Jeff Halper, a Jewish human rights worker in Israel, makes a strong case against "terror" whether of HAMAS or (the Israeli) state-supported kind. JRK
Right of Reply: Protecting human rights is never 'interference'
Aug. 12, 2009
Jeff Halper, THE JERUSALEM POST
The article entitled Spain funds 'summer camp' for foreign volunteers to rebuild demolished illegal Palestinian homes, which merited the front page of The Jerusalem Post(August 10), would seem somewhat of a non-story. After all, Israel and the US funded NGOs assisting Jews in the Soviet Union.
Israel went so far as to argue that the human rights provisions of the UN Charter granted it the right to speak and act on behalf of persecuted Jews even if they were not Israeli nationals. Anyone approaching Jerusalem encounters the "Sakharov Gardens," named for Andrei Sakharov, a Soviet human rights figure who could not have survived without the political support of outside governments - a close friend, by the way, of Natan Sharansky, whose own release from the Gulag was made possible by the intervention of foreign governments.
Israel has long and openly justified its interventions in countries like apartheid South Africa and Argentina under the military dictatorship as a way of defending the local Jewish communities. So-called pro-Israel organizations in the US are well known for advocating support for pro-democracy groups in Iran and Egypt. And doesn't Israel intervene deeply in American internal politics when, through AIPAC, its lobby in Washington, it attempts to get "friends of Israel" elected to Congress and de-elect more critical members?
HERE I will say something that may surprise: Israel should intervene in situations when human rights are threatened, be they of Jews or of any other people. Indeed, Israel was one of the first countries to urge the governments of the world to employ universal jurisdiction in prosecuting Nazi war criminals. In doing so it recognized the essence of human rights - the notion that they are universal. "Universal jurisdiction" means, as Israel pointed out in the wake of the Holocaust, that safeguarding the rights of individuals and peoples is not the exclusive domain of the government involved, but is the business of the entire international community.
In urging universal jurisdiction on the international community, Israel rejected categorically the contention that the treatment of one's own citizens or people under one's control is a "domestic, internal matter." This was the argument used by the most nefarious of regimes: Hitler's claim that Germany's "Jewish problem" was an internal issue and that foreign governments should "butt out" is the most notorious, but it's been repeated by Russia in regard to Chechnya, China in regard to Tibet and the Serbs in their campaign of "ethnic cleansing" in Bosnia to mention just a few. Human rights organizations are the favorite targets of oppressive regimes.
One of the major instruments in enforcing universal human rights is the Fourth Geneva Convention, approved by the UN in 1949 and ratified by Israel. It provides a double layer of protection for people living under occupation: The occupying power is held responsible for the well-being of the people under its control, but so is the entire international community. While Israel refuses to apply the Fourth Geneva Convention to the occupied territories, denying that it even has an occupation (a position rejected by every country in the world, including its American patron), in fact all governments and court systems are required under universal jurisdiction to prosecute violations of human rights and to intervene on behalf of the peoples being oppressed.
This is no mere academic issue. Had the Fourth Geneva Convention been adopted and enforced by the international community in 1939 instead of 1949, the worst of the Holocaust could have been averted.
SO WHAT'S wrong with Spain supporting human rights organizations such as the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD), Breaking the Silence, Rabbis for Human Rights, the Coalition of Women for Peace and ACRI, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel? Just as it is absolutely appropriate for Israel to intervene when Jewish human rights are threatened abroad, so too is it absolutely appropriate for the Spanish government to intervene to strengthen human rights in Israel while offering protection to the Palestinians whose homes are being demolished.
But it isn't enough.
While I'm grateful that countries like Spain pursue their international responsibilities as guarantors of human rights, the occupation is robbing Israel of its soul. The fact that government officials and the media criticize "foreign intervention" yet ignore the reasons for it - in this case Israel's demolition of more than 24,000 Palestinian homes in the occupied territories since 1967 with no "security" justification at all - puts our country in the company of disreputable regimes under which Jews have traditionally suffered or against which they have struggled. If we cannot end this occupation on our own, I would ask Spain and the rest of the international community to intervene even more forcefully. Forget the pointless negotiations.
Merely enforcing the Fourth Geneva Convention would cause the occupation to collapse of its own illegality and immorality.
As for all those Israeli officials who nevertheless complain about foreign intervention in Israel's "internal affairs," I would simply point out a geographical and political fact: Neither the occupied territories nor their Palestinian residents are "internal" to Israel. Both are external. Our oppression of the Palestinians has nothing to do with the State of Israel. It is rather disingenuous, therefore, to argue that Spain, by supporting ICAHD's rebuilding of Palestinian homes illegally demolished in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention is somehow "interfering."
Finally, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's spokesman Mark Regev crosses a line of libel when he accuses me in the article of "justifying terror." My views are well known and readers can view many of my presentations on YouTube. I always condemn terrorism, the killing or harming of innocent civilians. But, again, I take the human rights approach which condemns all forms of terrorism, whether that of non-state actors like Hamas or that of states, certainly including Israel.
Let's start taking responsibility for our policies and actions so that other countries - who are not our enemies - will not find it necessary to "intervene."
The writer is director of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD).
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1249418590065&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Obama Administration Praised for Strong Stand
The American Task Force on Palestine (ATFP) is one of our longtime contributors. They weigh in here with this press release The settlement issue is the "wedge" that shows the "Achilles Heel" of Israeli occupation; an occupation that must end. By not ending it, Isr/Pal is surely moving toward a "One-State" solution, where the outcome will be equal rights and full citizenship for ALL people who live there. Bantustans just won't finally cut it, historically, internationally, or from the standpoint of "justice". JRK
Washington DC, August 5 -- The American Task Force on Palestine (ATFP) today welcomed the firm stance taken by the Obama administration against Israel's eviction of 58 Palestinians from homes in East Jerusalem in which they have been living for many decades. The homes were immediately occupied by Israeli settlers. Israel argues that the homes had been Jewish-owned before 1948, and that the Palestinian families had "violated the terms of their leases."
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton described the evictions as "deeply regrettable," and Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman told Israel's Ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, who was summoned to receive Washington's official protest of the act, that the evictions were "provocative" and "unacceptable," and violate Israel's obligations under the Roadmap. ATFP said it agreed with the leading Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz that, "The government must immediately return the Palestinian residents to their homes in Sheikh Jarrah and cancel the eviction orders that have been issued against additional houses. And the neighborhood's fate must be determined via diplomatic negotiations."
ATFP President Ziad J. Asali said, "We are gratified that our government has taken a strong stance against these unjustifiable evictions, and we strongly agree with Secretary Clinton and Assistant Secretary Feltman that they were indeed regrettable, provocative and unacceptable. We urge the Obama administration to continue to try to ensure that Israel avoids further provocative measures, especially in Jerusalem. We also urge the Israeli government to recognize the significant damage to the credibility and viability of peace negotiations caused by actions that prejudice the outcome on Jerusalem. Building conditions for an end of conflict agreement requires that all parties focus on their broader, long-term interests and refrain from actions and statements that undermine the prospects for peace. We strongly feel that Israel should not take or allow actions in Jerusalem that are bound to complicate building the conditions for a viable, permanent peace agreement."
Washington DC, August 5 -- The American Task Force on Palestine (ATFP) today welcomed the firm stance taken by the Obama administration against Israel's eviction of 58 Palestinians from homes in East Jerusalem in which they have been living for many decades. The homes were immediately occupied by Israeli settlers. Israel argues that the homes had been Jewish-owned before 1948, and that the Palestinian families had "violated the terms of their leases."
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton described the evictions as "deeply regrettable," and Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman told Israel's Ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, who was summoned to receive Washington's official protest of the act, that the evictions were "provocative" and "unacceptable," and violate Israel's obligations under the Roadmap. ATFP said it agreed with the leading Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz that, "The government must immediately return the Palestinian residents to their homes in Sheikh Jarrah and cancel the eviction orders that have been issued against additional houses. And the neighborhood's fate must be determined via diplomatic negotiations."
ATFP President Ziad J. Asali said, "We are gratified that our government has taken a strong stance against these unjustifiable evictions, and we strongly agree with Secretary Clinton and Assistant Secretary Feltman that they were indeed regrettable, provocative and unacceptable. We urge the Obama administration to continue to try to ensure that Israel avoids further provocative measures, especially in Jerusalem. We also urge the Israeli government to recognize the significant damage to the credibility and viability of peace negotiations caused by actions that prejudice the outcome on Jerusalem. Building conditions for an end of conflict agreement requires that all parties focus on their broader, long-term interests and refrain from actions and statements that undermine the prospects for peace. We strongly feel that Israel should not take or allow actions in Jerusalem that are bound to complicate building the conditions for a viable, permanent peace agreement."
Monday, August 3, 2009
Palestinian Youths Commit to Nonviolence
Palestinian Youth Embrace Nonviolence
In the West Bank city of Hebron, the unemployment rate is hovering around 28%. Seventy-eight checkpoints, monitored by Israeli soldiers, make even the shortest of trips difficult and time consuming. Four Israeli settlements inside the Hebron city limits, and another five just outside of the city are home to some of the most aggressive and dangerous settlers in the West Bank. In the midst of the violence and desperation, a dozen young Palestinian men and women sit in a circle and read the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. They have come because of their refusal to accept defeat and because of their conviction that there is a way forward that does not involve violence, but chooses to draw its strength from love. They are the July 2009 participants in the Nonviolence Youth (NV Youth) Hebron training program, and they are joining their voices with thousands throughout the Palestinian territories and millions around the world who have already been convinced of the potential to create change through nonviolent resistance to injustice.
NV Youth is a project of Love Thy Neighbor (LTN), a nonprofit organization based in Bethesda, MD. Since 2007, LTN has sponsored nonviolence summer camps for children and nonviolence trainings for young adults, and, in fall of 2009, will inaugurate a follow-up leadership training program for graduates of its introductory courses. Through music, literature, art and role play, participants are given the opportunity to build and practice their nonviolence and conflict resolution skills. Discussions about largely nonviolent resistance movements around the world, including the U.S. Civil Rights movement, the South African Anti-Apartheid movement and the Indian Independence movement provoke creative thinking about how new ideas and different strategies can be incorporated into the Palestinian nonviolent struggle against the occupation.
Demand for these programs is high, not because LTN and NV Youth are introducing a new and foreign concept, but because of the long history of nonviolent resistance that is woven throughout Palestinian society and culture. According to LTN’s executive director, Tarek Abuata, the organization has been able to achieve what it has only in partnership with the many other nonviolence initiatives that are already an active part of Palestinian culture. The camps and training programs build on that tradition and set out to expand participation in the movement and provide its leaders with the needed resources that are difficult to obtain under occupation. By empowering young people, LTN and NV Youth are working to ensure that the next generation of Palestinian leaders will be grounded in the tradition and history of nonviolent struggle in their homeland and around the world.
In a society so deeply scarred by injustice and inequality, the message of nonviolence contains an element of hope that offers welcome relief from the daily struggle. Unfortunately, it is a message that is all too often lost on a media that prefers to report on bloodshed and strife. And so it is without fanfare and recognition that the young people of Hebron gathered last month. But they, and thousands like them, will continue to gather and raise their voices against oppression and violence. It is in this stubborn refusal to succumb to injustice or violence that one finds possibilities and hope.
In the West Bank city of Hebron, the unemployment rate is hovering around 28%. Seventy-eight checkpoints, monitored by Israeli soldiers, make even the shortest of trips difficult and time consuming. Four Israeli settlements inside the Hebron city limits, and another five just outside of the city are home to some of the most aggressive and dangerous settlers in the West Bank. In the midst of the violence and desperation, a dozen young Palestinian men and women sit in a circle and read the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. They have come because of their refusal to accept defeat and because of their conviction that there is a way forward that does not involve violence, but chooses to draw its strength from love. They are the July 2009 participants in the Nonviolence Youth (NV Youth) Hebron training program, and they are joining their voices with thousands throughout the Palestinian territories and millions around the world who have already been convinced of the potential to create change through nonviolent resistance to injustice.
NV Youth is a project of Love Thy Neighbor (LTN), a nonprofit organization based in Bethesda, MD. Since 2007, LTN has sponsored nonviolence summer camps for children and nonviolence trainings for young adults, and, in fall of 2009, will inaugurate a follow-up leadership training program for graduates of its introductory courses. Through music, literature, art and role play, participants are given the opportunity to build and practice their nonviolence and conflict resolution skills. Discussions about largely nonviolent resistance movements around the world, including the U.S. Civil Rights movement, the South African Anti-Apartheid movement and the Indian Independence movement provoke creative thinking about how new ideas and different strategies can be incorporated into the Palestinian nonviolent struggle against the occupation.
Demand for these programs is high, not because LTN and NV Youth are introducing a new and foreign concept, but because of the long history of nonviolent resistance that is woven throughout Palestinian society and culture. According to LTN’s executive director, Tarek Abuata, the organization has been able to achieve what it has only in partnership with the many other nonviolence initiatives that are already an active part of Palestinian culture. The camps and training programs build on that tradition and set out to expand participation in the movement and provide its leaders with the needed resources that are difficult to obtain under occupation. By empowering young people, LTN and NV Youth are working to ensure that the next generation of Palestinian leaders will be grounded in the tradition and history of nonviolent struggle in their homeland and around the world.
In a society so deeply scarred by injustice and inequality, the message of nonviolence contains an element of hope that offers welcome relief from the daily struggle. Unfortunately, it is a message that is all too often lost on a media that prefers to report on bloodshed and strife. And so it is without fanfare and recognition that the young people of Hebron gathered last month. But they, and thousands like them, will continue to gather and raise their voices against oppression and violence. It is in this stubborn refusal to succumb to injustice or violence that one finds possibilities and hope.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Israelis "Terrorist"
July 30, 2009
West Bank Settlers Send Obama Defiant Message
By ETHAN BRONNER
NERIA, West Bank — In this land of endless history and ethereal beauty, several thousand Jewish settlers gathered on a dozen West Bank hills with makeshift huts and Israeli flags over several days this week to mark an invented anniversary and defy the American president, conveying to his aides visiting Jerusalem what they thought of his demand for a settlement freeze.
Eleven tiny settler outposts were inaugurated, including one next to this settlement in the rugged Samarian hills. A clearing encompassing a generator and a hut with a corrugated metal roof and a ritual mezuza on its doorpost now bears the name Givat Egoz. This is how nearby Neria, with 180 families, got its start 18 years ago.
“We are rebuilding the land of Israel,” Rabbi Yigael Shandorfi, leader of a religious academy at the neighboring settlement outpost of Nahliel, said during the ceremony. “Our hope is that there will be roads, electricity and water.” The message to President Obama, he said, is that this is Jewish land. He did not use the president’s name, but an insulting Hebrew slang for a black man and the phrase “that Arab they call a president.”
None of the hundreds gathered — mostly couples with large families, but also armed young men and teenagers from other outposts — objected. Yitzhak Shadmi, leader of the regional council of settlements, said Mr. Obama was a racist and anti-Semite for his assertion that Jews should not build here, but Arabs could.
Mr. Shadmi said the ceremonies across the West Bank this week honored a moment in 1946 when Zionists established 11 settlements in the northern Negev of Palestine in defiance of the British rulers before Israel was created. It was important for the new outposts to be established while Washington’s emissaries were visiting, he said. George J. Mitchell, the special envoy for the Middle East, who is pressing the settlement freeze, was in the West Bank at the start of the week.
The national security adviser, James L. Jones, and a White House adviser on the region, Dennis B. Ross, held meetings in Jerusalem on Wednesday as part of the negotiations, which also include attempts to get Arab governments and Palestinians to reciprocate if the Israelis agree to the freeze.
“We wanted to do this while they were here,” Mr. Shadmi said. “We’re saying, ‘Mitchell, go home.’ ”
When the settlement of Neria was created in 1991, it had a similar purpose. Yossi Dermer, spokesman for the settlement, said it was known slyly to intimates as “the James Baker settlement” because it was set up to convey a message of defiance before a visit by James A. Baker III, secretary of state for the first President George Bush.
Because West Bank settlements officially require Israeli government approval and the new outposts did not obtain it, the Israeli police have dismantled several of the new ones already. But just as quickly, they are being rebuilt, sometimes a bit bigger. At nearly every outpost, the ruins left by past police actions lie next to newly built huts.
“We’ll build and build, and every time they destroy it we will build bigger and better and prettier,” asserted Tirael Cohen, a 16-year-old girl who lives at Ramat Migron, an extension of the unauthorized Migron outpost, not far from Ramallah, a large Palestinian city in the West Bank. Ruined corrugated metal and pieces of wood were strewn on the ground nearby.
Tirael has lived at Ramat Migron for a year and a half with 10 other girls, and, at a religiously modest distance away, 10 boys live in a separate structure. The girls cook, the boys build and maintain, and all study at nearby religious academies.
About 40 religious girls from within Israel and West Bank settlements spent three days at Ramat Migron last week in what they called “spiritual preparation” for coming battles over the land.
On the outside wall of the kitchen is a rabbinical quotation about the need to redeem the land of Israel. It says “bare mountains and deserted fields cry out for life and creation,” and adds: “An internal revolution is taking place here, a revolution in man and the earth. These are the true pains of salvation.”
The Migron outpost itself is expected to be taken down because it is built on land that, according to a court case, belongs to private Palestinian families. Centuries-old olive trees dot the landscape.
The Obama administration is hoping to help establish a Palestinian state in nearly all of the West Bank next to Israel. One major challenge is what to do with the 300,000 Israeli Jews who have settled here over four decades, often at their government’s urging.
Many could be incorporated into Israel through a border adjustment; others say they would move if compensated. But some, like these outpost settlers, say they will never move because they believe they are fulfilling God’s plan with every hut they put up. They are likely to be a major stumbling block to any attempt to find a two-state solution.
At the Neria outpost celebration, Noam Rein, a father of 10, looked out across the hills at Ramallah and called its presence “temporary.”
He added: “The Torah says the land of Israel is for the Jewish people. This is just the beginning. We will build 1,000 homes here. The Arabs cannot stay here, not because we hate them, but because this is not their place.”
Among the religious leaders who spoke at the ceremony, Rabbi Yair Remer of Harasha, a nearby outpost, noted that Thursday was the Ninth of Av, a Jewish day of mourning commemorating the destruction of the ancient temples. He suggested that the best way to cope with the tragedy of Jewish history was to do what the young builders of this outpost were doing.
“The land rejoices because its children are returning to her,” he said, referring to Jewish settlers, making no mention of the 2.5 million Palestinians here.
Tirael, the teenager from Ramat Migron, put it another way: “I believe that every inch of this land is us, our blood. If we lose one inch, it is like losing a person.”
West Bank Settlers Send Obama Defiant Message
By ETHAN BRONNER
NERIA, West Bank — In this land of endless history and ethereal beauty, several thousand Jewish settlers gathered on a dozen West Bank hills with makeshift huts and Israeli flags over several days this week to mark an invented anniversary and defy the American president, conveying to his aides visiting Jerusalem what they thought of his demand for a settlement freeze.
Eleven tiny settler outposts were inaugurated, including one next to this settlement in the rugged Samarian hills. A clearing encompassing a generator and a hut with a corrugated metal roof and a ritual mezuza on its doorpost now bears the name Givat Egoz. This is how nearby Neria, with 180 families, got its start 18 years ago.
“We are rebuilding the land of Israel,” Rabbi Yigael Shandorfi, leader of a religious academy at the neighboring settlement outpost of Nahliel, said during the ceremony. “Our hope is that there will be roads, electricity and water.” The message to President Obama, he said, is that this is Jewish land. He did not use the president’s name, but an insulting Hebrew slang for a black man and the phrase “that Arab they call a president.”
None of the hundreds gathered — mostly couples with large families, but also armed young men and teenagers from other outposts — objected. Yitzhak Shadmi, leader of the regional council of settlements, said Mr. Obama was a racist and anti-Semite for his assertion that Jews should not build here, but Arabs could.
Mr. Shadmi said the ceremonies across the West Bank this week honored a moment in 1946 when Zionists established 11 settlements in the northern Negev of Palestine in defiance of the British rulers before Israel was created. It was important for the new outposts to be established while Washington’s emissaries were visiting, he said. George J. Mitchell, the special envoy for the Middle East, who is pressing the settlement freeze, was in the West Bank at the start of the week.
The national security adviser, James L. Jones, and a White House adviser on the region, Dennis B. Ross, held meetings in Jerusalem on Wednesday as part of the negotiations, which also include attempts to get Arab governments and Palestinians to reciprocate if the Israelis agree to the freeze.
“We wanted to do this while they were here,” Mr. Shadmi said. “We’re saying, ‘Mitchell, go home.’ ”
When the settlement of Neria was created in 1991, it had a similar purpose. Yossi Dermer, spokesman for the settlement, said it was known slyly to intimates as “the James Baker settlement” because it was set up to convey a message of defiance before a visit by James A. Baker III, secretary of state for the first President George Bush.
Because West Bank settlements officially require Israeli government approval and the new outposts did not obtain it, the Israeli police have dismantled several of the new ones already. But just as quickly, they are being rebuilt, sometimes a bit bigger. At nearly every outpost, the ruins left by past police actions lie next to newly built huts.
“We’ll build and build, and every time they destroy it we will build bigger and better and prettier,” asserted Tirael Cohen, a 16-year-old girl who lives at Ramat Migron, an extension of the unauthorized Migron outpost, not far from Ramallah, a large Palestinian city in the West Bank. Ruined corrugated metal and pieces of wood were strewn on the ground nearby.
Tirael has lived at Ramat Migron for a year and a half with 10 other girls, and, at a religiously modest distance away, 10 boys live in a separate structure. The girls cook, the boys build and maintain, and all study at nearby religious academies.
About 40 religious girls from within Israel and West Bank settlements spent three days at Ramat Migron last week in what they called “spiritual preparation” for coming battles over the land.
On the outside wall of the kitchen is a rabbinical quotation about the need to redeem the land of Israel. It says “bare mountains and deserted fields cry out for life and creation,” and adds: “An internal revolution is taking place here, a revolution in man and the earth. These are the true pains of salvation.”
The Migron outpost itself is expected to be taken down because it is built on land that, according to a court case, belongs to private Palestinian families. Centuries-old olive trees dot the landscape.
The Obama administration is hoping to help establish a Palestinian state in nearly all of the West Bank next to Israel. One major challenge is what to do with the 300,000 Israeli Jews who have settled here over four decades, often at their government’s urging.
Many could be incorporated into Israel through a border adjustment; others say they would move if compensated. But some, like these outpost settlers, say they will never move because they believe they are fulfilling God’s plan with every hut they put up. They are likely to be a major stumbling block to any attempt to find a two-state solution.
At the Neria outpost celebration, Noam Rein, a father of 10, looked out across the hills at Ramallah and called its presence “temporary.”
He added: “The Torah says the land of Israel is for the Jewish people. This is just the beginning. We will build 1,000 homes here. The Arabs cannot stay here, not because we hate them, but because this is not their place.”
Among the religious leaders who spoke at the ceremony, Rabbi Yair Remer of Harasha, a nearby outpost, noted that Thursday was the Ninth of Av, a Jewish day of mourning commemorating the destruction of the ancient temples. He suggested that the best way to cope with the tragedy of Jewish history was to do what the young builders of this outpost were doing.
“The land rejoices because its children are returning to her,” he said, referring to Jewish settlers, making no mention of the 2.5 million Palestinians here.
Tirael, the teenager from Ramat Migron, put it another way: “I believe that every inch of this land is us, our blood. If we lose one inch, it is like losing a person.”
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Is President Obama the "Enemy" of Israel?
Dear Friend,
Wise words to Israelis from the Jewish perspective (albeit, the more "liberal" Ha'aretz newspaper),
With thanks to our correspondent on the ground, Doug Dicks, Your servant, JRK
Painting Obama as an enemy will hurt Israel badly
by Zvi Bar'el
Ha'eretz -- Sunday - July 26, 2009
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1102815.html
In light of the public brawling between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. President Barack Obama, we can expect to start seeing graffiti saying things like "America, get out," "Obama is an Arab" and "Neither a broker nor honest."
In the new Israeli debate, America is slowly beginning to be perceived as an enemy - and the dispute is going personal: Our prime minister versus their president. Yesterday, he simply demanded that Israel adopt the two-state solution, then called for a freeze on construction in the settlements (without agreeing to settle for "only" the completion of projects already underway), and now he wants to divide Jerusalem. Not Netanyahu - Obama.
The tension already prodded U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton into making a hasty declaration that the United States is placing similar pressure on the Arabs. Washington, too, it would seem, has been infected by the terror of the Israeli right, which seeks to portray it as a pro-Arab, Muslim-loving, aggressive intruder jeopardizing the Zionist enterprise in the territories. And how can we continue to believe the American promise to guarantee Israel's security when every day new headlines trumpet yet another dispute between the White House and Jerusalem?
To back up its claims, the right points to a long list of U.S. foreign-policy failures: the desire to open a channel of dialogue with Iran; the lifting of the boycott on Syria; the willingness to permit Hamas to take part in the peace process, albeit with restrictions; and, of course, the pressure on Israel regarding the settlements and Jerusalem. The right is using this distorted balance sheet, in which Israel is purportedly being asked to give "everything" and the Arabs "nothing," to present the Israeli public with a paradigm in which being "for Obama" means being anti-Zionist, and being against the settlements means being for Obama. A vicious circle in which images replace facts and slogans stand in for policy.
The equation should be familiar to Israelis. Before January it was the sole province of the Arabs in general and the Palestinians in particular. They were the ones who viewed America as the enemy, and former president George W. Bush as a representative of right-wing Zionism. They were the ones who claimed the United States demanded "everything" from them and "nothing" from Israel. As such, being a Palestinian nationalist meant being first of all anti-American.
Since the roles are now reversed and the Palestinians see Obama as their savior, the Israeli right is rushing in to adopt the Palestinian equation. The right doesn't have to persuade the public to support the settlements or the eternal unity of Jerusalem; in fact it no longer has to sell any ideology at all. It's enough to paint Obama as an enemy, or at least as a suspicious object, to create the holy hostile unity. The task is a relatively easy one, especially vis-a-vis the U.S. administration, which is no longer willing to use vague expressions to achieve foreign policy goals.
But the implications of this anti-Americanism are much more dire than the dismantling of a settlement, or even than serious damage to the peace process. It could put Israel in the same pit as the tiny number of states that have sought to oppose the United States.
The remedy lies in reviewing the facts. Obama did not invent a new American policy. The United States has long held that the settlements are illegal; the same is true for the status of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. The Americans are sticking to the same road map drawn up seven years ago, it's just that Israel apparently didn't notice that the Palestinians have fulfilled the first article in the document almost completely. Military action against Israel has stopped, even from the Gaza Strip, and an increasingly effective Palestinian force in the West Bank is taking action against terror organizations. Israel, in contrast, has not met its road map obligations and continues to argue over the terms of the agreement - as if it never adopted it. Nor can Israel rely on its demand that the Arab states normalize relations with Jerusalem: The obligation of normalization is conditioned on Israel's withdrawal from all occupied territory.
There is one thing, however, that the United States has changed: its diplomatic behavior, and its tone. But it is truly difficult to complain about someone no longer willing to stand for the verbal contortions and the lies that Israel has been feeding Washington.
Wise words to Israelis from the Jewish perspective (albeit, the more "liberal" Ha'aretz newspaper),
With thanks to our correspondent on the ground, Doug Dicks, Your servant, JRK
Painting Obama as an enemy will hurt Israel badly
by Zvi Bar'el
Ha'eretz -- Sunday - July 26, 2009
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1102815.html
In light of the public brawling between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. President Barack Obama, we can expect to start seeing graffiti saying things like "America, get out," "Obama is an Arab" and "Neither a broker nor honest."
In the new Israeli debate, America is slowly beginning to be perceived as an enemy - and the dispute is going personal: Our prime minister versus their president. Yesterday, he simply demanded that Israel adopt the two-state solution, then called for a freeze on construction in the settlements (without agreeing to settle for "only" the completion of projects already underway), and now he wants to divide Jerusalem. Not Netanyahu - Obama.
The tension already prodded U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton into making a hasty declaration that the United States is placing similar pressure on the Arabs. Washington, too, it would seem, has been infected by the terror of the Israeli right, which seeks to portray it as a pro-Arab, Muslim-loving, aggressive intruder jeopardizing the Zionist enterprise in the territories. And how can we continue to believe the American promise to guarantee Israel's security when every day new headlines trumpet yet another dispute between the White House and Jerusalem?
To back up its claims, the right points to a long list of U.S. foreign-policy failures: the desire to open a channel of dialogue with Iran; the lifting of the boycott on Syria; the willingness to permit Hamas to take part in the peace process, albeit with restrictions; and, of course, the pressure on Israel regarding the settlements and Jerusalem. The right is using this distorted balance sheet, in which Israel is purportedly being asked to give "everything" and the Arabs "nothing," to present the Israeli public with a paradigm in which being "for Obama" means being anti-Zionist, and being against the settlements means being for Obama. A vicious circle in which images replace facts and slogans stand in for policy.
The equation should be familiar to Israelis. Before January it was the sole province of the Arabs in general and the Palestinians in particular. They were the ones who viewed America as the enemy, and former president George W. Bush as a representative of right-wing Zionism. They were the ones who claimed the United States demanded "everything" from them and "nothing" from Israel. As such, being a Palestinian nationalist meant being first of all anti-American.
Since the roles are now reversed and the Palestinians see Obama as their savior, the Israeli right is rushing in to adopt the Palestinian equation. The right doesn't have to persuade the public to support the settlements or the eternal unity of Jerusalem; in fact it no longer has to sell any ideology at all. It's enough to paint Obama as an enemy, or at least as a suspicious object, to create the holy hostile unity. The task is a relatively easy one, especially vis-a-vis the U.S. administration, which is no longer willing to use vague expressions to achieve foreign policy goals.
But the implications of this anti-Americanism are much more dire than the dismantling of a settlement, or even than serious damage to the peace process. It could put Israel in the same pit as the tiny number of states that have sought to oppose the United States.
The remedy lies in reviewing the facts. Obama did not invent a new American policy. The United States has long held that the settlements are illegal; the same is true for the status of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. The Americans are sticking to the same road map drawn up seven years ago, it's just that Israel apparently didn't notice that the Palestinians have fulfilled the first article in the document almost completely. Military action against Israel has stopped, even from the Gaza Strip, and an increasingly effective Palestinian force in the West Bank is taking action against terror organizations. Israel, in contrast, has not met its road map obligations and continues to argue over the terms of the agreement - as if it never adopted it. Nor can Israel rely on its demand that the Arab states normalize relations with Jerusalem: The obligation of normalization is conditioned on Israel's withdrawal from all occupied territory.
There is one thing, however, that the United States has changed: its diplomatic behavior, and its tone. But it is truly difficult to complain about someone no longer willing to stand for the verbal contortions and the lies that Israel has been feeding Washington.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Israel Plays with Fire
Dear Friend,
The media is actually picking up and reporting the "dispute" between Netanyahu and the Obama administration on settlements.
Here is today's editorial in the newspaper, Ha'aretz, condemning the direction the Israeli P.M. is taking. Pray that Obama will remain adamant in his opposition to further provocations and settlements. JRK
Playing with fire
Haaretz Editorial
Ha'aretz -- Monday - July 20, 2009
The controversy surrounding the plan to create a Jewish enclave in the heart of the Palestinian neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah in East Jerusalem is not another routine expression of the U.S.-Israel dispute over the settlements. The timing of the decision to build dozens of housing units in the Shepherd Hotel complex, at the height of efforts to reach an agreement on limited construction in the settlements, casts doubt over Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's willingness to enter serious negotiations on a final-status agreement. The support he granted the construction project yesterday, despite the vehement condemnations of America and Britain, show he is prepared to endanger Israel's most essential foreign relations for a provocative initiative led by Irving Moskowitz, the patron of right-wing organizations in East Jerusalem.
U.S. President Barack Obama's opposition should not have surprised Netanyahu. The day after Jerusalem Day, when the prime minister declared the city is "Israel's united capital" and would remain forever under Israeli sovereignty, Washington clarified that authority over East Jerusalem would be resolved only through negotiations on a final-status agreement.
Netanyahu's agreement to hold talks based on the principle of "two states for two peoples" must also include readiness to discuss Sheikh Jarrah. Jerusalem is one of the most sensitive issues in the Israeli-Arab conflict. Arab states cannot be expected to normalize relations with Israel while the latter embarrasses them with construction projects in East Jerusalem.
Particularly infuriating is the government's claim that Israel is allowing the Arabs of East Jerusalem to settle in Jewish neighborhoods. Unlike Jewish right-wing organizations - which work to settle Jews in, and take control of, the eastern part of the city - Palestinian residents look to the Jewish areas due to a lack of housing and public services in their own neighborhoods. Since 1967 Israel has expropriated 35 percent of East Jerusalem in order to construct 50,000 housing units in neighborhoods intended primarily for Jews. During the same period, fewer than 600 housing units were built for Palestinian residents with government support.
Construction for Jews in East Jerusalem is inflicting tremendous diplomatic damage on Israel. Netanyahu and Jerusalem mayor Nir Barkat are playing with fire under the transparent cover of "normal authorization for private construction." Freezing construction at Shepherd Hotel is no less essential than evacuating the outposts and freezing settlement construction beyond the capital's municipal area.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1101416.html
The media is actually picking up and reporting the "dispute" between Netanyahu and the Obama administration on settlements.
Here is today's editorial in the newspaper, Ha'aretz, condemning the direction the Israeli P.M. is taking. Pray that Obama will remain adamant in his opposition to further provocations and settlements. JRK
Playing with fire
Haaretz Editorial
Ha'aretz -- Monday - July 20, 2009
The controversy surrounding the plan to create a Jewish enclave in the heart of the Palestinian neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah in East Jerusalem is not another routine expression of the U.S.-Israel dispute over the settlements. The timing of the decision to build dozens of housing units in the Shepherd Hotel complex, at the height of efforts to reach an agreement on limited construction in the settlements, casts doubt over Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's willingness to enter serious negotiations on a final-status agreement. The support he granted the construction project yesterday, despite the vehement condemnations of America and Britain, show he is prepared to endanger Israel's most essential foreign relations for a provocative initiative led by Irving Moskowitz, the patron of right-wing organizations in East Jerusalem.
U.S. President Barack Obama's opposition should not have surprised Netanyahu. The day after Jerusalem Day, when the prime minister declared the city is "Israel's united capital" and would remain forever under Israeli sovereignty, Washington clarified that authority over East Jerusalem would be resolved only through negotiations on a final-status agreement.
Netanyahu's agreement to hold talks based on the principle of "two states for two peoples" must also include readiness to discuss Sheikh Jarrah. Jerusalem is one of the most sensitive issues in the Israeli-Arab conflict. Arab states cannot be expected to normalize relations with Israel while the latter embarrasses them with construction projects in East Jerusalem.
Particularly infuriating is the government's claim that Israel is allowing the Arabs of East Jerusalem to settle in Jewish neighborhoods. Unlike Jewish right-wing organizations - which work to settle Jews in, and take control of, the eastern part of the city - Palestinian residents look to the Jewish areas due to a lack of housing and public services in their own neighborhoods. Since 1967 Israel has expropriated 35 percent of East Jerusalem in order to construct 50,000 housing units in neighborhoods intended primarily for Jews. During the same period, fewer than 600 housing units were built for Palestinian residents with government support.
Construction for Jews in East Jerusalem is inflicting tremendous diplomatic damage on Israel. Netanyahu and Jerusalem mayor Nir Barkat are playing with fire under the transparent cover of "normal authorization for private construction." Freezing construction at Shepherd Hotel is no less essential than evacuating the outposts and freezing settlement construction beyond the capital's municipal area.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1101416.html
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
President Obama, Please Hold Your Course!
Netanyahu's Settlement Smoke Screens
By Gershom Gorenberg
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Washington Post, June 27, 2009
JERUSALEM -- It has become a fixed feature in the Israeli media, almost like the weather forecast. Nearly every day come reports that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's government is on the verge of a deal with President Obama to avoid a full freeze on construction in West Bank settlements. The sources are normally Israeli government officials, with an occasional American source speaking very far off the record.
. . .The Obama administration has purportedly decided to let the concrete mixers keep churning: One day it's that Netanyahu has explained that he can't legally stop construction underway. The next day, he has persuaded Washington to accept "natural growth" of existing settlements or explained that his coalition will fall if he stops building. Together, these reasons are about as substantial as smoke, and if U.S. policymakers have done their homework, they know it.
Take the claim that the Israeli government doesn't have the legal power to stop construction once it has signed contracts with builders, or after buyers have put down money for homes. Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak reportedly made that case to American envoy George Mitchell this month. But under Israeli Supreme Court precedents, the government's authority to set policy in territory under "belligerent occupation" (the court's terminology) trumps the interests of settlers and Israeli companies.
In 1992, the government of Yitzhak Rabin imposed a partial construction freeze in the West Bank. In two rulings, the Israeli Supreme Court rejected challenges to the freeze by developers and the municipal governments of settlements. The court eliminated any doubts left by those decisions with a far-reaching ruling in 2005, when it upheld the authority of the government and parliament to evacuate settlers from their homes in the Gaza Strip.
Achieving goals such as "peace, security, [and] international recognition" justified harming settlers' property rights and civil rights as long as they received financial compensation, Israel's highest court held. Let's be logical. If, for reasons of state, the court allowed the government to remove settlers from homes where they had lived for years, it would allow the state to prevent Israelis from completing homes where they haven't yet chosen the kitchen tiles. The only legal question would be how much compensation developers and buyers would receive. Netanyahu's reported assertion that he's hamstrung comes down to a hope that no one in Washington checks Israeli legal history.
Another claim is that the major building projects are in "settlement blocs" that are sure to remain in Israeli hands after a peace agreement. The term "blocs" refers loosely to clusters of large communities, most close to the pre-1967 border -- the Ma'aleh Adumim region east of Jerusalem, for instance. But the precise area of the blocs has never been defined. More important, Israel and the Palestinians have yet to reach an agreement on future borders. Lack of certainty about the blocs' future and their size is exactly the reason that the Israeli government continues to promote the blocs' expansion. As always, the purpose of settlement is to create a large enough Israeli presence that evacuation will seem impossible.
The argument that allowance must be made for "natural growth" of settlements is equally specious. Supposedly, building is needed to accommodate growing families and the adult children of settlers. But the alternative is obvious: Settlers have the option of moving into Israel proper; so do their children. In reality, migration has consistently flowed the opposite way, with the government's help.
As for Netanyahu's coalition -- yes, it could crack if he stops settlement expansion and his endorsement of a Palestinian state shifts from lip service to a diplomatic strategy. But Netanyahu's hard-right coalition is his choice. His Likud Party won fewer votes in the last election than Tzipi Livni's centrist Kadima party. Coalition talks with Livni collapsed over Netanyahu's unwillingness to pursue a two-state solution.
Netanyahu could still change his mind. In a multi-party parliamentary democracy, reshuffling a coalition is politics as usual. Livni would also resist an open-ended settlement freeze. But since her goal is to pursue the diplomatic process, she'd have an easier time agreeing to a defined moratorium -- allowing time for talks to proceed. A new coalition would be no less democratically chosen and would be more capable of pursuing peace. Netanyahu resists such a change for the same reason that he wants to expand settlements. He remains an ideological hard-liner, committed to keeping the maximum amount of land under Israeli rule.
All pretexts aside, Netanyahu agrees with Obama on this much: Building settlements stands in the way of an Israeli pullback and an agreement based on two states. They disagree on whether that's good or bad.
Amid all the rumors, the real question is whether the Obama administration will blink first or stand firm on a freeze as an essential step toward making peace.
Gershom Gorenberg is the author of "The Accidental Empire: Israel and the Birth of the Settlements, 1967-1977" and a senior correspondent for the American Prospect. He blogs at http://SouthJerusalem.com.
By Gershom Gorenberg
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Washington Post, June 27, 2009
JERUSALEM -- It has become a fixed feature in the Israeli media, almost like the weather forecast. Nearly every day come reports that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's government is on the verge of a deal with President Obama to avoid a full freeze on construction in West Bank settlements. The sources are normally Israeli government officials, with an occasional American source speaking very far off the record.
. . .The Obama administration has purportedly decided to let the concrete mixers keep churning: One day it's that Netanyahu has explained that he can't legally stop construction underway. The next day, he has persuaded Washington to accept "natural growth" of existing settlements or explained that his coalition will fall if he stops building. Together, these reasons are about as substantial as smoke, and if U.S. policymakers have done their homework, they know it.
Take the claim that the Israeli government doesn't have the legal power to stop construction once it has signed contracts with builders, or after buyers have put down money for homes. Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak reportedly made that case to American envoy George Mitchell this month. But under Israeli Supreme Court precedents, the government's authority to set policy in territory under "belligerent occupation" (the court's terminology) trumps the interests of settlers and Israeli companies.
In 1992, the government of Yitzhak Rabin imposed a partial construction freeze in the West Bank. In two rulings, the Israeli Supreme Court rejected challenges to the freeze by developers and the municipal governments of settlements. The court eliminated any doubts left by those decisions with a far-reaching ruling in 2005, when it upheld the authority of the government and parliament to evacuate settlers from their homes in the Gaza Strip.
Achieving goals such as "peace, security, [and] international recognition" justified harming settlers' property rights and civil rights as long as they received financial compensation, Israel's highest court held. Let's be logical. If, for reasons of state, the court allowed the government to remove settlers from homes where they had lived for years, it would allow the state to prevent Israelis from completing homes where they haven't yet chosen the kitchen tiles. The only legal question would be how much compensation developers and buyers would receive. Netanyahu's reported assertion that he's hamstrung comes down to a hope that no one in Washington checks Israeli legal history.
Another claim is that the major building projects are in "settlement blocs" that are sure to remain in Israeli hands after a peace agreement. The term "blocs" refers loosely to clusters of large communities, most close to the pre-1967 border -- the Ma'aleh Adumim region east of Jerusalem, for instance. But the precise area of the blocs has never been defined. More important, Israel and the Palestinians have yet to reach an agreement on future borders. Lack of certainty about the blocs' future and their size is exactly the reason that the Israeli government continues to promote the blocs' expansion. As always, the purpose of settlement is to create a large enough Israeli presence that evacuation will seem impossible.
The argument that allowance must be made for "natural growth" of settlements is equally specious. Supposedly, building is needed to accommodate growing families and the adult children of settlers. But the alternative is obvious: Settlers have the option of moving into Israel proper; so do their children. In reality, migration has consistently flowed the opposite way, with the government's help.
As for Netanyahu's coalition -- yes, it could crack if he stops settlement expansion and his endorsement of a Palestinian state shifts from lip service to a diplomatic strategy. But Netanyahu's hard-right coalition is his choice. His Likud Party won fewer votes in the last election than Tzipi Livni's centrist Kadima party. Coalition talks with Livni collapsed over Netanyahu's unwillingness to pursue a two-state solution.
Netanyahu could still change his mind. In a multi-party parliamentary democracy, reshuffling a coalition is politics as usual. Livni would also resist an open-ended settlement freeze. But since her goal is to pursue the diplomatic process, she'd have an easier time agreeing to a defined moratorium -- allowing time for talks to proceed. A new coalition would be no less democratically chosen and would be more capable of pursuing peace. Netanyahu resists such a change for the same reason that he wants to expand settlements. He remains an ideological hard-liner, committed to keeping the maximum amount of land under Israeli rule.
All pretexts aside, Netanyahu agrees with Obama on this much: Building settlements stands in the way of an Israeli pullback and an agreement based on two states. They disagree on whether that's good or bad.
Amid all the rumors, the real question is whether the Obama administration will blink first or stand firm on a freeze as an essential step toward making peace.
Gershom Gorenberg is the author of "The Accidental Empire: Israel and the Birth of the Settlements, 1967-1977" and a senior correspondent for the American Prospect. He blogs at http://SouthJerusalem.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)