Luckily for them, Stalin died just in time and they were saved.)
TODAY, THE partition resolution is remembered in Israel mainly because of two words: “Jewish state”.
No one in Israel wants to be reminded of the borders of 1947, which gave the Jewish minority in Palestine “only” 55% of the country. (Though half of this consisted of the Negev desert, most of which is almost empty even now.) Nor do Jewish Israelis like to be reminded that almost half the population of the territory allotted to them was Arab.
At the time, the UN resolution was accepted by the Jewish population with overflowing enthusiasm. The photos of the people dancing in the streets of Tel Aviv belong to this day, and not – as is often falsely claimed, to the day the State of Israel was officially founded. (At that time we were in middle of a bloody war and nobody was in the mood for dancing.)
We know now that Ben-Gurion did not dream of accepting the partition plan borders, and even less the Arab population within them. The famous army “Plan Dalet” early in the war was a strategic necessity, but it was also a solution to the two problems: it added to Israel another 22% of the country and it drove the Arab population out. Only a small remnant of the Arab population remained – and by now it has grown to 1.5 million.
But all that is history. What concerned the future are the words “Jewish state”. Israeli rightists, who abhor the partition resolution in any other context, insist that it provides the legal basis to Israel’s right to be recognized as a “Jewish state” – meaning in practice, that the state belongs to all the Jews around the world, but not to its Arab citizens, whose families have been living here for at least 13 centuries, if not far longer (depends who does the counting).
But the UN used the word “Jewish” only for lack of any other definition. During the British Mandate, the two peoples in the country were called in English “Jews” and “Arabs”. But we ourselves spoke about a “Hebrew” State (medina Ivrit). In newspaper clippings of the time, only this term can be seen. People of my age-group remember dozens of demonstrations in which we invariably chanted “Free Immigration – Hebrew State”. The sound of it still rings in our ears.
The UN did not deal with the ideological makeup of the future states. It certainly assumed that they would be democratic, belonging to all their inhabitants. Otherwise they would hardly have drawn borders that left a substantial Arab population in the “Jewish” state.
Israel’s declaration of independence bases itself on the UN resolution. The relevant sentence reads: “…AND ON THE STRENGTH OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY, (WE) HEREBY DECLARE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A JEWISH STATE IN ERETZ-ISRAEL, TO BE KNOWN AS THE STATE OF ISRAEL.”
The ultra-rightists who now dominate the Knesset want to use these words as a pretext for replacing democracy with a doctrine of Jewish nationalist-religious supremacy. A former Shin-Bet chief and present Kadima party MK has submitted a bill that would abolish the equality of the two terms “Jewish” and “democratic” in the official legal doctrine, and state clearly that the “Jewishness” of the state has precedence over its “democratic” character. This would deprive the Arab citizens of any remnant of equality. (At the last moment, in face of the public reaction, the Kadima party compelled him to withdraw the bill.)
THE 1947 partition plan was an exceptionally intelligent document. Its details are obsolete now, but its basic idea is as relevant today as it was 64 years ago: two nations are living in this country, they cannot live together in one state without a continuous civil war, they can live together in two states, the two states must establish close ties between each other.
Ben-Gurion was determined to prevent the founding of the Arab Palestinian state, and with the help of King Abdallah of Transjordan he succeeded in this. All his successors, with the possible exception of Yitzhak Rabin, have followed this line, now more than ever. We have paid – and are still paying – a heavy price for this folly.
On the 64th anniversary of this historic event, we must go back to its basic principle: Israel and Palestine, Two States for Two Peoples.
Mostrando postagens com marcador Rabin. Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens com marcador Rabin. Mostrar todas as postagens
quarta-feira, 30 de novembro de 2011
LOS EUROPEOS CONVOCAN A LOS SUPERMERCADOS Y A LOS GOBIERNOS A DEJAR FUERA DEL MERCADO LOS PRODUCTOS DEL RÉGIMEN DE APARTHEID ISRAELÍ
29 Noviembre 2011, Rebelión http://www.rebelion.org (México)
Declaraciones para el día de acción
Comité Nacional Palestino para el BDS
bdsmovement.net
Traducido para Rebelión por J. M. y revisado por Caty R.
• Los activistas europeos declaran que las importaciones de frutas y hortalizas de Israel facilitan las violaciones de los derechos palestinos y el derecho internacional.
• Más de 60 acciones se desarrollan en 10 países.
Palestina ocupada, 27 de noviembre.- En Europa los defensores de los derechos humanos, sindicalistas, ONG y grupos religiosos llevan a cabo una ola de manifestaciones, actuaciones multitudinarias breves y actos de presión para llamar a que se deje de comerciar con Israel y sus empresas agrícolas de exportación, como Mehadrin y Agrexco, porque son cómplices de las violaciones del derecho internacional y de los derechos de los palestinos.
El programa de las acciones, organizadas bajo el lema Dejar fuera del Menú el Apartheid israelí, coinciden con el Día de Solidaridad con el Pueblo Palestino, el 29 de noviembre, con el objetivo de crear conciencia sobre el papel que las empresas agrícolas de Israel juegan en el robo de tierras y recursos palestinos en territorio palestino ocupado ilegalmente y en la explotación de los trabajadores palestinos.
Las manifestaciones se llevaron a cabo fuera de las sedes principales de las empresas británica y francesa importadoras de la principal exportadora de frutas y vegetales de Israel, Mehadrin. Los productos que se exportan provienen de las colonias ilegales israelíes en territorio palestino ocupado y de la empresa estatal Mekerot, que priva a las comunidades palestinas de agua. Los activistas de Roma organizaron una manifestación nacional por el acceso irrestricto de los palestinos al agua.
Jamal Juma, coordinador de Stop The Wall, la campaña palestina contra el muro del apartheid, que está actualmente trabajando para apoyar a Al Hadidiye, una comunidad de beduinos en el territorio palestino ocupado y que recientemente recibió de las autoridades israelíes una orden de demolición, dijo: "A los residentes de Al Hadidye se les niega el acceso al agua y apenas pueden criar su ganado como consecuencia de ello. En los ilegales asentamientos cercanos de Ro'i y Beqa'ot, la producción agrícola se cultiva con abundancia de agua robada para que Mehadrin y otras empresas exporten sus productos a Europa, y son esas empresas las que se benefician de las demoliciones en Al Hadidye”.
"Las empresas como Mehadrin se benefician y están a menudo directamente involucradas en la continua colonización de tierras palestinas y el robo de nuestros recursos. Comerciar con estas empresas es la forma más importante de apoyo para el régimen de apartheid de Israel sobre el pueblo palestino y hay que acabar con eso", añadió Juma.
Los activistas en Bélgica, Gran Bretaña, Alemania, Suiza, Noruega y Suecia organizaron piquetes en supermercados, pidiendo a los consumidores que boicoteen los productos israelíes que las empresas agrícolas de ese país exportan y a los supermercados que dejen de venderlos. Muchos se centraron en supermercados que funcionan de forma cooperativa y que, tradicionalmente, se considera que tienen estándares éticos más altos que los supermercados comunes.
"Las campañas populares del BDS y la presión pública que resulta de ellas ya han obligado a los supermercados en varios países europeos a poner en práctica las políticas que convocan a evitar la venta de productos de las colonias ilegales de Israel", dijo Awwad Hind, coordinador con los palestinos del Comité Nacional BDS.
"Pero son las empresas agrícolas de exportación de Israel las que tienen la responsabilidad de la complicidad con Israel de las violaciones del derecho internacional, y no los productos de producción individual. Estas empresas, se ha comprobado, engañan a los consumidores sobre el origen de los productos que venden. Es por eso que los activistas están llamando a un cese total al comercio con estas empresas", agregó.
En Bélgica, los activistas llevaron a cabo acciones de presión sobre las oficinas de la Secretaría de Economía, para protestar por la venta en los supermercados belga de productos cultivados en asentamientos ilegales de Israel en territorio palestino ocupado.
"Los gobiernos europeos tienen la obligación de hacer que Israel se responsabilice de sus violaciones del derecho internacional, pero Europa sigue siendo el mayor mercado de los productos agrícolas israelíes, incluidos los productos de los asentamientos ilegales israelíes. La prohibición de comerciar con exportadores de productos agrícolas de Israel estaría en consonancia con las políticas establecidas sobre la ilegalidad de los asentamientos ilegales de Israel", dijo Awwad.
En Gran Bretaña, los activistas también protestaron en las oficinas de las filiales británicas de las empresas agrícolas israelíes, incluidas las que exportan flores, Bickel Flowers y Edom. Junto con su colega Orian, Flowrs Bickel ha adquirido recientemente la decadente compañía de exportación israelí Agrexco, de la cual se ordenó la liquidación después de registrar pérdidas récord y no pagar a sus acreedores. Los activistas dicen que su campaña a escala europea contra la compañía, que incluyó el boicot popular, los piquetes de los supermercados, los bloqueos de las instalaciones de la empresa y grupos de presión, fue un factor importante detrás del colapso de la compañía.
Las acciones se llevaron a cabo como parte de la rápida aparición del Movimiento Palestino para el Boicot, Desinversión y Sanciones (BDS) contra Israel hasta que cumpla con el derecho internacional.
info@bdsmovement.net
Notas
1.- Se puede encontrar un mapa interactivo de todas las acciones en:
http://www.bdsmovement.net/activecamps/take-apartheid-off-the-menu
Para más información ampliada:
http://www.bdsmovement.net/2011/take-apartheid-off-the-menu-8313#.Ts92dXOVtMc
2.- Mehadrin se convirtió en la empresa agrícola de exportación más importante, a partir de la caída de Agrexco. La fuente de los productos son las colonias ilegales, incluyendo Beqa’ot en Cisjordania. Durante las entrevistas con investigadores, los trabajadores palestinos en esas colonias declararon que ganan la miseria de 11 euros diarios. Los envases de las uvas y los dátiles de los asentamientos llevan las etiquetas de “producto de Israel”.
El rol de Mehadrin en la provisión de agua a los agricultores y su relación con la compañía de aguas del Estado de Israel, Mekorot, supone una complicidad directa de la empresa con las políticas discriminatorias en la escasa provisión de agua que determina el Estado. Más sobre Mehadrin en:
http://www.bdsmovement.net/2011/mehadrin-profile-8450#.Ts-BJXOVtMc Para información más detallada de otras empresas de exportación de productos agrícolas ver: http://bit.ly/vIrqLp
3.- Agrexco, la empresa exportadora más antigua de productos agrícolas provenientes de los asentamientos ilegales de Israel, fue alguna vez la responsable del mercado de exportación del 60/70% de los productos de las colonias ilegales. Para más información del impacto de las campañas sobre Agrexco ver: http://www.bdsmovement.net/2011/palestinian-civil-society-welcomes-agrexco-liquidation-calls-for-celebration-of-this-bds-victory-8096#.Ts-CS3OVtMc, http://www.jnews.org.uk/commentary/why-did-agrexco-go-bankrupt
4.- La dominación de Israel sobre el abastecimiento de agua en Israel y en los territorios palestinos ocupados, deja a muchas comunidades palestinas con un mínimo de abastecimiento de agua. De acuerdo con las estadísticas de OECD, los agricultores israelíes utilizan la asombrosa cantidad de 1.127 millones de metros cúbicos de agua por año. Solamente cerca de unos 60 millones de metros cúbicos de agua se destinan a la totalidad de la Autoridad Palestina. OECD (2010), OECD Review of agricultural policies: Israel, 2010.Ver también Amnesty International: Sedientos de Justicia: Acceso de los palestinos al agua, http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE15/028/2009/en
5.- Al Hadidiye es una comunidad palestina de unos 112 habitantes permanentes y unos 130 adicionales que durante los dos meses más fríos retornan a las aldeas cerca de Tobas porque las fuerzas israelíes destruyeron sus hogares y no encontraron necesario construirles refugios alternativos para que puedan protegerse del frio invernal. El jueves 10 de noviembre, las autoridades israelíes hicieron llegar a la comunidad otras nueve órdenes de demolición de 17 estructuras que afectarán a 72 personas, incluyendo mujeres y niños. Las organizaciones palestinas hicieron un llamamiento a quienes apoyan los derechos de los palestinos para que contacten a sus embajadas en Israel interesándolos sobre estas demoliciones. http://stopthewall.org/2011/11/13/al-hadidiye-be-demolished-once-again-halt-new-wave-ethnic-cleansing
Fuente: http://www.bdsmovement.net/2011/europeans-call-apartheid-8493#.TtKtvLL7iRU
Declaraciones para el día de acción
Comité Nacional Palestino para el BDS
bdsmovement.net
Traducido para Rebelión por J. M. y revisado por Caty R.
• Los activistas europeos declaran que las importaciones de frutas y hortalizas de Israel facilitan las violaciones de los derechos palestinos y el derecho internacional.
• Más de 60 acciones se desarrollan en 10 países.
Palestina ocupada, 27 de noviembre.- En Europa los defensores de los derechos humanos, sindicalistas, ONG y grupos religiosos llevan a cabo una ola de manifestaciones, actuaciones multitudinarias breves y actos de presión para llamar a que se deje de comerciar con Israel y sus empresas agrícolas de exportación, como Mehadrin y Agrexco, porque son cómplices de las violaciones del derecho internacional y de los derechos de los palestinos.
El programa de las acciones, organizadas bajo el lema Dejar fuera del Menú el Apartheid israelí, coinciden con el Día de Solidaridad con el Pueblo Palestino, el 29 de noviembre, con el objetivo de crear conciencia sobre el papel que las empresas agrícolas de Israel juegan en el robo de tierras y recursos palestinos en territorio palestino ocupado ilegalmente y en la explotación de los trabajadores palestinos.
Las manifestaciones se llevaron a cabo fuera de las sedes principales de las empresas británica y francesa importadoras de la principal exportadora de frutas y vegetales de Israel, Mehadrin. Los productos que se exportan provienen de las colonias ilegales israelíes en territorio palestino ocupado y de la empresa estatal Mekerot, que priva a las comunidades palestinas de agua. Los activistas de Roma organizaron una manifestación nacional por el acceso irrestricto de los palestinos al agua.
Jamal Juma, coordinador de Stop The Wall, la campaña palestina contra el muro del apartheid, que está actualmente trabajando para apoyar a Al Hadidiye, una comunidad de beduinos en el territorio palestino ocupado y que recientemente recibió de las autoridades israelíes una orden de demolición, dijo: "A los residentes de Al Hadidye se les niega el acceso al agua y apenas pueden criar su ganado como consecuencia de ello. En los ilegales asentamientos cercanos de Ro'i y Beqa'ot, la producción agrícola se cultiva con abundancia de agua robada para que Mehadrin y otras empresas exporten sus productos a Europa, y son esas empresas las que se benefician de las demoliciones en Al Hadidye”.
"Las empresas como Mehadrin se benefician y están a menudo directamente involucradas en la continua colonización de tierras palestinas y el robo de nuestros recursos. Comerciar con estas empresas es la forma más importante de apoyo para el régimen de apartheid de Israel sobre el pueblo palestino y hay que acabar con eso", añadió Juma.
Los activistas en Bélgica, Gran Bretaña, Alemania, Suiza, Noruega y Suecia organizaron piquetes en supermercados, pidiendo a los consumidores que boicoteen los productos israelíes que las empresas agrícolas de ese país exportan y a los supermercados que dejen de venderlos. Muchos se centraron en supermercados que funcionan de forma cooperativa y que, tradicionalmente, se considera que tienen estándares éticos más altos que los supermercados comunes.
"Las campañas populares del BDS y la presión pública que resulta de ellas ya han obligado a los supermercados en varios países europeos a poner en práctica las políticas que convocan a evitar la venta de productos de las colonias ilegales de Israel", dijo Awwad Hind, coordinador con los palestinos del Comité Nacional BDS.
"Pero son las empresas agrícolas de exportación de Israel las que tienen la responsabilidad de la complicidad con Israel de las violaciones del derecho internacional, y no los productos de producción individual. Estas empresas, se ha comprobado, engañan a los consumidores sobre el origen de los productos que venden. Es por eso que los activistas están llamando a un cese total al comercio con estas empresas", agregó.
En Bélgica, los activistas llevaron a cabo acciones de presión sobre las oficinas de la Secretaría de Economía, para protestar por la venta en los supermercados belga de productos cultivados en asentamientos ilegales de Israel en territorio palestino ocupado.
"Los gobiernos europeos tienen la obligación de hacer que Israel se responsabilice de sus violaciones del derecho internacional, pero Europa sigue siendo el mayor mercado de los productos agrícolas israelíes, incluidos los productos de los asentamientos ilegales israelíes. La prohibición de comerciar con exportadores de productos agrícolas de Israel estaría en consonancia con las políticas establecidas sobre la ilegalidad de los asentamientos ilegales de Israel", dijo Awwad.
En Gran Bretaña, los activistas también protestaron en las oficinas de las filiales británicas de las empresas agrícolas israelíes, incluidas las que exportan flores, Bickel Flowers y Edom. Junto con su colega Orian, Flowrs Bickel ha adquirido recientemente la decadente compañía de exportación israelí Agrexco, de la cual se ordenó la liquidación después de registrar pérdidas récord y no pagar a sus acreedores. Los activistas dicen que su campaña a escala europea contra la compañía, que incluyó el boicot popular, los piquetes de los supermercados, los bloqueos de las instalaciones de la empresa y grupos de presión, fue un factor importante detrás del colapso de la compañía.
Las acciones se llevaron a cabo como parte de la rápida aparición del Movimiento Palestino para el Boicot, Desinversión y Sanciones (BDS) contra Israel hasta que cumpla con el derecho internacional.
info@bdsmovement.net
Notas
1.- Se puede encontrar un mapa interactivo de todas las acciones en:
http://www.bdsmovement.net/activecamps/take-apartheid-off-the-menu
Para más información ampliada:
http://www.bdsmovement.net/2011/take-apartheid-off-the-menu-8313#.Ts92dXOVtMc
2.- Mehadrin se convirtió en la empresa agrícola de exportación más importante, a partir de la caída de Agrexco. La fuente de los productos son las colonias ilegales, incluyendo Beqa’ot en Cisjordania. Durante las entrevistas con investigadores, los trabajadores palestinos en esas colonias declararon que ganan la miseria de 11 euros diarios. Los envases de las uvas y los dátiles de los asentamientos llevan las etiquetas de “producto de Israel”.
El rol de Mehadrin en la provisión de agua a los agricultores y su relación con la compañía de aguas del Estado de Israel, Mekorot, supone una complicidad directa de la empresa con las políticas discriminatorias en la escasa provisión de agua que determina el Estado. Más sobre Mehadrin en:
http://www.bdsmovement.net/2011/mehadrin-profile-8450#.Ts-BJXOVtMc Para información más detallada de otras empresas de exportación de productos agrícolas ver: http://bit.ly/vIrqLp
3.- Agrexco, la empresa exportadora más antigua de productos agrícolas provenientes de los asentamientos ilegales de Israel, fue alguna vez la responsable del mercado de exportación del 60/70% de los productos de las colonias ilegales. Para más información del impacto de las campañas sobre Agrexco ver: http://www.bdsmovement.net/2011/palestinian-civil-society-welcomes-agrexco-liquidation-calls-for-celebration-of-this-bds-victory-8096#.Ts-CS3OVtMc, http://www.jnews.org.uk/commentary/why-did-agrexco-go-bankrupt
4.- La dominación de Israel sobre el abastecimiento de agua en Israel y en los territorios palestinos ocupados, deja a muchas comunidades palestinas con un mínimo de abastecimiento de agua. De acuerdo con las estadísticas de OECD, los agricultores israelíes utilizan la asombrosa cantidad de 1.127 millones de metros cúbicos de agua por año. Solamente cerca de unos 60 millones de metros cúbicos de agua se destinan a la totalidad de la Autoridad Palestina. OECD (2010), OECD Review of agricultural policies: Israel, 2010.Ver también Amnesty International: Sedientos de Justicia: Acceso de los palestinos al agua, http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE15/028/2009/en
5.- Al Hadidiye es una comunidad palestina de unos 112 habitantes permanentes y unos 130 adicionales que durante los dos meses más fríos retornan a las aldeas cerca de Tobas porque las fuerzas israelíes destruyeron sus hogares y no encontraron necesario construirles refugios alternativos para que puedan protegerse del frio invernal. El jueves 10 de noviembre, las autoridades israelíes hicieron llegar a la comunidad otras nueve órdenes de demolición de 17 estructuras que afectarán a 72 personas, incluyendo mujeres y niños. Las organizaciones palestinas hicieron un llamamiento a quienes apoyan los derechos de los palestinos para que contacten a sus embajadas en Israel interesándolos sobre estas demoliciones. http://stopthewall.org/2011/11/13/al-hadidiye-be-demolished-once-again-halt-new-wave-ethnic-cleansing
Fuente: http://www.bdsmovement.net/2011/europeans-call-apartheid-8493#.TtKtvLL7iRU
Death threats sent to peace activists
29 November 2011, Communist Party of Israel המפלגה הקומוניסטית הישראלית http://maki.org.il
A 21 year-old man, was arrested again on Sunday night in connection with death threats he sent via e-mail to members of "Peace Now", last Sunday.
The man in question, whose identity cannot be published due to a gag order, was arrested two weeks ago in connection with a bomb threat and an act of vandalism perpetrated against the Peace Now offices in Jerusalem. There have been a rash of fascists attacks – which vandalize Arab mosques, IDF bases or leftwing sites in retaliation for the dismantling of settlements – in recent months.
(At the night of November 7, 2011, fascists and racists slogans and personal threats were sprayed inside the house of Hagit Ofran, the head of Peace Now's "settlements watch" office. A nearby car, which does not belong to Ofran, was also vandalized, most likely because it sported a "Peace Now" sticker/Photo: Activestills)
The man admitted to the offenses during questioning, saying that he “hates Arabs and leftists.” On Sunday, between 3 and 4 p.m., he sent e-mails to numerous Peace Now activists including director Yariv Oppenheimer and Hagit Ofran, the director of the organization’s Settlement Watch program.
To Oppenheimer he wrote, “Today you die.” To Ofran he sent the message “The end is near, I will kill you and all who are close to you.” The e-mails included the man’s name and e-mail address.
Speaking with The Jerusalem Post on Monday, Ofran said that the incident “is part of a wider phenomenon within the current political atmosphere and public discourse.”
“The Knesset and the government, through legislation and public statements, are trying to silence criticism, the left, and the media,” she said. “The message being broadcast is that those opposing the government are not legitimate and this is inspiring these graffiti attacks and death threats.”
In September the racist suspect phoned Oppenheimer and threatened him, telling him he would “put a bullet in your head.” He also left a beeper message to the same effect.
In October he produced 20 posters with the words “Price tag – to kill, to murder and to slaughter all the Arabs,” and “Death to Arabs,” and hung 20 of them around Mevasseret Zion.
He was brought in for questioning by the police on October 31, released, and ordered to remain in his house until November 4. On November 3, he breached the police order and sprayed graffiti on the Peace Now offices in Jerusalem’s German Colony, painting “Death to Arabs” and other slogans in the occupied east Jerusalem neighborhood of Beit Hanina.
Subsequently, on November 6, the suspect again sprayed graffiti on the Peace Now offices and called in a bomb threat that was ultimately proven to be false.
The suspect was indicted on November 17 by the Jerusalem District Attorney’s office on four separate charges, including two counts of issuing threats, one of harassment, two counts of publishing material to incite racial hatred, two counts of damage to private property and one of breaching police orders
"The threat of another political murder exists in Israel", Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch told last week the Knesset. The most infamous political murder in Israeli history took place on November 4, 1995 when then-Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated by a right-wing Jewish extremist after a peace rally in Tel Aviv.
A 21 year-old man, was arrested again on Sunday night in connection with death threats he sent via e-mail to members of "Peace Now", last Sunday.
The man in question, whose identity cannot be published due to a gag order, was arrested two weeks ago in connection with a bomb threat and an act of vandalism perpetrated against the Peace Now offices in Jerusalem. There have been a rash of fascists attacks – which vandalize Arab mosques, IDF bases or leftwing sites in retaliation for the dismantling of settlements – in recent months.
(At the night of November 7, 2011, fascists and racists slogans and personal threats were sprayed inside the house of Hagit Ofran, the head of Peace Now's "settlements watch" office. A nearby car, which does not belong to Ofran, was also vandalized, most likely because it sported a "Peace Now" sticker/Photo: Activestills)
The man admitted to the offenses during questioning, saying that he “hates Arabs and leftists.” On Sunday, between 3 and 4 p.m., he sent e-mails to numerous Peace Now activists including director Yariv Oppenheimer and Hagit Ofran, the director of the organization’s Settlement Watch program.
To Oppenheimer he wrote, “Today you die.” To Ofran he sent the message “The end is near, I will kill you and all who are close to you.” The e-mails included the man’s name and e-mail address.
Speaking with The Jerusalem Post on Monday, Ofran said that the incident “is part of a wider phenomenon within the current political atmosphere and public discourse.”
“The Knesset and the government, through legislation and public statements, are trying to silence criticism, the left, and the media,” she said. “The message being broadcast is that those opposing the government are not legitimate and this is inspiring these graffiti attacks and death threats.”
In September the racist suspect phoned Oppenheimer and threatened him, telling him he would “put a bullet in your head.” He also left a beeper message to the same effect.
In October he produced 20 posters with the words “Price tag – to kill, to murder and to slaughter all the Arabs,” and “Death to Arabs,” and hung 20 of them around Mevasseret Zion.
He was brought in for questioning by the police on October 31, released, and ordered to remain in his house until November 4. On November 3, he breached the police order and sprayed graffiti on the Peace Now offices in Jerusalem’s German Colony, painting “Death to Arabs” and other slogans in the occupied east Jerusalem neighborhood of Beit Hanina.
Subsequently, on November 6, the suspect again sprayed graffiti on the Peace Now offices and called in a bomb threat that was ultimately proven to be false.
The suspect was indicted on November 17 by the Jerusalem District Attorney’s office on four separate charges, including two counts of issuing threats, one of harassment, two counts of publishing material to incite racial hatred, two counts of damage to private property and one of breaching police orders
"The threat of another political murder exists in Israel", Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch told last week the Knesset. The most infamous political murder in Israeli history took place on November 4, 1995 when then-Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated by a right-wing Jewish extremist after a peace rally in Tel Aviv.
sexta-feira, 11 de novembro de 2011
“YOU ARE FED UP?”
12 november 2011, Gush Shalom גוש שלום http://zope.gush-shalom.org (Israel)
Uri Avnery אורי אבנרי
“YOU CAN lie to all of the people some of the time, and to some of the people all of the time, but you cannot lie to all of the people all of the time.”
This slightly altered quotation from Abraham Lincoln has yet to be absorbed by Binyamin Netanyahu. He thinks it doesn't apply to him. Actually, that is the core of his entire political career.
This week, he was given a very instructive lesson. After being treated to dozens of cordial encounters between Netanyahu and Nicholas Sarkozy, Israeli TV viewers got a glimpse of reality. It came in the form of an exchange of views between the presidents of the US and of France.
Sarkozy: “I cannot stand him (Netanyahu). He is a liar!”
Obama: "YOU are fed up with him? I have to deal with him every day!"
That came after it was leaked that Angela Merkel, the German prime minister, told her cabinet that “every word that leaves Netanyahu’s mouth is a lie.”
Which makes it more or less unanimous.
BEFORE PROCEEDING, I must say something about the media angle of this affair.
The dialogue was broadcast live to a group of senior French media people, because somebody forgot to turn the microphone off. A piece of luck of the kind that journalists dream about.
Yet not one of the journalists in the hall published a word about it. They kept it to themselves and only told it to their colleagues, who told it to their friends, one of whom told it to a blogger, who published it.
Why? Because the senior journalists who were present are friends and confidants of the people in power. That’s how they get their scoops. The price is suppressing any news that might hurt or embarrass their sponsors. This means in practice that they become lackeys of the people in power – betraying their elementary democratic duty as servants of the public.
I know this from experience. As an editor of a news magazine, I saw it as my duty (and pleasure) to break these conspiracies of silence. Actually, many of our best scoops were given to us by colleagues from other publications who could not use them themselves for the same reason.
Luckily, with the internet now everywhere, it has become almost impossible to suppress news. Blessed be the online Gods.
A FEW weeks after Yitzhak Rabin was elected Prime Minister (for the second time) in 1992, I met Yasser Arafat in Tunis.
He was, of course, curious about the personality of the newly elected Israeli leader. Knowing that I was meeting him from time to time, he asked what I thought of him.
“He is an honest man,” I replied, and then added: “as much as a politician can be.”
Arafat burst out laughing, and so did everybody in the room, including Mahmoud Abbas and Yasser Abed Rabbo.
Ever since Sir Henry Wotton said, some four centuries ago, that “an ambassador is an honest man sent to lie abroad for the good of his country,” it is generally assumed that diplomats and politicians may be lying, and not only abroad. Some do so only when necessary, some do it often, some, like Netanyahu, do it as a rule.
In spite of the general assumption of mendacity, it is not good for a leader to be branded as a habitual liar. When leaders meet personally, in private and face to face, they are supposed to tell each other the truth, even if not necessarily the whole truth. Some personal trust is of great advantage. If a leader loses it, he loses a precious asset.
Winston Churchill said of one of his predecessors, Stanley Baldwin, that (quoting from memory) “the Right Honorable Gentleman sometimes stumbles upon the truth, but he always hurries on as if nothing has happened.” One of our ministers said about Ariel Sharon that he sometimes tells the truth by mistake. People asked how you could tell when Richard Nixon was lying: “Easy: his lips are moving”.
Rabin was basically an honest man. He hated lying and avoided it as much as he could. Basically he remained a military man and never became a real politician.
LAST WEDNESDAY was the 16th anniversary of his assassination, according to the Hebrew calendar.
The event was marked in Israeli schools by speeches and special lessons. What these citizens of tomorrow learned was that it is very bad to murder a prime minister. And that, more or less, was that.
Not a word about why he was killed. Certainly nothing about the community the assassin belonged to, or what campaign of hatred and incitement led to the murder.
The Ministry of Education is now firmly in the hands of a Likud minister, and one of the most extreme. But the trend is not confined to the education system.
In Israel it is practically impossible to obtain a picture of Rabin shaking the hand of Arafat. Rabin and King Hussein? As many post cards as you might wish. But Rabin’s peace with Jordan was an unimportant matter, like the US peace with Canada. The Oslo agreement, however, was a historic watershed.
Only people branded as “extreme leftists” – one of the worst insults these days – dare to raise the obvious questions about the assassination: Who? Why?
There is tacit agreement that the only person responsible was the actual assassin: Yigal Amir, the son of Yemenite Jews, a former settler and a student of a religious university.
Would he have acted without the blessing of one or more rabbis? Most certainly not.
Amir was led to do what he did by months of intense incitement. An unprecedented campaign of hatred dominated the public sphere. Posters showed Rabin in the uniform of an SS officer. Religious groups publicly condemned him to death in medieval ceremonies. Demonstrators in front of his private home shouted: “With blood and fire / we shall remove Rabin!”
In the most (in)famous demonstration, in the center of Jerusalem, a coffin marked “Rabin” was paraded around, while Netanyahu looked on from a balcony, in the company of other rightist leaders.
And most tellingly: not a single important right-wing or religious voice was raised against this murderous campaign.
By general tacit agreement, nothing of all this was mentioned this week. Why? Because it would not be nice. It would “split the nation”. Honorable citizens do not do this kind of thing.
Rabin himself cannot be acquitted of all blame. After the incredibly courageous act of recognizing the PLO (and thereby the Palestinian people) and shaking hands with Arafat, he did not rush forward to create an irreversible historic fact of peace, but hesitated, dithered, held back and allowed the forces of war and racism to regroup and counter-attack.
When the Kiryat Arba settler Baruch Goldstein carried out his massacre in the “Cave of Machpela”, Rabin had a golden opportunity to clear out the nest of fascist settlers in Hebron. He shrank back from taking on the settlers. The settlers did not shrink back from killing him.
WHAT HAPPENED next? This week a very revealing document was leaked.
It appears that on the day of the assassination, Netanyahu spoke with the American ambassador (and Zionist Jew) Martin Indyk. Netanyahu, remembering his part in the incitement, was obviously in panic. He confided to the ambassador that if elections were to take place immediately, the entire Israeli right-wing would be wiped out.
But Shimon Peres, the new Prime Minister, did not call immediate elections, though several people (including myself) publicly urged him to do so. Netanyahu’s assessment was quite correct – the country was outraged, the right-wing was generally blamed for the assassination, and if elections had taken place, the Right would have been marginalized for many many years. The entire history of Israel would have taken a different turn.
Why did Peres refuse to do so? Because he hated Rabin. He did not want to be elected as the “executor of Rabin’s testament”, but on his own merits.
Unfortunately, the public did not have the same high opinion of these “merits”.
During the next few months, Peres committed every conceivable (and inconceivable) mistake: he approved the killing of a major Hamas militant which led to a flood of deadly suicide bombings all over the country. He attacked Lebanon, which led to the Kafr Kana massacre, and had to withdraw ignominiously. And then he called premature elections after all. In his election campaign, Rabin was not even mentioned. Thus Peres managed to be (narrowly) defeated by Netanyahu.
I once wrote that Peres suffered his most grievous insult just a few minutes before the assassination. Amir was waiting at the foot of the stairs from the tribune, his pistol ready. Peres came down the steps, and the assassin let him pass, like a fisherman contemptuously throwing a small specimen back into the sea. He was waiting for Rabin.
The rest is history.
Uri Avnery אורי אבנרי
“YOU CAN lie to all of the people some of the time, and to some of the people all of the time, but you cannot lie to all of the people all of the time.”
This slightly altered quotation from Abraham Lincoln has yet to be absorbed by Binyamin Netanyahu. He thinks it doesn't apply to him. Actually, that is the core of his entire political career.
This week, he was given a very instructive lesson. After being treated to dozens of cordial encounters between Netanyahu and Nicholas Sarkozy, Israeli TV viewers got a glimpse of reality. It came in the form of an exchange of views between the presidents of the US and of France.
Sarkozy: “I cannot stand him (Netanyahu). He is a liar!”
Obama: "YOU are fed up with him? I have to deal with him every day!"
That came after it was leaked that Angela Merkel, the German prime minister, told her cabinet that “every word that leaves Netanyahu’s mouth is a lie.”
Which makes it more or less unanimous.
BEFORE PROCEEDING, I must say something about the media angle of this affair.
The dialogue was broadcast live to a group of senior French media people, because somebody forgot to turn the microphone off. A piece of luck of the kind that journalists dream about.
Yet not one of the journalists in the hall published a word about it. They kept it to themselves and only told it to their colleagues, who told it to their friends, one of whom told it to a blogger, who published it.
Why? Because the senior journalists who were present are friends and confidants of the people in power. That’s how they get their scoops. The price is suppressing any news that might hurt or embarrass their sponsors. This means in practice that they become lackeys of the people in power – betraying their elementary democratic duty as servants of the public.
I know this from experience. As an editor of a news magazine, I saw it as my duty (and pleasure) to break these conspiracies of silence. Actually, many of our best scoops were given to us by colleagues from other publications who could not use them themselves for the same reason.
Luckily, with the internet now everywhere, it has become almost impossible to suppress news. Blessed be the online Gods.
A FEW weeks after Yitzhak Rabin was elected Prime Minister (for the second time) in 1992, I met Yasser Arafat in Tunis.
He was, of course, curious about the personality of the newly elected Israeli leader. Knowing that I was meeting him from time to time, he asked what I thought of him.
“He is an honest man,” I replied, and then added: “as much as a politician can be.”
Arafat burst out laughing, and so did everybody in the room, including Mahmoud Abbas and Yasser Abed Rabbo.
Ever since Sir Henry Wotton said, some four centuries ago, that “an ambassador is an honest man sent to lie abroad for the good of his country,” it is generally assumed that diplomats and politicians may be lying, and not only abroad. Some do so only when necessary, some do it often, some, like Netanyahu, do it as a rule.
In spite of the general assumption of mendacity, it is not good for a leader to be branded as a habitual liar. When leaders meet personally, in private and face to face, they are supposed to tell each other the truth, even if not necessarily the whole truth. Some personal trust is of great advantage. If a leader loses it, he loses a precious asset.
Winston Churchill said of one of his predecessors, Stanley Baldwin, that (quoting from memory) “the Right Honorable Gentleman sometimes stumbles upon the truth, but he always hurries on as if nothing has happened.” One of our ministers said about Ariel Sharon that he sometimes tells the truth by mistake. People asked how you could tell when Richard Nixon was lying: “Easy: his lips are moving”.
Rabin was basically an honest man. He hated lying and avoided it as much as he could. Basically he remained a military man and never became a real politician.
LAST WEDNESDAY was the 16th anniversary of his assassination, according to the Hebrew calendar.
The event was marked in Israeli schools by speeches and special lessons. What these citizens of tomorrow learned was that it is very bad to murder a prime minister. And that, more or less, was that.
Not a word about why he was killed. Certainly nothing about the community the assassin belonged to, or what campaign of hatred and incitement led to the murder.
The Ministry of Education is now firmly in the hands of a Likud minister, and one of the most extreme. But the trend is not confined to the education system.
In Israel it is practically impossible to obtain a picture of Rabin shaking the hand of Arafat. Rabin and King Hussein? As many post cards as you might wish. But Rabin’s peace with Jordan was an unimportant matter, like the US peace with Canada. The Oslo agreement, however, was a historic watershed.
Only people branded as “extreme leftists” – one of the worst insults these days – dare to raise the obvious questions about the assassination: Who? Why?
There is tacit agreement that the only person responsible was the actual assassin: Yigal Amir, the son of Yemenite Jews, a former settler and a student of a religious university.
Would he have acted without the blessing of one or more rabbis? Most certainly not.
Amir was led to do what he did by months of intense incitement. An unprecedented campaign of hatred dominated the public sphere. Posters showed Rabin in the uniform of an SS officer. Religious groups publicly condemned him to death in medieval ceremonies. Demonstrators in front of his private home shouted: “With blood and fire / we shall remove Rabin!”
In the most (in)famous demonstration, in the center of Jerusalem, a coffin marked “Rabin” was paraded around, while Netanyahu looked on from a balcony, in the company of other rightist leaders.
And most tellingly: not a single important right-wing or religious voice was raised against this murderous campaign.
By general tacit agreement, nothing of all this was mentioned this week. Why? Because it would not be nice. It would “split the nation”. Honorable citizens do not do this kind of thing.
Rabin himself cannot be acquitted of all blame. After the incredibly courageous act of recognizing the PLO (and thereby the Palestinian people) and shaking hands with Arafat, he did not rush forward to create an irreversible historic fact of peace, but hesitated, dithered, held back and allowed the forces of war and racism to regroup and counter-attack.
When the Kiryat Arba settler Baruch Goldstein carried out his massacre in the “Cave of Machpela”, Rabin had a golden opportunity to clear out the nest of fascist settlers in Hebron. He shrank back from taking on the settlers. The settlers did not shrink back from killing him.
WHAT HAPPENED next? This week a very revealing document was leaked.
It appears that on the day of the assassination, Netanyahu spoke with the American ambassador (and Zionist Jew) Martin Indyk. Netanyahu, remembering his part in the incitement, was obviously in panic. He confided to the ambassador that if elections were to take place immediately, the entire Israeli right-wing would be wiped out.
But Shimon Peres, the new Prime Minister, did not call immediate elections, though several people (including myself) publicly urged him to do so. Netanyahu’s assessment was quite correct – the country was outraged, the right-wing was generally blamed for the assassination, and if elections had taken place, the Right would have been marginalized for many many years. The entire history of Israel would have taken a different turn.
Why did Peres refuse to do so? Because he hated Rabin. He did not want to be elected as the “executor of Rabin’s testament”, but on his own merits.
Unfortunately, the public did not have the same high opinion of these “merits”.
During the next few months, Peres committed every conceivable (and inconceivable) mistake: he approved the killing of a major Hamas militant which led to a flood of deadly suicide bombings all over the country. He attacked Lebanon, which led to the Kafr Kana massacre, and had to withdraw ignominiously. And then he called premature elections after all. In his election campaign, Rabin was not even mentioned. Thus Peres managed to be (narrowly) defeated by Netanyahu.
I once wrote that Peres suffered his most grievous insult just a few minutes before the assassination. Amir was waiting at the foot of the stairs from the tribune, his pistol ready. Peres came down the steps, and the assassin let him pass, like a fisherman contemptuously throwing a small specimen back into the sea. He was waiting for Rabin.
The rest is history.
terça-feira, 30 de agosto de 2011
Israeli intellectuals back Palestinian state; Women to march in Qalandia
29 August 2011, Communist Party of Israel המפלגה הקומוניסטית הישראלית http://maki.org.il
A newly established cooperation between Israeli playwright Joshua Sobol and Arab-Palestinian poet in Israel Taha Muhammad Ali has led to a petition calling on intellectuals on both sides to support the foundation of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders.
According to Sobol, the petition – distributed by email in recent days – has been signed by more than100 artists and academics, Jews and Arabs. It says that "the establishment of a Palestinian state within the 1967 border, which will live in peace with Israel, is a crucial interest both for Israel and the Palestinians.
(June 4, 2011 demonstration in Tel-Aviv for a Palestinian state. Photo: Al Ittihad)
"All Arab countries and most of the world's countries support this solution for the conflict. According to the Arab Summit Conference in Beirut in 2002, all Arab countries and 60 Muslim countries would recognize the State of Israel and establish diplomatic relations with it if Israel were to recognize the '67 borders as the borders of just, comprehensive and sustainable peace with the future Palestinian state.
"These borders will gain the recognition of the UN and the countries of the world, as well as international guarantees." Sobol and Muhammad Ali warn in the petition that the ongoing political stalemate will create fertile land for extreme forces, who they say seek to drag the region's people into bloodshed and disastrous wars, which "create destruction, perpetuate backwardness and prevent any option of normalization of life and furthering social justice."
Talking about social justice, the two say that the recent popular protests movements in Arab countries and Israel express the aspirations for normalization of life that will exist in the region in times of peace, which will guarantee the fulfillment of the existential interests of the citizens of Israel and the Palestinian state and allow economic prosperity and social justice for all of the region's nations.
"For all these reasons, we the undersigned welcome the establishment of a Palestinian state within the '67 borders, including east Jerusalem, and call on its leadership and on the Israeli leadership to resume – immediately upon the foundation of the Palestinian state – the negotiations for ending the conflict based on UN resolutions and the international legitimization of a sustainable peace settlement between the two countries."
A women's march to be held in Qalandia checkpoint
Thousands of peace and left-wing women, from Israel and Palestine are expected to march through Qalandia checkpoint in east Jerusalem, Saturday, September 17 at 11 am. Among them Hadash, Communist Party of Israel and Tandi (Women's Democratic Movement in Israel) members, in support of an independent Palestinian state ahead of a declaration of statehood at the UN.
The demonstration will call for recognition of the Palestinian right to an independent state, with Jerusalem as its capital. The demonstration will be held in the two sides of the Qalandia checkpoint, with the participation of the General Union of Palestinian Women activists. March organizers were expecting thousands of Israeli and Palestinian women to participate.
On June 4, some 25,000 people marched through the streets of Tel Aviv in a demonstration calling for the creation of a Palestinian state. Setting out from the city’s central Rabin Square, protesters affiliated with the Hadash, Meretz, Peace Now, the Sheikh Jarrah Solidarity Movement and the Geneva Initiative slowly made their way along an unusually long route to the Tel Aviv Museum of Art, where a rally was held. Speakers included MKs from the Hadash, Meretz, Labor and Kadima parties.
Accompanied by a small but loud amateur marching band composed of youths from the Communist Party, activists carrying Israeli, Palestinian and red flags marched past Dizengoff center, making their presence known with amplified chants of: “Israel and Palestine, two states for two peoples”; “Yes we ‘ken’” (the Hebrew word for “yes”); and “Bibi and Barak, peace isn’t a game,” referring to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu by his nickname.
(in Hebrew and Arabic): http://2states.org.il/independent
A newly established cooperation between Israeli playwright Joshua Sobol and Arab-Palestinian poet in Israel Taha Muhammad Ali has led to a petition calling on intellectuals on both sides to support the foundation of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders.
According to Sobol, the petition – distributed by email in recent days – has been signed by more than100 artists and academics, Jews and Arabs. It says that "the establishment of a Palestinian state within the 1967 border, which will live in peace with Israel, is a crucial interest both for Israel and the Palestinians.
(June 4, 2011 demonstration in Tel-Aviv for a Palestinian state. Photo: Al Ittihad)
"All Arab countries and most of the world's countries support this solution for the conflict. According to the Arab Summit Conference in Beirut in 2002, all Arab countries and 60 Muslim countries would recognize the State of Israel and establish diplomatic relations with it if Israel were to recognize the '67 borders as the borders of just, comprehensive and sustainable peace with the future Palestinian state.
"These borders will gain the recognition of the UN and the countries of the world, as well as international guarantees." Sobol and Muhammad Ali warn in the petition that the ongoing political stalemate will create fertile land for extreme forces, who they say seek to drag the region's people into bloodshed and disastrous wars, which "create destruction, perpetuate backwardness and prevent any option of normalization of life and furthering social justice."
Talking about social justice, the two say that the recent popular protests movements in Arab countries and Israel express the aspirations for normalization of life that will exist in the region in times of peace, which will guarantee the fulfillment of the existential interests of the citizens of Israel and the Palestinian state and allow economic prosperity and social justice for all of the region's nations.
"For all these reasons, we the undersigned welcome the establishment of a Palestinian state within the '67 borders, including east Jerusalem, and call on its leadership and on the Israeli leadership to resume – immediately upon the foundation of the Palestinian state – the negotiations for ending the conflict based on UN resolutions and the international legitimization of a sustainable peace settlement between the two countries."
A women's march to be held in Qalandia checkpoint
Thousands of peace and left-wing women, from Israel and Palestine are expected to march through Qalandia checkpoint in east Jerusalem, Saturday, September 17 at 11 am. Among them Hadash, Communist Party of Israel and Tandi (Women's Democratic Movement in Israel) members, in support of an independent Palestinian state ahead of a declaration of statehood at the UN.
The demonstration will call for recognition of the Palestinian right to an independent state, with Jerusalem as its capital. The demonstration will be held in the two sides of the Qalandia checkpoint, with the participation of the General Union of Palestinian Women activists. March organizers were expecting thousands of Israeli and Palestinian women to participate.
On June 4, some 25,000 people marched through the streets of Tel Aviv in a demonstration calling for the creation of a Palestinian state. Setting out from the city’s central Rabin Square, protesters affiliated with the Hadash, Meretz, Peace Now, the Sheikh Jarrah Solidarity Movement and the Geneva Initiative slowly made their way along an unusually long route to the Tel Aviv Museum of Art, where a rally was held. Speakers included MKs from the Hadash, Meretz, Labor and Kadima parties.
Accompanied by a small but loud amateur marching band composed of youths from the Communist Party, activists carrying Israeli, Palestinian and red flags marched past Dizengoff center, making their presence known with amplified chants of: “Israel and Palestine, two states for two peoples”; “Yes we ‘ken’” (the Hebrew word for “yes”); and “Bibi and Barak, peace isn’t a game,” referring to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu by his nickname.
(in Hebrew and Arabic): http://2states.org.il/independent
quinta-feira, 25 de agosto de 2011
ISRAËL DOIT SORTIR DE LA LEGENDE POUR PASSER AU REEL
24 août 2011, Association France Palestine Solidarité (AFPS) http://www.france-palestine.org (France)
Germain Latour, avocat
On parlera d’Israël en dehors du conflit israélo-arabe quand cet Etat acceptera de sortir de la légende pour tenir son rang dans l’histoire des Nations.
Pour répondre à M. Marek Halter (Le Monde 19/08/11) qu’il soit permis de rappeler (d’appeler à la lecture) et prendre appui sur l’ouvrage de Sylvain Cypel: les Emmurés, la société israélienne dans l’impasse, Paris, La Découverte, 2005. On parlera d’Israël en dehors du conflit israélo-arabe quand cet Etat acceptera de sortir de la légende pour tenir son rang dans l’histoire des Nations. Et l’on sait de tout temps que les légendes nourrissent les impostures ; et donc pour parler, enfin, "autrement" d’Israël il faut que ce dernier accepte de mettre un terme à trois impostures majeures qui empoisonnent sa propre existence: une imposture historique, une imposture nationale et une imposture politique.
Au regard de l’Histoire, il convient de rappeler que la résolution 181 de l’ONU, dès le 29 novembre 1947, recommandait un plan de partage de la Palestine en deux Etats indépendants, l’un "arabe" et l’autre "juif". Dès l‘origine, dans l’esprit de ceux qui ont voulu et contribué à la création de l’Etat d’Israël, ce dernier devait s’inscrire au côté d’un "Etat arabe" à naître qui ne s’écrivait pas encore" palestinien ". En aucun cas, la résolution de l‘ONU n’était une décision octroyant un droit à l’existence d’un Etat juif envers et contre tous. Au mépris insolent de la lettre et de l’esprit de la résolution 181, Israël s’est octroyé dès le départ et d’autorité les terres des "absents" soit environ 60% de son propre territoire, avant de procéder dès juillet 1948 ( !) à l’expulsion de 82% des Palestiniens vivant sur les territoires dévolus à ces derniers par l’ONU mais convoités avant d’être "annexés" par Israël. A l’expulsion s’ajouteront les destructions physiques de 400 sur 500 villages palestiniens. Il fallait une terre "nettoyée" de son passé pour accréditer la légende d’une terre "neuve" originelle. Les accords d’Oslo n’étaient donc qu’une mise en conformité du droit et des faits, dont les gouvernements israéliens successifs depuis l’assassinat de Itzhak Rabin n’ont eu de cesse de parjurer la signature et de remettre en question ce qui était acquis ou accessible...on est toujours trahi (et ici,en outre, tué) par les siens. Voilà pour l’imposture historique.
L’imposture nationale est tout entière contenue dans le fait que l’histoire nationale d’Israël occulte ces faits, et a donc créé et alimenté la "légende" de l’agression "arabe" pour justifier une politique continuelle de conquête de territoires au nom d’une légitime défense pervertie. Cette tromperie délibérée du peuple israélien a conduit ce même peuple à accepter de consentir des sacrifices humains, politiques et financiers hors de proportions avec ce que le droit à l’existence exigeait. Israël n’était pas menacé mais bien menaçant, provoquant l’hostilité régionale dont il se proclamait néanmoins haut et fort la victime. Au fond personne ne contestait les frontières d’origine de l’Etat d’Israël sinon Israël lui-même, et Sylvain Cypel rappelle judicieusement les propos tenus par Ben Gourion dès 1948 sur cette question : "(..) Nous nous emparerons de la Galilée occidentale et des deux côtés de la route vers Jérusalem (alloués par le plan onusien de 1947 à la future Palestine) et tout ça deviendra partie de notre Etat, si l’on en a la force. Alors pourquoi s’engager (sur des frontières)?". Les cartes reproduites se passent de commentaires et disent presque tout du torpillage délibéré du processus de paix par Israël.
Enfin, les responsables israéliens ont pris la responsabilité d’inscrire dans les mentalités une culture d’apartheid. Or cette culture ne discrimine plus désormais seulement les Arabes, mais désormais les juifs entre eux, au sein même de la société civile. Les vagues successives de "nouveaux" arrivants sont de moins en moins intégrés, parfois leur venue a été parfaitement instrumentalisée notamment aux fins de colonisation des territoires occupés, qui demeuraient insuffisamment habités pour légitimer une occupation militaire. Le mouvement "d’indignés" qui réveille la société civile israélienne aujourd’hui est la manifestation citoyenne d’une saturation face à des inégalités croissantes, à des fossés sociaux qu’Israël creuse en son sein, derniers avatars de cette culture d’apartheid qui n’est au fond qu’une perversion du sionisme fondateur...soit une imposture politique que ne veut plus subir (taire?) le peuple israélien.
Les faits étant, par nature, têtus, les hommes obstinés par nécessité et l’avenir compté, il faut que cesse cette intolérable soumission à un "particularisme" d’Israël violation des fondements des Nations Unies, ceux de l’égalité et de la fraternité nécessaire des peuples. L’Autorité palestinienne a fixé un rendez-vous de paix au monde le 20 septembre prochain devant l’ONU, et il serait temps qu’Israël (pour lui-même) saisisse, à cette occasion, le destin qui ne lui est pas contesté : celui de vivre sur une terre faite d’histoire et non plus de légendes, faite par des hommes et non des bourreaux et des victimes, faite pour durer et non seulement résister. A cette seule condition, M. Marek Halter un "Israël juste" sera non plus un rêve – il faut en finir avec la légende - mais un fait en devenir.
publié par le Monde
http://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article...
Germain Latour, avocat
On parlera d’Israël en dehors du conflit israélo-arabe quand cet Etat acceptera de sortir de la légende pour tenir son rang dans l’histoire des Nations.
Pour répondre à M. Marek Halter (Le Monde 19/08/11) qu’il soit permis de rappeler (d’appeler à la lecture) et prendre appui sur l’ouvrage de Sylvain Cypel: les Emmurés, la société israélienne dans l’impasse, Paris, La Découverte, 2005. On parlera d’Israël en dehors du conflit israélo-arabe quand cet Etat acceptera de sortir de la légende pour tenir son rang dans l’histoire des Nations. Et l’on sait de tout temps que les légendes nourrissent les impostures ; et donc pour parler, enfin, "autrement" d’Israël il faut que ce dernier accepte de mettre un terme à trois impostures majeures qui empoisonnent sa propre existence: une imposture historique, une imposture nationale et une imposture politique.
Au regard de l’Histoire, il convient de rappeler que la résolution 181 de l’ONU, dès le 29 novembre 1947, recommandait un plan de partage de la Palestine en deux Etats indépendants, l’un "arabe" et l’autre "juif". Dès l‘origine, dans l’esprit de ceux qui ont voulu et contribué à la création de l’Etat d’Israël, ce dernier devait s’inscrire au côté d’un "Etat arabe" à naître qui ne s’écrivait pas encore" palestinien ". En aucun cas, la résolution de l‘ONU n’était une décision octroyant un droit à l’existence d’un Etat juif envers et contre tous. Au mépris insolent de la lettre et de l’esprit de la résolution 181, Israël s’est octroyé dès le départ et d’autorité les terres des "absents" soit environ 60% de son propre territoire, avant de procéder dès juillet 1948 ( !) à l’expulsion de 82% des Palestiniens vivant sur les territoires dévolus à ces derniers par l’ONU mais convoités avant d’être "annexés" par Israël. A l’expulsion s’ajouteront les destructions physiques de 400 sur 500 villages palestiniens. Il fallait une terre "nettoyée" de son passé pour accréditer la légende d’une terre "neuve" originelle. Les accords d’Oslo n’étaient donc qu’une mise en conformité du droit et des faits, dont les gouvernements israéliens successifs depuis l’assassinat de Itzhak Rabin n’ont eu de cesse de parjurer la signature et de remettre en question ce qui était acquis ou accessible...on est toujours trahi (et ici,en outre, tué) par les siens. Voilà pour l’imposture historique.
L’imposture nationale est tout entière contenue dans le fait que l’histoire nationale d’Israël occulte ces faits, et a donc créé et alimenté la "légende" de l’agression "arabe" pour justifier une politique continuelle de conquête de territoires au nom d’une légitime défense pervertie. Cette tromperie délibérée du peuple israélien a conduit ce même peuple à accepter de consentir des sacrifices humains, politiques et financiers hors de proportions avec ce que le droit à l’existence exigeait. Israël n’était pas menacé mais bien menaçant, provoquant l’hostilité régionale dont il se proclamait néanmoins haut et fort la victime. Au fond personne ne contestait les frontières d’origine de l’Etat d’Israël sinon Israël lui-même, et Sylvain Cypel rappelle judicieusement les propos tenus par Ben Gourion dès 1948 sur cette question : "(..) Nous nous emparerons de la Galilée occidentale et des deux côtés de la route vers Jérusalem (alloués par le plan onusien de 1947 à la future Palestine) et tout ça deviendra partie de notre Etat, si l’on en a la force. Alors pourquoi s’engager (sur des frontières)?". Les cartes reproduites se passent de commentaires et disent presque tout du torpillage délibéré du processus de paix par Israël.
Enfin, les responsables israéliens ont pris la responsabilité d’inscrire dans les mentalités une culture d’apartheid. Or cette culture ne discrimine plus désormais seulement les Arabes, mais désormais les juifs entre eux, au sein même de la société civile. Les vagues successives de "nouveaux" arrivants sont de moins en moins intégrés, parfois leur venue a été parfaitement instrumentalisée notamment aux fins de colonisation des territoires occupés, qui demeuraient insuffisamment habités pour légitimer une occupation militaire. Le mouvement "d’indignés" qui réveille la société civile israélienne aujourd’hui est la manifestation citoyenne d’une saturation face à des inégalités croissantes, à des fossés sociaux qu’Israël creuse en son sein, derniers avatars de cette culture d’apartheid qui n’est au fond qu’une perversion du sionisme fondateur...soit une imposture politique que ne veut plus subir (taire?) le peuple israélien.
Les faits étant, par nature, têtus, les hommes obstinés par nécessité et l’avenir compté, il faut que cesse cette intolérable soumission à un "particularisme" d’Israël violation des fondements des Nations Unies, ceux de l’égalité et de la fraternité nécessaire des peuples. L’Autorité palestinienne a fixé un rendez-vous de paix au monde le 20 septembre prochain devant l’ONU, et il serait temps qu’Israël (pour lui-même) saisisse, à cette occasion, le destin qui ne lui est pas contesté : celui de vivre sur une terre faite d’histoire et non plus de légendes, faite par des hommes et non des bourreaux et des victimes, faite pour durer et non seulement résister. A cette seule condition, M. Marek Halter un "Israël juste" sera non plus un rêve – il faut en finir avec la légende - mais un fait en devenir.
publié par le Monde
http://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article...
segunda-feira, 22 de agosto de 2011
ISRAEL'S SOCIAL PROTESTS ARE ANYTHING BUT DEAD
The smothering trap that successive Israeli governments have put us in for the past 40 years no longer allows us to breathe.
21 August 2011, Haaretz הארץ (Israel)
By Merav Michaeli
The day after Thursday's terror attacks, the media rushed to declare the end of the protest movement due to the security-political agenda that would now take over. As if nothing had happened, as though Israelis had not taken to the streets en masse in order to bring about change. To the media and, of course, to the government, it is as though nothing had changed, as though they would once again set the agenda. They - the government and the media - would remind us of what is really urgent and important.
That is the greatest threat we face. Not the security situation, but the usual thing - more of the same. That regular, completely automatic Israeli drill, mantra-like, as if hypnotized. Emergency meetings of the inner cabinet and the forum of eight senior ministers, the IDF attacks, the IDF kills, demands for an apology, demands for an investigation, funerals, injured, eyewitnesses. Whichever prime minister says for the who-knows-how-many time, "When Israeli civilians are hurt, we respond swiftly and strongly." Some defense minister or other says: "We will strike them decisively and with full force." Some head of the opposition or other says, "This demands action from Israel, we will support the government's actions." More and more of the same thing, repeating itself over and over again, trapping us on an endless merry-go-round, with no way out.
This dead end is one of the main reasons for the great and unprecedented protest movement that is taking place. Even if the word "occupation" is not uttered, even if no one speaks of a Palestinian state, the smothering trap that successive Israeli governments have put us in for the past 40 years no longer allows us to breathe. There is a sense of hopelessness and pointlessness stemming from the knowledge that everything is the same, and only the citizens' situation declines from day to day. There's nothing to look forward to, no prospect for something else in sight.
It is always astonishing to realize that, save the brief episode of the Rabin administration, no government took any step to change Israel's fundamental situation, in terms of security and policy in the region. No government proposed a solution or responded to an offered proposal. In keeping with that, no prime minister gave us hope, none offered a vision of a better life in Israel.
Everyone warned of myriad threats to the state's existence, but no one can think of a different reality. No one drew a vision of peace with the neighboring states; of good neighborly relations and partnerships that lead to fantastic economic growth, an enriching cultural mix and even military cooperation. Yes, yes. Just imagine Israel living in peace with Palestine, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan, with all of them forming a NATO-like alliance, a Middle Eastern Treaty Organization, and together fighting the radical Islamic organizations that threaten us all.
Sounds delusional, utopian, impossible? The truth is that it's not that far off from acceptance of the Arab peace initiative, which includes the normalization by all Arab states of relations with Israel, the creation of a friendly Palestinian state and a peace treaty with Syria. For years, all of these were within reach, and some still are. Add to them the desire to live in peace and with cooperation, and the imaginary picture could be very realistic.
In order to realize such a vision, our politicians must see it. Prof. Dan Ariely, author of "Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions," explains that the brain creates an expectation that is then fulfilled by reality, regardless of the actual reality. For years we have been captives to an expectation of threat and war, which we respond to militantly. Over the years, this vicious cycle has grown increasingly shorter from incident to incident, becoming increasingly destructive to Israeli society and to the state.
The great social protest broke that pattern. The public does not want it any more. It has begun to sketch a new picture of the world. The protest demands a new agenda, one which refuses the axiom that militarism and aggressiveness should be at the top. This agenda also includes a new way of thinking in the world of regional policy. A welfare state is one that does not force its citizens to live under the threat of war and annihilation; a welfare state is one that strives for genuine peace and achieves it. And the demand for such a state is not going away.
21 August 2011, Haaretz הארץ (Israel)
By Merav Michaeli
The day after Thursday's terror attacks, the media rushed to declare the end of the protest movement due to the security-political agenda that would now take over. As if nothing had happened, as though Israelis had not taken to the streets en masse in order to bring about change. To the media and, of course, to the government, it is as though nothing had changed, as though they would once again set the agenda. They - the government and the media - would remind us of what is really urgent and important.
That is the greatest threat we face. Not the security situation, but the usual thing - more of the same. That regular, completely automatic Israeli drill, mantra-like, as if hypnotized. Emergency meetings of the inner cabinet and the forum of eight senior ministers, the IDF attacks, the IDF kills, demands for an apology, demands for an investigation, funerals, injured, eyewitnesses. Whichever prime minister says for the who-knows-how-many time, "When Israeli civilians are hurt, we respond swiftly and strongly." Some defense minister or other says: "We will strike them decisively and with full force." Some head of the opposition or other says, "This demands action from Israel, we will support the government's actions." More and more of the same thing, repeating itself over and over again, trapping us on an endless merry-go-round, with no way out.
This dead end is one of the main reasons for the great and unprecedented protest movement that is taking place. Even if the word "occupation" is not uttered, even if no one speaks of a Palestinian state, the smothering trap that successive Israeli governments have put us in for the past 40 years no longer allows us to breathe. There is a sense of hopelessness and pointlessness stemming from the knowledge that everything is the same, and only the citizens' situation declines from day to day. There's nothing to look forward to, no prospect for something else in sight.
It is always astonishing to realize that, save the brief episode of the Rabin administration, no government took any step to change Israel's fundamental situation, in terms of security and policy in the region. No government proposed a solution or responded to an offered proposal. In keeping with that, no prime minister gave us hope, none offered a vision of a better life in Israel.
Everyone warned of myriad threats to the state's existence, but no one can think of a different reality. No one drew a vision of peace with the neighboring states; of good neighborly relations and partnerships that lead to fantastic economic growth, an enriching cultural mix and even military cooperation. Yes, yes. Just imagine Israel living in peace with Palestine, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan, with all of them forming a NATO-like alliance, a Middle Eastern Treaty Organization, and together fighting the radical Islamic organizations that threaten us all.
Sounds delusional, utopian, impossible? The truth is that it's not that far off from acceptance of the Arab peace initiative, which includes the normalization by all Arab states of relations with Israel, the creation of a friendly Palestinian state and a peace treaty with Syria. For years, all of these were within reach, and some still are. Add to them the desire to live in peace and with cooperation, and the imaginary picture could be very realistic.
In order to realize such a vision, our politicians must see it. Prof. Dan Ariely, author of "Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions," explains that the brain creates an expectation that is then fulfilled by reality, regardless of the actual reality. For years we have been captives to an expectation of threat and war, which we respond to militantly. Over the years, this vicious cycle has grown increasingly shorter from incident to incident, becoming increasingly destructive to Israeli society and to the state.
The great social protest broke that pattern. The public does not want it any more. It has begun to sketch a new picture of the world. The protest demands a new agenda, one which refuses the axiom that militarism and aggressiveness should be at the top. This agenda also includes a new way of thinking in the world of regional policy. A welfare state is one that does not force its citizens to live under the threat of war and annihilation; a welfare state is one that strives for genuine peace and achieves it. And the demand for such a state is not going away.
sábado, 30 de julho de 2011
THE NEW ANTI-SEMITISM
30 July 2011, Gush Shalom גוש שלום http://zope.gush-shalom.org (Israel)
By Uri Avnery
The Nazi Propaganda Minister, Dr. Joseph Goebbels, calls his boss, Adolf Hitler, by hell-phone.
“Mein Führer,” he exclaims excitedly. “News from the world. It seems we were on the right track, after all. Anti-Semitism is conquering Europe!”
“Good!” the Führer says, “That will be the end of the Jews!”
“Hmmm…well…not exactly, mein Führer. It looks as though we chose the wrong Semites. Our heirs, the new Nazis, are going to annihilate the Arabs and all the other Muslims in Europe.” Then, with a chuckle, “After all, there are many more Muslims than Jews to exterminate.”
“But what about the Jews?” Hitler insists.
“You won’t believe this: the new Nazis love Israel, the Jewish State - and Israel loves them!”
THE atrocity committed this week by the Norwegian neo-Nazi – is it an isolated incident? Right-wing extremists all over Europe and the US are already declaiming in unison: “He does not belong to us! He is just a lone individual with a deranged mind! There are crazy people everywhere! You cannot condemn a whole political camp for the deeds of one single person!”
Sounds familiar. Where did we hear this before?
Of course, after the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin.
There is no connection between the Oslo mass-murder and the assassination in Tel Aviv. Or is there?
During the months leading up to Rabin’s murder, a growing hate campaign was orchestrated against him. Almost all the Israeli right-wing groups were competing among themselves to see who could demonize him most effectively.
In one demonstration, a photo-montage of Rabin in the uniform of an [] SS officer was paraded around. On the balcony overlooking this demonstration, Binyamin Netanyahu could be seen applauding wildly, while a coffin marked “Rabin” was paraded below. Religious groups staged a medieval, kabbalistic ceremony, in which Rabin was condemned to death. Senior rabbis took part in the campaign. No right-wing or religious voices were raised in warning.
The actual murder was indeed carried out by a single individual, Yigal Amir, a former settler, the student of a religious university. It is generally assumed that before the deed he consulted with at least one senior rabbi. Like Anders Behring Breivik, the Oslo murderer, he planned his deed carefully, over a long time, and executed it cold-bloodedly. He had no accomplices.
OR HAD he? Were not all the inciters his accomplices? Does not the responsibility rest with all the shameless demagogues, like Netanyahu, who hoped to ride to power on the wave of hatred, fears and prejudice?
As it turned out, their calculations were confirmed. Less than a year after the assassination, Netanyahu indeed came to power. Now the right-wing is ruling Israel, becoming more radical from year to year, and, lately, it seems, from week to week. Outright Fascists now play leading roles in the Knesset.
All this – the result of three shots by a single fanatic, for whom the words of the cynical demagogues were deadly serious.
The latest proposal of our fascists, straight from the mouth of Avigdor Lieberman, is to abrogate Rabin’s crowning achievement: the Oslo agreements. So we come back to Oslo.
WHEN I first heard the news about the Oslo outrage, I was afraid that the perpetrators might be some crazy Muslims. The repercussions would have been terrible. Indeed, within minutes, one stupid Muslim group already boasted that they had carried out this glorious feat. Fortunately, the actual mass-murderer surrendered at the scene of the crime.
He is the prototype of a Nazi anti-Semite of the new wave. His creed consists of white supremacy, Christian fundamentalism, hatred of democracy and European chauvinism, mixed with a virulent hatred of Muslims.
This creed is now sprouting offshoots all over Europe. Small radical groups of the ultra-Right are turning into dynamic political parties, take their seats in Parliaments and even become kingmakers here and there. Countries which always seemed to be models of political sanity suddenly produce fascist rabble-rousers of the most disgusting kind, even worse than the US Tea Party, another offspring of this new Zeitgeist. Avigdor Lieberman is our contribution to this illustrious world-wide league.
One thing almost all these European and American ultra-Rightist groups have in common is their admiration for Israel. In his 1500 page political manifesto, on which he had been working for a long time, the Oslo murderer devoted an entire section to this. He proposed an alliance of the European extreme Right and Israel. For him, Israel is an outpost of Western Civilization in the mortal struggle with barbaric Islam. (Somewhat reminiscent of Theodor Herzl’s promise that the future Jewish State would be an “outpost of Western culture against Asiatic barbarism”?)
Part of the professed philo-Zionism of these Islamophobic groups is, of course, pure make-believe, designed to disguise their neo-Nazi character. If you love Jews, or the Jewish State, you can’t be a Fascist, right? You bet you can! However, I believe that the major part of this adoration of Israel is entirely sincere.
Right-wing Israelis, who are courted by these groups, argue that it is not their fault that all these hate-mongers are attracted to them. On the face of it, that is of course true. Yet one cannot but ask oneself: why are they so attracted? Wherein lies this attraction? Does this not warrant some serious soul-searching?
I FIRST BECAME aware of the gravity of the situation when a friend drew my attention to some German anti-Islamic blogs.
I was shocked to the core. These outpourings are almost verbatim copies of the diatribes of Joseph Goebbels. The same rabble-rousing slogans. The same base allegations. The same demonization. With one little difference: instead of Jews, this time it is Arabs who are undermining Western Civilization, seducing Christian maids, plotting to dominate the world. The Protocols of the Elders of Mecca.
A day after the Oslo events I happened to be watching Aljazeera’s English TV network, one of the best in the world, and saw an interesting program. For a whole hour, the reporter interviewed Italian people in the street about Muslims. The answers were shocking.
Mosques should be forbidden. They are places where Muslims plot to commit crimes. Actually, they don’t need mosques at all – they need only a rug to pray. Muslims come to Italy to destroy Italian culture. They are parasites, spreading drugs, crime and disease. They must be kicked out, to the last man, woman and child.
I always considered Italians easygoing, loveable people. Even during the Holocaust, they behaved better than most other European peoples. Benito Mussolini became a rabid anti-Semite only during the last stages, when he had become totally dependent on Hitler.
Yet here we are, barely 66 years after Italian partisans hanged Mussolini’s body by his feet in a public place in Milan - and a much worse form of anti-Semitism is rampant in the streets of Italy, as in most [or “many”?] other European countries.
OF COURSE, there is a real problem. Muslims are not free of blame for the situation. Their own behavior makes them easy targets. Like the Jews in their time.
Europe is in a quandary. They need the “foreigners” – Muslims and all – to work for them, keep their economy going, pay for the pensions of the old people. If all Muslims were to leave Europe tomorrow morning, the fabric of society in Germany, France, Italy and many other countries would break down.
Yet many Europeans are dismayed when they see these “foreigners”, with their strange languages, mannerisms and clothes crowding their streets, changing the character of many neighborhoods, opening shops, marrying their daughters, competing with them in many ways. It hurts. As a German minister once said: “We brought here workers, and found out that we had brought human beings!”
One can understand these Europeans, up to a point. Immigration causes real problems. The migration from the poor South to the rich North is a phenomenon of the 21st century, a result of the crying inequality among nations. It needs an all-European immigration policy, a dialogue with the minorities about integration or multiculturalism. It won’t be easy.
But this tidal wave of Islamophobia goes far beyond that. Like a Tsunami, it can result in devastation.
MANY OF the Islamophobic parties and groups remind one of the atmosphere of Germany in the early 1920s, when “völkisch” groups and militias were spreading their hateful poison, and an army spy called Adolf Hitler was earning his first laurels as an anti-Semitic orator. They looked unimportant, marginal, even crazy. Many laughed at this man Hitler, the Chaplinesque mustachioed clown.
But the abortive Nazi putsch of 1923 was followed by 1933, when the Nazis took power, and 1939, when Hitler started World War II, and 1942, when the gas chambers were brought into operation.
It is the beginnings which are critical, when political opportunists realize that arousing fear and hatred is the easiest way to fortune and power, when social misfits become nationalist and religious fanatics, when attacking helpless minorities becomes acceptable as legitimate politics, when funny little men turn into monsters.
Is that Dr. Goebbels I hear laughing in hell?
By Uri Avnery
The Nazi Propaganda Minister, Dr. Joseph Goebbels, calls his boss, Adolf Hitler, by hell-phone.
“Mein Führer,” he exclaims excitedly. “News from the world. It seems we were on the right track, after all. Anti-Semitism is conquering Europe!”
“Good!” the Führer says, “That will be the end of the Jews!”
“Hmmm…well…not exactly, mein Führer. It looks as though we chose the wrong Semites. Our heirs, the new Nazis, are going to annihilate the Arabs and all the other Muslims in Europe.” Then, with a chuckle, “After all, there are many more Muslims than Jews to exterminate.”
“But what about the Jews?” Hitler insists.
“You won’t believe this: the new Nazis love Israel, the Jewish State - and Israel loves them!”
THE atrocity committed this week by the Norwegian neo-Nazi – is it an isolated incident? Right-wing extremists all over Europe and the US are already declaiming in unison: “He does not belong to us! He is just a lone individual with a deranged mind! There are crazy people everywhere! You cannot condemn a whole political camp for the deeds of one single person!”
Sounds familiar. Where did we hear this before?
Of course, after the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin.
There is no connection between the Oslo mass-murder and the assassination in Tel Aviv. Or is there?
During the months leading up to Rabin’s murder, a growing hate campaign was orchestrated against him. Almost all the Israeli right-wing groups were competing among themselves to see who could demonize him most effectively.
In one demonstration, a photo-montage of Rabin in the uniform of an [] SS officer was paraded around. On the balcony overlooking this demonstration, Binyamin Netanyahu could be seen applauding wildly, while a coffin marked “Rabin” was paraded below. Religious groups staged a medieval, kabbalistic ceremony, in which Rabin was condemned to death. Senior rabbis took part in the campaign. No right-wing or religious voices were raised in warning.
The actual murder was indeed carried out by a single individual, Yigal Amir, a former settler, the student of a religious university. It is generally assumed that before the deed he consulted with at least one senior rabbi. Like Anders Behring Breivik, the Oslo murderer, he planned his deed carefully, over a long time, and executed it cold-bloodedly. He had no accomplices.
OR HAD he? Were not all the inciters his accomplices? Does not the responsibility rest with all the shameless demagogues, like Netanyahu, who hoped to ride to power on the wave of hatred, fears and prejudice?
As it turned out, their calculations were confirmed. Less than a year after the assassination, Netanyahu indeed came to power. Now the right-wing is ruling Israel, becoming more radical from year to year, and, lately, it seems, from week to week. Outright Fascists now play leading roles in the Knesset.
All this – the result of three shots by a single fanatic, for whom the words of the cynical demagogues were deadly serious.
The latest proposal of our fascists, straight from the mouth of Avigdor Lieberman, is to abrogate Rabin’s crowning achievement: the Oslo agreements. So we come back to Oslo.
WHEN I first heard the news about the Oslo outrage, I was afraid that the perpetrators might be some crazy Muslims. The repercussions would have been terrible. Indeed, within minutes, one stupid Muslim group already boasted that they had carried out this glorious feat. Fortunately, the actual mass-murderer surrendered at the scene of the crime.
He is the prototype of a Nazi anti-Semite of the new wave. His creed consists of white supremacy, Christian fundamentalism, hatred of democracy and European chauvinism, mixed with a virulent hatred of Muslims.
This creed is now sprouting offshoots all over Europe. Small radical groups of the ultra-Right are turning into dynamic political parties, take their seats in Parliaments and even become kingmakers here and there. Countries which always seemed to be models of political sanity suddenly produce fascist rabble-rousers of the most disgusting kind, even worse than the US Tea Party, another offspring of this new Zeitgeist. Avigdor Lieberman is our contribution to this illustrious world-wide league.
One thing almost all these European and American ultra-Rightist groups have in common is their admiration for Israel. In his 1500 page political manifesto, on which he had been working for a long time, the Oslo murderer devoted an entire section to this. He proposed an alliance of the European extreme Right and Israel. For him, Israel is an outpost of Western Civilization in the mortal struggle with barbaric Islam. (Somewhat reminiscent of Theodor Herzl’s promise that the future Jewish State would be an “outpost of Western culture against Asiatic barbarism”?)
Part of the professed philo-Zionism of these Islamophobic groups is, of course, pure make-believe, designed to disguise their neo-Nazi character. If you love Jews, or the Jewish State, you can’t be a Fascist, right? You bet you can! However, I believe that the major part of this adoration of Israel is entirely sincere.
Right-wing Israelis, who are courted by these groups, argue that it is not their fault that all these hate-mongers are attracted to them. On the face of it, that is of course true. Yet one cannot but ask oneself: why are they so attracted? Wherein lies this attraction? Does this not warrant some serious soul-searching?
I FIRST BECAME aware of the gravity of the situation when a friend drew my attention to some German anti-Islamic blogs.
I was shocked to the core. These outpourings are almost verbatim copies of the diatribes of Joseph Goebbels. The same rabble-rousing slogans. The same base allegations. The same demonization. With one little difference: instead of Jews, this time it is Arabs who are undermining Western Civilization, seducing Christian maids, plotting to dominate the world. The Protocols of the Elders of Mecca.
A day after the Oslo events I happened to be watching Aljazeera’s English TV network, one of the best in the world, and saw an interesting program. For a whole hour, the reporter interviewed Italian people in the street about Muslims. The answers were shocking.
Mosques should be forbidden. They are places where Muslims plot to commit crimes. Actually, they don’t need mosques at all – they need only a rug to pray. Muslims come to Italy to destroy Italian culture. They are parasites, spreading drugs, crime and disease. They must be kicked out, to the last man, woman and child.
I always considered Italians easygoing, loveable people. Even during the Holocaust, they behaved better than most other European peoples. Benito Mussolini became a rabid anti-Semite only during the last stages, when he had become totally dependent on Hitler.
Yet here we are, barely 66 years after Italian partisans hanged Mussolini’s body by his feet in a public place in Milan - and a much worse form of anti-Semitism is rampant in the streets of Italy, as in most [or “many”?] other European countries.
OF COURSE, there is a real problem. Muslims are not free of blame for the situation. Their own behavior makes them easy targets. Like the Jews in their time.
Europe is in a quandary. They need the “foreigners” – Muslims and all – to work for them, keep their economy going, pay for the pensions of the old people. If all Muslims were to leave Europe tomorrow morning, the fabric of society in Germany, France, Italy and many other countries would break down.
Yet many Europeans are dismayed when they see these “foreigners”, with their strange languages, mannerisms and clothes crowding their streets, changing the character of many neighborhoods, opening shops, marrying their daughters, competing with them in many ways. It hurts. As a German minister once said: “We brought here workers, and found out that we had brought human beings!”
One can understand these Europeans, up to a point. Immigration causes real problems. The migration from the poor South to the rich North is a phenomenon of the 21st century, a result of the crying inequality among nations. It needs an all-European immigration policy, a dialogue with the minorities about integration or multiculturalism. It won’t be easy.
But this tidal wave of Islamophobia goes far beyond that. Like a Tsunami, it can result in devastation.
MANY OF the Islamophobic parties and groups remind one of the atmosphere of Germany in the early 1920s, when “völkisch” groups and militias were spreading their hateful poison, and an army spy called Adolf Hitler was earning his first laurels as an anti-Semitic orator. They looked unimportant, marginal, even crazy. Many laughed at this man Hitler, the Chaplinesque mustachioed clown.
But the abortive Nazi putsch of 1923 was followed by 1933, when the Nazis took power, and 1939, when Hitler started World War II, and 1942, when the gas chambers were brought into operation.
It is the beginnings which are critical, when political opportunists realize that arousing fear and hatred is the easiest way to fortune and power, when social misfits become nationalist and religious fanatics, when attacking helpless minorities becomes acceptable as legitimate politics, when funny little men turn into monsters.
Is that Dr. Goebbels I hear laughing in hell?
segunda-feira, 25 de julho de 2011
ISRAEL'S GOVERNMENT IS A GRAVE THREAT TO DEMOCRACY
The power of the threat of the popular majority against the government are harbingers of the danger that the coming elections will be called off.
25 july 2011, Haaretz הארץ (Israel)
By Sefi Rachlevsky
Anyone who was present at the demonstration of the tens of thousands of people roaring "Bibi go home" on Saturday should understand the intensity of the threat against the present government. Anyone who heard Yehuda Alush shouting "We're tired of this" at the fat belly of the government knows that it is in fact the vulnerable belly of right-wing rule. The protest is speaking "Likudese." It was this language that helped spur the victory of the late Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin - with "The Likud has cut itself off from the people." Using those materials the tent protest is once again asserting: "The government has abandoned the people."
Anyone who saw the joy with which the Knesset celebrated the Boycott Law should understand what kind of governmental determination and aggressiveness we are facing. Without blinking an eye, it crushed one of the very foundation stones of democracy. The prolonged price in global terms - exemplified in last week's editorial in The New York Times, which expressed doubt as to the democratic nature of Israel - was known. But the gang of democracy-crushers have no god. Nor do they have any intention of removing their talons from the government.
Anyone who listened to Dafni Leef, the organizer of the test protest, describing the National Housing Committees Law - due to be enacted now - as a wicked and cynical law, should understand what kind of a government we are confronting. This legislation is reminiscent of a situation where an abusive husband tries to claim that the real problem is the police who disturb him. With utter cynicism, the removal of restrictions to loot land from the citizens is being presented as an act designed to help them. As in the case of the land itself, the Netanyahu gang is planning to speculate with democracy as well. Like the ghost neighborhoods in Jerusalem, in which the world's wealthy are the owners of empty apartments instead of Israelis occupying them - the country is liable to be stolen from those living in it.
The power of the threat of the popular majority that is taking shape against the government - in addition to the anti-democratic determination to maintain control of it - - are harbingers of the danger that the coming elections will be called off. The first part of the plan, which is the process of being implemented, is enacting the law to enable voting abroad. In a country that many have chosen to leave and in which Jews receive citizenship on the spot, this means a de facto cancellation of the elections.
The law has three right-wing "teeth" to bolster it: First, most former Israelis who chose to move to a place without hamsins, missiles and an alienated government support the right and its adventures from a safe distance. Second, under cover of the Law of Return, tens of thousands of religious Jews who visit Israel can receive citizenship for the purpose of long-distance voting, so as to help choose the government in a country where they don't live. Lastly, the Interior Ministry has the power to create hundreds of thousands of "Pollards": Just as the incarcerated Jonathan Pollard received long-distance citizenship by means of a temporary order, it will be possible to add to the voter registration lists hundreds of thousands of Haredim from Brooklyn, who haven't even bothered to visit here.
This is not some summer hallucination. It is for the purpose of this "looting law" that Transportation Minister Yisrael Katz's special governance committee was established, and is awaiting an anti-democratic legislative blitz when it becomes necessary.
That is "only" the beginning. The same number of people voted in the 1999 and the 2009 elections. Since Defense Minister Ehud Barak's targeted assassination of hope, there has been a sharp decline in the voting percentages of the non-right in Israel. One million people with the right to vote have joined the electorate since 1999, but they didn't actually cast ballots.
Based on past voting percentages, that means 800,000 voters - the vast majority of whom are supporters of the non-right. When they arise against the government to demand their country back, they will constitute a clear majority. And now they are rising up. The young people of the tent protest won't be satisfied with a protest and this time will come to the polls. Furthermore, Israeli Arabs are also capable of translating their anger over racism into a winning protest vote.
A chilling governmental idea is now facing the awakening majority. If the Supreme Court is deterred from acting, what may succeed is a plot to invalidate a party such as Balad. The objective of such a cynical move would be to spur Israel's Arab citizens to protest and not come to the polls. Thus the "ideal" situation would be created: By means of Jews and former Israelis who don't live here, the country would be stolen away from a clear majority of its citizens, who are tired of the right-wing government and want a welfare state that can live in peace.
Against the determination of those entrenching themselves in the government, Israeli citizens must join Leef and her friends in counter-determination - one that will stop the de facto cancellation of democratic elections. That will help rescue Israel at the polls.
25 july 2011, Haaretz הארץ (Israel)
By Sefi Rachlevsky
Anyone who was present at the demonstration of the tens of thousands of people roaring "Bibi go home" on Saturday should understand the intensity of the threat against the present government. Anyone who heard Yehuda Alush shouting "We're tired of this" at the fat belly of the government knows that it is in fact the vulnerable belly of right-wing rule. The protest is speaking "Likudese." It was this language that helped spur the victory of the late Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin - with "The Likud has cut itself off from the people." Using those materials the tent protest is once again asserting: "The government has abandoned the people."
Anyone who saw the joy with which the Knesset celebrated the Boycott Law should understand what kind of governmental determination and aggressiveness we are facing. Without blinking an eye, it crushed one of the very foundation stones of democracy. The prolonged price in global terms - exemplified in last week's editorial in The New York Times, which expressed doubt as to the democratic nature of Israel - was known. But the gang of democracy-crushers have no god. Nor do they have any intention of removing their talons from the government.
Anyone who listened to Dafni Leef, the organizer of the test protest, describing the National Housing Committees Law - due to be enacted now - as a wicked and cynical law, should understand what kind of a government we are confronting. This legislation is reminiscent of a situation where an abusive husband tries to claim that the real problem is the police who disturb him. With utter cynicism, the removal of restrictions to loot land from the citizens is being presented as an act designed to help them. As in the case of the land itself, the Netanyahu gang is planning to speculate with democracy as well. Like the ghost neighborhoods in Jerusalem, in which the world's wealthy are the owners of empty apartments instead of Israelis occupying them - the country is liable to be stolen from those living in it.
The power of the threat of the popular majority that is taking shape against the government - in addition to the anti-democratic determination to maintain control of it - - are harbingers of the danger that the coming elections will be called off. The first part of the plan, which is the process of being implemented, is enacting the law to enable voting abroad. In a country that many have chosen to leave and in which Jews receive citizenship on the spot, this means a de facto cancellation of the elections.
The law has three right-wing "teeth" to bolster it: First, most former Israelis who chose to move to a place without hamsins, missiles and an alienated government support the right and its adventures from a safe distance. Second, under cover of the Law of Return, tens of thousands of religious Jews who visit Israel can receive citizenship for the purpose of long-distance voting, so as to help choose the government in a country where they don't live. Lastly, the Interior Ministry has the power to create hundreds of thousands of "Pollards": Just as the incarcerated Jonathan Pollard received long-distance citizenship by means of a temporary order, it will be possible to add to the voter registration lists hundreds of thousands of Haredim from Brooklyn, who haven't even bothered to visit here.
This is not some summer hallucination. It is for the purpose of this "looting law" that Transportation Minister Yisrael Katz's special governance committee was established, and is awaiting an anti-democratic legislative blitz when it becomes necessary.
That is "only" the beginning. The same number of people voted in the 1999 and the 2009 elections. Since Defense Minister Ehud Barak's targeted assassination of hope, there has been a sharp decline in the voting percentages of the non-right in Israel. One million people with the right to vote have joined the electorate since 1999, but they didn't actually cast ballots.
Based on past voting percentages, that means 800,000 voters - the vast majority of whom are supporters of the non-right. When they arise against the government to demand their country back, they will constitute a clear majority. And now they are rising up. The young people of the tent protest won't be satisfied with a protest and this time will come to the polls. Furthermore, Israeli Arabs are also capable of translating their anger over racism into a winning protest vote.
A chilling governmental idea is now facing the awakening majority. If the Supreme Court is deterred from acting, what may succeed is a plot to invalidate a party such as Balad. The objective of such a cynical move would be to spur Israel's Arab citizens to protest and not come to the polls. Thus the "ideal" situation would be created: By means of Jews and former Israelis who don't live here, the country would be stolen away from a clear majority of its citizens, who are tired of the right-wing government and want a welfare state that can live in peace.
Against the determination of those entrenching themselves in the government, Israeli citizens must join Leef and her friends in counter-determination - one that will stop the de facto cancellation of democratic elections. That will help rescue Israel at the polls.
quinta-feira, 7 de julho de 2011
ARIK ASCHERMAN: UNA FORMA SIONISTA DE DEFENDER A LOS PALESTINOS
29 junio 2011, Periodistas en Español (España)
Mel Frykberg (IPS/Jerusalén).- El rabino Arik Ascherman es, a la vez que un
ardiente sionista y religioso que cree que Dios hizo un pacto con su pueblo y la tierra de Israel, un persistente luchador por la defensa de los derechos humanos, en especial de los palestinos.
"Creo que la mejor forma de proteger a mis hijos y salvaguardar su futuro es luchar por la justicia y tomar partido por el sufrimiento de los palestinos", dijo Ascherman a IPS.
El desgarbado rabino, con su espesa barba y maraña de rulos bajo un solideo desplazándose por las colinas de Cisjordania puede confundirse con uno de los fanáticos colonos israelíes que se enfrentan con los palestinos.
Pero es todo lo contrario, Ascherman ayuda a los agricultores palestinos a cosechar aceitunas, reconstruir las casas destruidas por el ejército israelí y cavar pozos de agua. También es común que oficie de escudo humano cuando soldados y colonos judíos atacan a los palestinos.
"No hay nada como dejarse golpear por las fuerzas de seguridad israelí para formar un lazo común con ellos y darles una nueva perspectiva de quienes consideran su enemigo", río Ascherman, integrantes de Rabinos por los derechos humanos (Rabbis for Human Rights).
"Fui atacado y detenido varias veces y encarcelado una vez por policías y soldados israelíes, pero también los palestinos me rompieron los vidrios del automóvil creyendo que era un colono", relató.
Ascherman, casado con dos hijos, llegó a Israel en 1994 desde Estados Unidos.
La organización fue creada en 1988 para defender la causa de los pobres israelíes y defender los derechos de las minorías, incluidos los palestinos. También lucha contra el abuso de trabajadores extranjeros, a favor de la igualdad de género y de la erradicación de la trata de mujeres.
En 2006 recibió el prestigioso premio de paz Niwano por trabajar en un contexto interconfesional y, en 2011, Ascherman y el rabino Ehud Bandel obtuvieron el Gandhi por la Paz.
El sionismo es comparado con el racismo y el fanatismo porque se lo asocia con la expulsión de los palestinos de su histórico territorio y la violación de sus derechos.
La organización sostiene que defiende la auténtica voz de los sionistas y la tradición judía de defender los derechos humanos.
"Hay diferentes corrientes sionistas, las que son religiosas y las que no. Algunas las aborrezco y me desagradan, pero no representan a todos los judíos", respondió Ascherman al ser consultado por la expropiación de tierras a los palestinos para crear el estado de Israel en 1948.
"Hubo sionistas que fueron excluyentes y no quisieron compartir el territorio con los palestinos. Pero también estuvieron los pioneros sionistas socialistas que sí estaban dispuestos a hacerlo y se veían viviendo junto a ellos a la vanguardia de la revolución social", señaló.
"Creo en el derecho de los judíos a vivir en Israel y a existir, pero la tradición judía señala que la justicia y los derechos humanos triunfan sobre la creación del Gran Israel", añadió.
Gran parte del trabajo de Rabinos por los Derechos Humanos se desarrolla en Cisjordania, donde gracias a sus reclamaciones legales, agricultores palestinos pudieron acceder otra vez a sus huertos tras varios años de prohibición.
La labor de la organización en Jerusalén oriental sufre una enorme presión.
La situación en Cisjordania se tranquilizó un poco, pero en Jerusalén oriental la tensión es grande. Ascherman cree que es posible que haya una tercera Intifada (levantamiento palestino) y que ocurriría en esa parte de la ciudad.
"En Cisjordania puedo utilizar ciertas herramientas de la democracia israelí para luchar por los derechos de los palestinos y llegar a los medios. Pero en Jerusalén la situación es otra. Veo las mismas señales de enojo y frustración entre los palestinos que precedieron a la segunda Intifada", observó.
"Las autoridades israelíes están decididas a limitar la presencia palestina en Jerusalén oriental y seguir haciendo lugar a sus colonos. Muchas de esas iniciativas están financiadas por judíos ricos del exterior", indicó.
Todas las personas están obligadas a desempeñar su papel, incluso si el problema no se resuelve de inmediato, añadió.
Mel Frykberg (IPS/Jerusalén).- El rabino Arik Ascherman es, a la vez que un
ardiente sionista y religioso que cree que Dios hizo un pacto con su pueblo y la tierra de Israel, un persistente luchador por la defensa de los derechos humanos, en especial de los palestinos.
"Creo que la mejor forma de proteger a mis hijos y salvaguardar su futuro es luchar por la justicia y tomar partido por el sufrimiento de los palestinos", dijo Ascherman a IPS.
El desgarbado rabino, con su espesa barba y maraña de rulos bajo un solideo desplazándose por las colinas de Cisjordania puede confundirse con uno de los fanáticos colonos israelíes que se enfrentan con los palestinos.
Pero es todo lo contrario, Ascherman ayuda a los agricultores palestinos a cosechar aceitunas, reconstruir las casas destruidas por el ejército israelí y cavar pozos de agua. También es común que oficie de escudo humano cuando soldados y colonos judíos atacan a los palestinos.
"No hay nada como dejarse golpear por las fuerzas de seguridad israelí para formar un lazo común con ellos y darles una nueva perspectiva de quienes consideran su enemigo", río Ascherman, integrantes de Rabinos por los derechos humanos (Rabbis for Human Rights).
"Fui atacado y detenido varias veces y encarcelado una vez por policías y soldados israelíes, pero también los palestinos me rompieron los vidrios del automóvil creyendo que era un colono", relató.
Ascherman, casado con dos hijos, llegó a Israel en 1994 desde Estados Unidos.
La organización fue creada en 1988 para defender la causa de los pobres israelíes y defender los derechos de las minorías, incluidos los palestinos. También lucha contra el abuso de trabajadores extranjeros, a favor de la igualdad de género y de la erradicación de la trata de mujeres.
En 2006 recibió el prestigioso premio de paz Niwano por trabajar en un contexto interconfesional y, en 2011, Ascherman y el rabino Ehud Bandel obtuvieron el Gandhi por la Paz.
El sionismo es comparado con el racismo y el fanatismo porque se lo asocia con la expulsión de los palestinos de su histórico territorio y la violación de sus derechos.
La organización sostiene que defiende la auténtica voz de los sionistas y la tradición judía de defender los derechos humanos.
"Hay diferentes corrientes sionistas, las que son religiosas y las que no. Algunas las aborrezco y me desagradan, pero no representan a todos los judíos", respondió Ascherman al ser consultado por la expropiación de tierras a los palestinos para crear el estado de Israel en 1948.
"Hubo sionistas que fueron excluyentes y no quisieron compartir el territorio con los palestinos. Pero también estuvieron los pioneros sionistas socialistas que sí estaban dispuestos a hacerlo y se veían viviendo junto a ellos a la vanguardia de la revolución social", señaló.
"Creo en el derecho de los judíos a vivir en Israel y a existir, pero la tradición judía señala que la justicia y los derechos humanos triunfan sobre la creación del Gran Israel", añadió.
Gran parte del trabajo de Rabinos por los Derechos Humanos se desarrolla en Cisjordania, donde gracias a sus reclamaciones legales, agricultores palestinos pudieron acceder otra vez a sus huertos tras varios años de prohibición.
La labor de la organización en Jerusalén oriental sufre una enorme presión.
La situación en Cisjordania se tranquilizó un poco, pero en Jerusalén oriental la tensión es grande. Ascherman cree que es posible que haya una tercera Intifada (levantamiento palestino) y que ocurriría en esa parte de la ciudad.
"En Cisjordania puedo utilizar ciertas herramientas de la democracia israelí para luchar por los derechos de los palestinos y llegar a los medios. Pero en Jerusalén la situación es otra. Veo las mismas señales de enojo y frustración entre los palestinos que precedieron a la segunda Intifada", observó.
"Las autoridades israelíes están decididas a limitar la presencia palestina en Jerusalén oriental y seguir haciendo lugar a sus colonos. Muchas de esas iniciativas están financiadas por judíos ricos del exterior", indicó.
Todas las personas están obligadas a desempeñar su papel, incluso si el problema no se resuelve de inmediato, añadió.
sexta-feira, 1 de julho de 2011
THE JEWISH AYATOLLAHS
2 Junho 2011, Uri Avnery's Column http://www.avnery-news.co.il (Israel)
A protestant priest in Berlin decrees that a Christian who employs a Jew will be banished from his parish.
Impossible? Indeed. Except in Israel – in reverse, of course.
The rabbi of Safed, a government employee, has decreed that it is strictly forbidden to let apartments to Arabs – including the Arab students at the local medical school. Twenty other town rabbis – whose salaries are paid by the taxpayers, mostly secular, including Arab citizens - have publicly supported this edict.
A group of Israeli intellectuals lodged a complaint with the Attorney General, arguing that this is a case of criminal incitement. The Attorney General promised to investigate the matter with all due haste. That was half a year ago. “Due haste” has not yet produced a decision.
The same goes for another group of rabbis, who prohibited employing Goyim.
(In ancient Hebrew, “Goy” just meant a people, any people. In the Bible, the Israelites were called a “holy Goy”. But in the last centuries, the term has come to mean non-Jews, with a decidedly derogatory undertone.)
THIS WEEK, Israel was in uproar. The turmoil was caused by the arrest of Rabbi Dov Lior.
The affair goes back to a book released more than a year ago by Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira. Shapira is, perhaps, the most extreme inhabitant of Yitzhar, which is perhaps the most extreme settlement in the West Bank. Its members are frequently accused of carrying out pogroms in the nearby Palestinian villages, generally in “retaliation” for army actions against structures that have been built without official consent.
The book, called Torat ha-Melekh (“the Teaching of the King”) deals with the killing of Goyim. It says that in peacetime, Goyim should generally not be killed – not because of the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” which, according to the book, applies to Jews only, but because of God’s command after the Deluge (Genesis 9:6): “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God made he man.” This applies to all Goyim who fulfill some basic commandments.
However, the situation is totally different in wartime. And according to the rabbis, Israel has been at war since its foundation, and probably will be for ever more.
In war, in every place where the presence of a Goy endangers a Jew, it is permitted to kill him, even though he be a righteous goy who bears no responsibility for the situation. It is permitted – indeed, recommended – to kill not only enemy fighters, but also those who “support” or “encourage” them. It is permitted to kill enemy civilians if this is helpful for the conduct of the war.
(Intentionally or not, this is reflected in the tactics employed by our army in the “Cast Lead” operation: to protect the life of a single Israeli soldier, it is permissible to kill as many Palestinians as necessary. The result: some 1300 dead Palestinians, half of them non-combatants, as against five soldiers killed by hostile action. Six more were killed by “friendly fire”.)
What really set off a storm was a passage in the book that says that it is permitted to kill children, when it is clear that once they grow up, they can be “harmful”.
It is customary for a book by a rabbi interpreting Jewish law to bear the endorsement – called haskama (“agreement”) – of other prominent rabbis. This particular masterpiece bore the “haskama” of four prominent rabbis. One of them is Dov Lior.
RABBI LIOR (the name can be translated as “I have the light” or “the light has been given to me”) stands out as one of the most extreme rabbis in the West Bank settlements – no mean achievement in a territory that is abundantly stocked with extreme rabbis, most of whom would be called fascist in any other country. He is the rabbi of Kiryat Arba, the settlement on the fringes of Hebron that cultivates the teachings of Meir Kahane and that produced the mass-murderer Baruch Goldstein.
Lior is also the chief of a Hesder yeshiva, a religious school affiliated with the army, whose pupils combine their studies (purely religious) with privileged army service.
When the book – now in its third printing – first appeared, there was an uproar. No rabbi protested, though quite a number discounted its religious argumentation. The Orthodox distanced themselves, if only on the ground that it violated the religious rule that forbids “provoking the Goyim”.
Following public demand, the Attorney General started a criminal investigation against the author and the four signatories of the “haskama”. They were called in for questioning, and most did appear and protested that they had had no time to read the book.
Lior, the text of whose “haskama” testified to the fact that he had read the book thoroughly, did not heed repeated summons to appear at the police station. He ignored them openly and contemptuously. This week the police reacted to the insult: they ambushed the rabbi on the “tunnel road” – a road with several tunnels between Jerusalem and Hebron, reserved for Jews – and arrested him. They did not handcuff him and put him in a police car, as they normally would, but replaced his driver with a police officer, who drove him straight to a police station. There he was politely questioned for an hour and set free.
The news of the arrest spread like wildfire throughout the settlements. Hundreds of the “Youth of the Hills” – groups of young settlers who carry out pogroms and spit on the law – gathered at the entrance to Jerusalem, battled with the police and cut the main road to the capital.
(I can’t really complain about that, because I was the first to do so. In 1965, I was elected to the Knesset and Teddy Kollek was elected mayor of Jerusalem. One of the first things he did was to pander to the Orthodox and close whole neighborhoods on the Shabbat. One of the first things I did was to call on my supporters to protest. We closed the entrance to Jerusalem for some hours until we were forcibly removed.)
But closing roads and parading the released Lior triumphantly on their shoulders was not the only thing the young fanatics did. They also tried to storm the Supreme Court building. Why this building in particular? That t requires some explanation.
THE ISRAELI right-wing, and especially the settlers and their rabbis, have long lists of hate objects. Some of these have been published. I have the honor of appearing on most. But the Supreme Court occupies a place high up, if not at the very top.
Why? The court has not covered itself with glory when dealing with the occupied territories. It has allowed the destruction of many Palestinian homes as retaliation for “terrorist” acts, approved “moderate” torture, assented to the “separation fence” (which was condemned by the international court), and generally positioned itself as an arm of the occupation.
But in some cases, the law has not enabled the court to wriggle out of its responsibilities. It has called for the demolition of “outposts” set up on private Palestinian property. It has forbidden “targeted killing” if the person could be arrested without risk, it has decreed that it is unlawful to prevent an Arab citizen from living in a village on state-owned land, and so on.
Each such decision drew a howl of rage from the rightists. But there is a deeper reason for the extreme antagonism.
UNLIKE MODERN Christianity, but very much like Islam, the Jewish religion is not just a matter between Man and God, but also a matter between Man and Man. It does not live in a quiet corner of public life. Religious law encompasses all aspects of public and private life. Therefore, for a pious Jew - or Muslim - the European idea of separation between state and religion is anathema.
The Jewish Halakha, like the Islamic Shari’a, regulates every single aspect of life. Whenever Jewish law clashes with Israeli law, which one should prevail? The one enacted by the democratically elected Knesset, which can be changed at any moment if the people want it, or the one handed down by God on Mount Sinai for all time, that cannot ever be changed (at most can be interpreted differently)?
Religious fanatics in Israel insist that religious law stands above the secular law (as in several Arab counties), and that the state courts have no jurisdiction over the clerics in matters that concern religion (as in Iran). When the Supreme Court ruled otherwise, the most respected Orthodox rabbi easily mobilized 100 thousand protesters in Jerusalem. For years now, religious cabinet ministers, law professors and politicians, as well as their political supporters, have been busy chipping away at the integrity, independence and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
This is the crux of the matter. The Attorney General considers a book calling for the killing of innocent children an act of criminal incitement. The rabbis and their supporters consider this an impertinent interference in a learned religious debate. There can be no real compromise between these two views.
For Israelis, this is not just an academic question. The entire religious community, with all its diverse factions, now belongs to the rightist, ultra-nationalist camp (except for pitiful little outposts like Reform and Conservative Jewry, who are the majority among American Jews). Transforming Israel into a Halakha state means castrating the democratic system and turning Israel into a second Iran governed by Jewish ayatollahs.
It will also make peace impossible for all time, since according to the rabbis all of the Holy Land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River belongs solely to the Jews, and giving the Goyim even an inch of it is a mortal sin, punishable by death. For this sin, Yitzhak Rabin was executed by the student of a religious university, a former settler.
Not the whole religious camp subscribes to the unrelenting extremism of Rabbi Lior and his ilk. There are many other trends. But all of these keep quiet. It is Lior, the rabbi who Possesses the Light, and his like-minded colleagues, who chart the course.
A protestant priest in Berlin decrees that a Christian who employs a Jew will be banished from his parish.
Impossible? Indeed. Except in Israel – in reverse, of course.
The rabbi of Safed, a government employee, has decreed that it is strictly forbidden to let apartments to Arabs – including the Arab students at the local medical school. Twenty other town rabbis – whose salaries are paid by the taxpayers, mostly secular, including Arab citizens - have publicly supported this edict.
A group of Israeli intellectuals lodged a complaint with the Attorney General, arguing that this is a case of criminal incitement. The Attorney General promised to investigate the matter with all due haste. That was half a year ago. “Due haste” has not yet produced a decision.
The same goes for another group of rabbis, who prohibited employing Goyim.
(In ancient Hebrew, “Goy” just meant a people, any people. In the Bible, the Israelites were called a “holy Goy”. But in the last centuries, the term has come to mean non-Jews, with a decidedly derogatory undertone.)
THIS WEEK, Israel was in uproar. The turmoil was caused by the arrest of Rabbi Dov Lior.
The affair goes back to a book released more than a year ago by Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira. Shapira is, perhaps, the most extreme inhabitant of Yitzhar, which is perhaps the most extreme settlement in the West Bank. Its members are frequently accused of carrying out pogroms in the nearby Palestinian villages, generally in “retaliation” for army actions against structures that have been built without official consent.
The book, called Torat ha-Melekh (“the Teaching of the King”) deals with the killing of Goyim. It says that in peacetime, Goyim should generally not be killed – not because of the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” which, according to the book, applies to Jews only, but because of God’s command after the Deluge (Genesis 9:6): “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God made he man.” This applies to all Goyim who fulfill some basic commandments.
However, the situation is totally different in wartime. And according to the rabbis, Israel has been at war since its foundation, and probably will be for ever more.
In war, in every place where the presence of a Goy endangers a Jew, it is permitted to kill him, even though he be a righteous goy who bears no responsibility for the situation. It is permitted – indeed, recommended – to kill not only enemy fighters, but also those who “support” or “encourage” them. It is permitted to kill enemy civilians if this is helpful for the conduct of the war.
(Intentionally or not, this is reflected in the tactics employed by our army in the “Cast Lead” operation: to protect the life of a single Israeli soldier, it is permissible to kill as many Palestinians as necessary. The result: some 1300 dead Palestinians, half of them non-combatants, as against five soldiers killed by hostile action. Six more were killed by “friendly fire”.)
What really set off a storm was a passage in the book that says that it is permitted to kill children, when it is clear that once they grow up, they can be “harmful”.
It is customary for a book by a rabbi interpreting Jewish law to bear the endorsement – called haskama (“agreement”) – of other prominent rabbis. This particular masterpiece bore the “haskama” of four prominent rabbis. One of them is Dov Lior.
RABBI LIOR (the name can be translated as “I have the light” or “the light has been given to me”) stands out as one of the most extreme rabbis in the West Bank settlements – no mean achievement in a territory that is abundantly stocked with extreme rabbis, most of whom would be called fascist in any other country. He is the rabbi of Kiryat Arba, the settlement on the fringes of Hebron that cultivates the teachings of Meir Kahane and that produced the mass-murderer Baruch Goldstein.
Lior is also the chief of a Hesder yeshiva, a religious school affiliated with the army, whose pupils combine their studies (purely religious) with privileged army service.
When the book – now in its third printing – first appeared, there was an uproar. No rabbi protested, though quite a number discounted its religious argumentation. The Orthodox distanced themselves, if only on the ground that it violated the religious rule that forbids “provoking the Goyim”.
Following public demand, the Attorney General started a criminal investigation against the author and the four signatories of the “haskama”. They were called in for questioning, and most did appear and protested that they had had no time to read the book.
Lior, the text of whose “haskama” testified to the fact that he had read the book thoroughly, did not heed repeated summons to appear at the police station. He ignored them openly and contemptuously. This week the police reacted to the insult: they ambushed the rabbi on the “tunnel road” – a road with several tunnels between Jerusalem and Hebron, reserved for Jews – and arrested him. They did not handcuff him and put him in a police car, as they normally would, but replaced his driver with a police officer, who drove him straight to a police station. There he was politely questioned for an hour and set free.
The news of the arrest spread like wildfire throughout the settlements. Hundreds of the “Youth of the Hills” – groups of young settlers who carry out pogroms and spit on the law – gathered at the entrance to Jerusalem, battled with the police and cut the main road to the capital.
(I can’t really complain about that, because I was the first to do so. In 1965, I was elected to the Knesset and Teddy Kollek was elected mayor of Jerusalem. One of the first things he did was to pander to the Orthodox and close whole neighborhoods on the Shabbat. One of the first things I did was to call on my supporters to protest. We closed the entrance to Jerusalem for some hours until we were forcibly removed.)
But closing roads and parading the released Lior triumphantly on their shoulders was not the only thing the young fanatics did. They also tried to storm the Supreme Court building. Why this building in particular? That t requires some explanation.
THE ISRAELI right-wing, and especially the settlers and their rabbis, have long lists of hate objects. Some of these have been published. I have the honor of appearing on most. But the Supreme Court occupies a place high up, if not at the very top.
Why? The court has not covered itself with glory when dealing with the occupied territories. It has allowed the destruction of many Palestinian homes as retaliation for “terrorist” acts, approved “moderate” torture, assented to the “separation fence” (which was condemned by the international court), and generally positioned itself as an arm of the occupation.
But in some cases, the law has not enabled the court to wriggle out of its responsibilities. It has called for the demolition of “outposts” set up on private Palestinian property. It has forbidden “targeted killing” if the person could be arrested without risk, it has decreed that it is unlawful to prevent an Arab citizen from living in a village on state-owned land, and so on.
Each such decision drew a howl of rage from the rightists. But there is a deeper reason for the extreme antagonism.
UNLIKE MODERN Christianity, but very much like Islam, the Jewish religion is not just a matter between Man and God, but also a matter between Man and Man. It does not live in a quiet corner of public life. Religious law encompasses all aspects of public and private life. Therefore, for a pious Jew - or Muslim - the European idea of separation between state and religion is anathema.
The Jewish Halakha, like the Islamic Shari’a, regulates every single aspect of life. Whenever Jewish law clashes with Israeli law, which one should prevail? The one enacted by the democratically elected Knesset, which can be changed at any moment if the people want it, or the one handed down by God on Mount Sinai for all time, that cannot ever be changed (at most can be interpreted differently)?
Religious fanatics in Israel insist that religious law stands above the secular law (as in several Arab counties), and that the state courts have no jurisdiction over the clerics in matters that concern religion (as in Iran). When the Supreme Court ruled otherwise, the most respected Orthodox rabbi easily mobilized 100 thousand protesters in Jerusalem. For years now, religious cabinet ministers, law professors and politicians, as well as their political supporters, have been busy chipping away at the integrity, independence and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
This is the crux of the matter. The Attorney General considers a book calling for the killing of innocent children an act of criminal incitement. The rabbis and their supporters consider this an impertinent interference in a learned religious debate. There can be no real compromise between these two views.
For Israelis, this is not just an academic question. The entire religious community, with all its diverse factions, now belongs to the rightist, ultra-nationalist camp (except for pitiful little outposts like Reform and Conservative Jewry, who are the majority among American Jews). Transforming Israel into a Halakha state means castrating the democratic system and turning Israel into a second Iran governed by Jewish ayatollahs.
It will also make peace impossible for all time, since according to the rabbis all of the Holy Land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River belongs solely to the Jews, and giving the Goyim even an inch of it is a mortal sin, punishable by death. For this sin, Yitzhak Rabin was executed by the student of a religious university, a former settler.
Not the whole religious camp subscribes to the unrelenting extremism of Rabbi Lior and his ilk. There are many other trends. But all of these keep quiet. It is Lior, the rabbi who Possesses the Light, and his like-minded colleagues, who chart the course.
domingo, 8 de maio de 2011
SYMPHONY OF INCITEMENT IN ISRAEL
27 April 2010, The Alternative Information Center (AIC) http://alternativenews.org/english
In the past few months, the symphony of incitement against everything that has a whiff of leftism, liberalism, humanism and empathy toward “the other” is becoming louder and more encompassing of the entire public sphere in Israel.
Knesset members and ministers, singers – who were drug addicts in the past and newly religious people in the present, secular celebrities (with a bit of understanding of Judaism but with no compulsion to keep the commandments), media types, rabbis and municipal heads. All of them now joined together in unruly incitement. This article will not relate to the distorted claims and explanations of those who incite, but will analyse the need of the Israeli society for a multi-pronged attack against small groups which at the present do not possess the power to threaten the political and social balance of power.
From where comes the need for this harsh and blunt incitement, which creates conditions for the next murder? A murder after which will come the usual excuse of the “exception.”
There are several reasons for this need, internal reasons that are political and social in nature in addition to international political factors.
Firstly, it must be taken into account that this incitement begins with the Israeli government and Knesset. The current political leadership, despite its electorally provided power as a stable coalition, perceives incitement against everything foreign to it – the Palestinian, migrant worker, refugee, leftist, gay, humanist – as an existential necessity. The reason for this is related to the need to construct a hegemonic ideology which will provide a long-term substitute for the political crises and hesitations with which we have lived since the 1992 assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.
The assassination of Rabin was a foundational event that resulted in a change in Israel’s internal political balance. In the political ping pong which existed for almost two decades previously, Labour and the Likud attempted to find a formula for the establishment of a new hegemony. However, the current Israeli government represents the first time that the secular, neo-fascist Right, the Messianic neo-fascist religious Right and the fundamentalist ultra-orthodox Jews are capable of establishing a ruling coalition founded on principles of deepening the occupation of the Palestinian territories, the transfer of Palestinians, elimination of liberal markers (such as human and civil rights) and social and economic neo-liberalism.
Like every regime that attempts to be powerful and maintain its position over time, Israel’s government must alter the power balance not only in the parliamentarian and governmental arena, but also in the public sphere. There is always a difference between victory in the elections and an alteration in the public arena’s power balance. In order to be strong over time, every regime must eliminate all substantial opposition. To this end, the new hegemony must mark the enemy, particularly the internal enemy, and to work in accordance with the logic of circles of incitement.
Circles of incitement are a method employed by anti-Semites in the 20th century. Firstly they point to the Jew as a hated person, a reason for disease, a rapist of young girls, possessor of a strange culture, a potential terrorist. The second circle is comprised of those who identify, empathise with the Jew. Surprisingly, the “Jew lover” is he who becomes the primary enemy. Why? As he impedes implementation of the incitement plan while providing another alternative. And every anti-Semite, like every fascist, neo-fascist and fundamentalist, cannot stand the fact that someone “from within” is capable of contradicting the rationale for incitement.
The second reason for this incitement is related to the repeated and ongoing failures of Israel’s recent wars and subsequent withdrawals. Since the first Lebanon war, the failure to remain in southern Lebanon and the subsequent Israeli withdrawal, the official Israel and its military apparatus are incapable of selling a clean war ending with proven successes. In the second war against Lebanon, Israel lost vis-?-vis its public and is unable to explain to the world the meaning of this destructive attack, which again ended in a retreat in Israel’s relations of power with Hizbullah. Later came the Israeli military attacks on Gaza, attacks through which Israel attempted to correct all the distortions of the past thirty years and prove the deterrence power of its strong military. Yet here we are again, receiving biting criticism from the entire world, unable to prove that the Hamas infrastructure was hampered, and seeing how the Goldstone Report is paving the way for a series of harsh responses in the international arena.
This failed political-military context brings official Israel to act like an injured and dangerous animal. It is attempting to chase all of those who supposedly collaborated with Goldstone, but in reality is organising an institutionalized lie in face of the results of these attacks. In other words and as with every belligerent government incapable of coping with failures that threaten the ethos of militarism, it begins to persecute those perceived as questioning the new hegemony. This is the reason for Israel’s pathetic campaign against those who do not serve in the military.
The third reason is the need to join forces against the direct and indirect international pressure. Following its military attacks on Gaza, Israel is gradually becoming like apartheid South Africa in international public opinion. The need to bring internal forces together in order to present a united front to the “non-Jews” represents an essential need for every regime with something to hide and reasons to fear. It is not the level of criticism toward official Israel which measures the level of fear of the Israeli government, but the echo of this criticism throughout the world. This is an echo that finally destroys the ultimate excuse of Israel for its very existence and justification for its actions. The “non Jews” are beginning to forget the Holocaust, or at least do not understand why the Holocaust must be an excuse for every Israeli action. This position propels the Israeli propaganda machine into hysteria: if the Holocaust does not deter, what else can we sell?
Internally, cooperation with such “non Jews” succeeds in driving the Right in its various forms and the fundamentalists crazy. For them, this is treason as it involves subverting the Israeli consensus with persons from the outside. In other words and as I have already noted, unity of thought is necessary to create an internal sense of cohesion and to display outwards the inability to present any alternative.
The fourth factor behind the current incitement in Israel is neo-liberal policies. To date there is almost no opposition from the populations most harmed by the privatization and reduction plans of the Israeli government. However, Israel’s social manipulation based on the hatred of the foreigner, who steals jobs from Israelis, is essential in order to justify its policies of social destruction. Yet there is a more hidden side to these neo-liberal policies. Despite the hollow statements of post-modern theoreticians, globalization and a reduction in the weight of states in guiding the economy require a strong state, a police state which will preserve economic arrangements and the profits of business. As we see in all European countries, the construction of a consciousness for the need of a strong state goes via hatred of the other. When there is an internal enemy, even if that enemy completely lacks the ability to fight and resist, it is easier to enlist public opinion for plans of policing and oppression. In Israel there is a tremendous number of community police programmes, “cities without violence” (which in actuality means more police and cameras in public spaces, more volunteer police officers…); discussions which transform youth into potential offenders; and of course talk about the “mafia.” In simple terms, if you want a strong police state, you need a defined enemy. Who if not the foreigner can play this part?
All of these reasons form the basis for today’s incitement. However, an additional and crucial factor must be added: the history of the state of Israel, past and present, which is a history of racism. Israeli colonialism has not substantially changed over the past decades. Only the holes in internal consensus have changed since the mid-1980s. The hegemony is now attempting to patch up these holes by eliminating the bothersome factors. Firstly it begins with the Jews who are outside of the Jewish-Israeli national consensus. The next step will be an attack, including physical transfer, of the Palestinian population within Israel. In order to employ violence, the Israeli regime must now silence the voices of protest.
We are entering a period of witch hunts, violence and murder. In my next article I will attempt to examine what we can do.
Marcello Weksler is the Director of Educational Programmes for Marginalised Youth in Tel Aviv and Board Member of the Alternative Information Center (AIC). This article was translated to English by the Alternative Information Center.
In the past few months, the symphony of incitement against everything that has a whiff of leftism, liberalism, humanism and empathy toward “the other” is becoming louder and more encompassing of the entire public sphere in Israel.
Knesset members and ministers, singers – who were drug addicts in the past and newly religious people in the present, secular celebrities (with a bit of understanding of Judaism but with no compulsion to keep the commandments), media types, rabbis and municipal heads. All of them now joined together in unruly incitement. This article will not relate to the distorted claims and explanations of those who incite, but will analyse the need of the Israeli society for a multi-pronged attack against small groups which at the present do not possess the power to threaten the political and social balance of power.
From where comes the need for this harsh and blunt incitement, which creates conditions for the next murder? A murder after which will come the usual excuse of the “exception.”
There are several reasons for this need, internal reasons that are political and social in nature in addition to international political factors.
Firstly, it must be taken into account that this incitement begins with the Israeli government and Knesset. The current political leadership, despite its electorally provided power as a stable coalition, perceives incitement against everything foreign to it – the Palestinian, migrant worker, refugee, leftist, gay, humanist – as an existential necessity. The reason for this is related to the need to construct a hegemonic ideology which will provide a long-term substitute for the political crises and hesitations with which we have lived since the 1992 assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.
The assassination of Rabin was a foundational event that resulted in a change in Israel’s internal political balance. In the political ping pong which existed for almost two decades previously, Labour and the Likud attempted to find a formula for the establishment of a new hegemony. However, the current Israeli government represents the first time that the secular, neo-fascist Right, the Messianic neo-fascist religious Right and the fundamentalist ultra-orthodox Jews are capable of establishing a ruling coalition founded on principles of deepening the occupation of the Palestinian territories, the transfer of Palestinians, elimination of liberal markers (such as human and civil rights) and social and economic neo-liberalism.
Like every regime that attempts to be powerful and maintain its position over time, Israel’s government must alter the power balance not only in the parliamentarian and governmental arena, but also in the public sphere. There is always a difference between victory in the elections and an alteration in the public arena’s power balance. In order to be strong over time, every regime must eliminate all substantial opposition. To this end, the new hegemony must mark the enemy, particularly the internal enemy, and to work in accordance with the logic of circles of incitement.
Circles of incitement are a method employed by anti-Semites in the 20th century. Firstly they point to the Jew as a hated person, a reason for disease, a rapist of young girls, possessor of a strange culture, a potential terrorist. The second circle is comprised of those who identify, empathise with the Jew. Surprisingly, the “Jew lover” is he who becomes the primary enemy. Why? As he impedes implementation of the incitement plan while providing another alternative. And every anti-Semite, like every fascist, neo-fascist and fundamentalist, cannot stand the fact that someone “from within” is capable of contradicting the rationale for incitement.
The second reason for this incitement is related to the repeated and ongoing failures of Israel’s recent wars and subsequent withdrawals. Since the first Lebanon war, the failure to remain in southern Lebanon and the subsequent Israeli withdrawal, the official Israel and its military apparatus are incapable of selling a clean war ending with proven successes. In the second war against Lebanon, Israel lost vis-?-vis its public and is unable to explain to the world the meaning of this destructive attack, which again ended in a retreat in Israel’s relations of power with Hizbullah. Later came the Israeli military attacks on Gaza, attacks through which Israel attempted to correct all the distortions of the past thirty years and prove the deterrence power of its strong military. Yet here we are again, receiving biting criticism from the entire world, unable to prove that the Hamas infrastructure was hampered, and seeing how the Goldstone Report is paving the way for a series of harsh responses in the international arena.
This failed political-military context brings official Israel to act like an injured and dangerous animal. It is attempting to chase all of those who supposedly collaborated with Goldstone, but in reality is organising an institutionalized lie in face of the results of these attacks. In other words and as with every belligerent government incapable of coping with failures that threaten the ethos of militarism, it begins to persecute those perceived as questioning the new hegemony. This is the reason for Israel’s pathetic campaign against those who do not serve in the military.
The third reason is the need to join forces against the direct and indirect international pressure. Following its military attacks on Gaza, Israel is gradually becoming like apartheid South Africa in international public opinion. The need to bring internal forces together in order to present a united front to the “non-Jews” represents an essential need for every regime with something to hide and reasons to fear. It is not the level of criticism toward official Israel which measures the level of fear of the Israeli government, but the echo of this criticism throughout the world. This is an echo that finally destroys the ultimate excuse of Israel for its very existence and justification for its actions. The “non Jews” are beginning to forget the Holocaust, or at least do not understand why the Holocaust must be an excuse for every Israeli action. This position propels the Israeli propaganda machine into hysteria: if the Holocaust does not deter, what else can we sell?
Internally, cooperation with such “non Jews” succeeds in driving the Right in its various forms and the fundamentalists crazy. For them, this is treason as it involves subverting the Israeli consensus with persons from the outside. In other words and as I have already noted, unity of thought is necessary to create an internal sense of cohesion and to display outwards the inability to present any alternative.
The fourth factor behind the current incitement in Israel is neo-liberal policies. To date there is almost no opposition from the populations most harmed by the privatization and reduction plans of the Israeli government. However, Israel’s social manipulation based on the hatred of the foreigner, who steals jobs from Israelis, is essential in order to justify its policies of social destruction. Yet there is a more hidden side to these neo-liberal policies. Despite the hollow statements of post-modern theoreticians, globalization and a reduction in the weight of states in guiding the economy require a strong state, a police state which will preserve economic arrangements and the profits of business. As we see in all European countries, the construction of a consciousness for the need of a strong state goes via hatred of the other. When there is an internal enemy, even if that enemy completely lacks the ability to fight and resist, it is easier to enlist public opinion for plans of policing and oppression. In Israel there is a tremendous number of community police programmes, “cities without violence” (which in actuality means more police and cameras in public spaces, more volunteer police officers…); discussions which transform youth into potential offenders; and of course talk about the “mafia.” In simple terms, if you want a strong police state, you need a defined enemy. Who if not the foreigner can play this part?
All of these reasons form the basis for today’s incitement. However, an additional and crucial factor must be added: the history of the state of Israel, past and present, which is a history of racism. Israeli colonialism has not substantially changed over the past decades. Only the holes in internal consensus have changed since the mid-1980s. The hegemony is now attempting to patch up these holes by eliminating the bothersome factors. Firstly it begins with the Jews who are outside of the Jewish-Israeli national consensus. The next step will be an attack, including physical transfer, of the Palestinian population within Israel. In order to employ violence, the Israeli regime must now silence the voices of protest.
We are entering a period of witch hunts, violence and murder. In my next article I will attempt to examine what we can do.
Marcello Weksler is the Director of Educational Programmes for Marginalised Youth in Tel Aviv and Board Member of the Alternative Information Center (AIC). This article was translated to English by the Alternative Information Center.
sexta-feira, 22 de abril de 2011
Rightist Attacks Peace Now’s Director in TV Studio, Israeli Professor Calls for His Execution
20 april 2011, Tikun Olam-תקון עולם http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam
You know something’s dreadfully wrong when a well-known Israeli professor says to a peace activist the equivalent of “up against the wall, mother-fucker.”
A week ago Peace Now director Yariv Oppenheim was slapped in the face before the airing of a TV interview which was supposed to include an Israeli right-wing activist, Dr. Mohr Altschuler. According to Peace Now and Al Jazeera, the attack was unprovoked and before slapping him she accused him of sending left-wing activists to interview her at her home a number of years earlier. Oppenheim refused to enter the TV studio until police were summoned. The authorities took witness statements from station personnel and Altshuler did not go on air.
However, another panel participant, a Likud MK accused Peace Now of participating in “an international campaign to generate delegitimization of Israel” by sharing with the U.S. embassy its reports about settlement activity in the Territories.
Apparently unsatisfied that Oppenheimer was only slapped and not punished severely enough, a far-right Bar Ilan professor, Moti Keidar, has called for Oppenheimer’s execution. Among the jewels contained in the letter of support he wrote to Altshuler:
“I learned with great satisfaction of your slapping Yariv Oppenheimer. Good for you! The time has come for someone with initiative to do what should be done to this dirty weakling squealer [against Israel], the least of which can be said about him that he is a traitor. In any normal nation he would’ve long ago been stood against a wall [and shot].”
Imagine that Kedar views Israel as an abnormal nation because no one has the guts to kill Yariv Oppenheim. What kind of sick souls does Bar Ilan and the entire Orthodox nationalist community nurture that they think its “normal” to execute those with whom you diagree?
In a subsequent TV interview Kedar told the reporter he was “proud” of what he wrote:
“He had it coming and has it coming. He has no idea what I see in the world. You have no idea what troubles we find ourselves in as a nation because of what he [Oppenheim] does, characterized largely by genuine lies.”
A spokesperson for Bar Ilan had the decency to say that Kedar did not reflect the University’s views in this matter (though I doubt you’ll find the president or board of trustees taking the good professor to task, because he likely reflects their views). Oppenheimer responded by challenging Bar Ilan to fire Kedar. Good luck with that.
If Kedar was a lone ranting lunatic it would be one thing. But aside from his prestigious academic position, he really represents the views of a large minority of Israelis. Every major opinion poll of Israelis confirms a decided willingness to limit free speech and the activities of NGOs which might endanger the State. It is far too short a walk from that to seeing such figures as traitors who deserve physical punishment and even death for their activities.
I’ve already written in this blog about a Yeshiva University senior administrator who told students in Israel that they should hang the prime minister (at the time) if he gave up one inch of Jerusalem. His punishment? The University sent him back home on the next plane to avoid further embarrassment. But as far as I know he wasn’t disciplined, again likely because he expressed precisely the views of many other senior leaders of the University.
Not to mention Yitzhak Rabin’s 1995 assassination at the hands of another far-right settler thug, Yigal Amir.
There is a strong undercurrent of violence among far-right Orthodox nationalists represented by the good rabbi and Professor Kedar. And truth be told, this group is in the political ascendancy in Israel. It may be only a short interval before some Jack Teitel nutcase actually does kill a peace activist like Oppenheimer. After all, it was Teitel himself who injured distinguished Hebrew University professor Zeev Sternhell with a poorly placed bomb outside his apartment front door.
What I wonder is–when such violence finally does happen, what will be the response? What will be learned? Which views will be renounced? Which groups, if any, will be tarnished by such violence? My guess is that no one who should pay a price, will; that Israel is incapable of learning any real lesson from such threats of violence or actual violence. Professor Kedar will continue opining to the world media and not be seen for the accomplice to murder that he really is. This is why my current views of the political situation inside Israel are so dreary and downcast.
Related posts:
- Rightist Ben Gurion Professor Derails Faculty Candidacy of Peace Activist
- Israeli Rightist Calls for Death of Palestinian MK
- Top Israeli Academics Censure Bar Ilan for Firing Professor Over Political Beliefs
- Israeli Security Labels American Professor Terrorist, Then Realizes It Was Mistaken Identity
- Bibi Names New Shin Bet Director, New Israeli Palestinian Arrest Under Gag
You know something’s dreadfully wrong when a well-known Israeli professor says to a peace activist the equivalent of “up against the wall, mother-fucker.”
A week ago Peace Now director Yariv Oppenheim was slapped in the face before the airing of a TV interview which was supposed to include an Israeli right-wing activist, Dr. Mohr Altschuler. According to Peace Now and Al Jazeera, the attack was unprovoked and before slapping him she accused him of sending left-wing activists to interview her at her home a number of years earlier. Oppenheim refused to enter the TV studio until police were summoned. The authorities took witness statements from station personnel and Altshuler did not go on air.
However, another panel participant, a Likud MK accused Peace Now of participating in “an international campaign to generate delegitimization of Israel” by sharing with the U.S. embassy its reports about settlement activity in the Territories.
Apparently unsatisfied that Oppenheimer was only slapped and not punished severely enough, a far-right Bar Ilan professor, Moti Keidar, has called for Oppenheimer’s execution. Among the jewels contained in the letter of support he wrote to Altshuler:
“I learned with great satisfaction of your slapping Yariv Oppenheimer. Good for you! The time has come for someone with initiative to do what should be done to this dirty weakling squealer [against Israel], the least of which can be said about him that he is a traitor. In any normal nation he would’ve long ago been stood against a wall [and shot].”
Imagine that Kedar views Israel as an abnormal nation because no one has the guts to kill Yariv Oppenheim. What kind of sick souls does Bar Ilan and the entire Orthodox nationalist community nurture that they think its “normal” to execute those with whom you diagree?
In a subsequent TV interview Kedar told the reporter he was “proud” of what he wrote:
“He had it coming and has it coming. He has no idea what I see in the world. You have no idea what troubles we find ourselves in as a nation because of what he [Oppenheim] does, characterized largely by genuine lies.”
A spokesperson for Bar Ilan had the decency to say that Kedar did not reflect the University’s views in this matter (though I doubt you’ll find the president or board of trustees taking the good professor to task, because he likely reflects their views). Oppenheimer responded by challenging Bar Ilan to fire Kedar. Good luck with that.
If Kedar was a lone ranting lunatic it would be one thing. But aside from his prestigious academic position, he really represents the views of a large minority of Israelis. Every major opinion poll of Israelis confirms a decided willingness to limit free speech and the activities of NGOs which might endanger the State. It is far too short a walk from that to seeing such figures as traitors who deserve physical punishment and even death for their activities.
I’ve already written in this blog about a Yeshiva University senior administrator who told students in Israel that they should hang the prime minister (at the time) if he gave up one inch of Jerusalem. His punishment? The University sent him back home on the next plane to avoid further embarrassment. But as far as I know he wasn’t disciplined, again likely because he expressed precisely the views of many other senior leaders of the University.
Not to mention Yitzhak Rabin’s 1995 assassination at the hands of another far-right settler thug, Yigal Amir.
There is a strong undercurrent of violence among far-right Orthodox nationalists represented by the good rabbi and Professor Kedar. And truth be told, this group is in the political ascendancy in Israel. It may be only a short interval before some Jack Teitel nutcase actually does kill a peace activist like Oppenheimer. After all, it was Teitel himself who injured distinguished Hebrew University professor Zeev Sternhell with a poorly placed bomb outside his apartment front door.
What I wonder is–when such violence finally does happen, what will be the response? What will be learned? Which views will be renounced? Which groups, if any, will be tarnished by such violence? My guess is that no one who should pay a price, will; that Israel is incapable of learning any real lesson from such threats of violence or actual violence. Professor Kedar will continue opining to the world media and not be seen for the accomplice to murder that he really is. This is why my current views of the political situation inside Israel are so dreary and downcast.
Related posts:
- Rightist Ben Gurion Professor Derails Faculty Candidacy of Peace Activist
- Israeli Rightist Calls for Death of Palestinian MK
- Top Israeli Academics Censure Bar Ilan for Firing Professor Over Political Beliefs
- Israeli Security Labels American Professor Terrorist, Then Realizes It Was Mistaken Identity
- Bibi Names New Shin Bet Director, New Israeli Palestinian Arrest Under Gag
Assinar:
Comentários (Atom)