EDITOR: On the road to nowhere, again…

So, once again, Israel holds a debate with itself, excluding not only the rest of the world, but specifically, the Palestinians. Well, what else is new? it is what Israel did for decades; they prefer to debate with a side which agrees with it. In this case, while the Israeli public is far from being in agreement with its government about most issues, it is still slavishly synchronised with its refusal to engage with realities in the Middle East, or to properly discuss how the occupation may be brought to an end, and how a just peace may be approached. Having behaved like an ostrich for over six decades, why change now?

So, we can look forward to more denial, more bloodshed, more misery for all in Palestine and Israel. But the world around Israel is not the same that it was for decades – most people outside of Israel have noted this, of course; the Arab Spring might not be an overnight utopia, but it is far from over, and far from being written off as a failure. Indeed, to date, it has achieved much more than the world-famous 1968 in Paris, which in hindsight looks like a deflated balloon, despite all the hype. So, in the new and still forming Middle East, moving painfully towards democracy, Israeli dependence and reliance on dictators and potentates for its continuation of occupation ans apartheid seems somewhat less safe than it was last year. Indeed, the Israeli Jewish population itself was amazingly fired into radical action by the Arab Spring surrounding it… that their tame uprising and calls for ‘social justice’ seem to have excluded the main political issue of the occupation of Palestine is evidence of the difficulties of the so called “Jewish Democracy” in Israel, a democracy for Jews only. What we can advise the Israeli ‘radicals’ in their dwindling tents, is another session of education, concentrating on colonialism and imperialism this time, which may bring some better understanding of the hell they created for themselves and the Palestinians. There is little chance for this taking place, though. They are likely to continue fighting for reducing the price of cottage cheese, thinking this is a struggle for ‘social justice’.So, the protesters include the settlers, who are now being massively armed in order to stop any Palestinian protest after September 20th. This is NOT Socialism; this is Nazional-Socialism!

Well, it is easier to fight over the price of cheese, that to face six decades of colonial, racist policies and actions. Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the fairest of them all?

The Israel-Egypt junta alliance: Haaretz

Now Israel stands in fear and trepidation, counting the days until the Camp David agreement with Egypt comes crashing down.
By Zvi Bar’el
We were shocked. Suddenly we were told that Egypt is being run by a “military junta.” We were also surprised to discover that after 33 years of peace, the peace agreement was signed with a dictator, and that we continued on with the dictator who followed him after he was assassinated. And now this peace is about to collapse, because the dictator is gone and the junta has arrived.

Now Israel stands in fear and trepidation, counting the days until the Camp David agreement with Egypt comes crashing down. In Israel, the peace agreement is perceived as a prelude to war. Even if another 100 years pass after its signature, it is a threat.

So here is the solution: Instead of getting excited every morning about Egyptian statements regarding a “reevaluation” of the Camp David Accords, and instead of waiting around in fear for the moment when Egypt will announce a demand that the agreements be changed, Israel should initiate a cancellation of the peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan, until those countries have a genuine democracy or real dictatorship of the sort that Israel knows how to cooperate with.

We would, of course, very much like to see a military junta stay on in Egypt, under General Tantawi, managing affairs and keeping Tahrir Square from deciding who will lead the country. Peace with Egyptian citizens is much more expensive than peace with a junta or with a dictator. The people demand peace with the Palestinians, withdrawal from the territories, the demarcation of borders, and the rest of the demands that the dictators did not insist on. But how is it possible to continue living in peace with a military junta that answers to the voice of the street?

The truth is that we actually like military juntas. In Turkey we loved the junta that bought drones from us, upgraded its tanks and cooperated with us on intelligence. But now the country is led by a “civilian junta,” an “Islamic” one that was elected democratically. And, once more, surprise: It turns out that even a democracy is not the magic solution. It is even dangerous for ties between countries. In Egypt, we liked Hosni Mubarak because he was part of the military establishment, and we also liked also Anwar Sadat who preceded him. King Hussein relied on his army, and when he signed the peace agreement with Israel he did not consult the Jordanian people.

We liked military juntas in the Arab world, and in Chile, Argentina and Ethiopia. Military juntas speak a similar language. They understand one another; their interests are narrow and specific; they are scornful of civilians, certain that without them their countries will fall into chaos, and that civilian politics – democracy – is a recipe for the country’s collapse. Juntas operate in the name of a desired value that is supreme to all other values: security. All the rest – education, health, social services, civil rights – can exist only if the junta ensures security.

“The nation and the army together,” demonstrators cried in Tahrir Square.

Our junta would love it if Rothschild Boulevard would burst like a bubble. Civilians with round glasses, three-quarter-length pants, some of whom never served in the army, some smoking illegal grass, would then get their hands off the junta’s money-box and stop interpreting, without any authority, the holy budget, and especially the sections on defense.

Our junta wants the public to raise red banners like the ones in Tahrir Square, calling out, “The nation and the army together” – but with its interpretation. The people must not stick their hands in the army’s pockets.

The difference between Egypt and Israel is that here there are two military juntas: the one that is appointed and the one that is elected. There is one that shapes the internal policy of the state through the enormous budget that it claims for itself, and there is one that approves these budgets for its twin. There is the one that goes to war to defend the homeland, and the one that determines what the borders of the motherland are that the army must defend.

In Egypt, the military junta does not camouflage itself, even when it moves into ministries. Those who carried a military rank continue to take pride in it also as “civilians.”

In Israel, of the twin juntas, one wears uniforms and ranks, and the other wears suits and ties – but it is the same generals. And here is another discovery: That same junta that is now running Egypt would not have taken over were it not for the civilian mutiny that threw out the previous regime. Egypt did not undergo a military revolution, but a civilian one. The army is the one who extended a hand to the civilians. But this is Egypt, and it has never served as our model. It is, after all, a dictatorship.

French giant Veolia cut down to size for abusing Palestinian rights: The Electronic Intifada

Maren Mantovani and Michael Deas  26 August 2011

The French corporation Veolia once appeared unassailable; today it is ailing. It is faced not only with the global economic crisis but also the growing impact of the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign against its involvement with Israeli apartheid infrastructure and transport projects. A recent merger between Veolia’s transport division and a subsidiary of the main French state investment fund indicates French industry and government have united to find a simple solution to Veolia’s problems: let the taxpayers finance Veolia’s income losses — and its complicity with Israeli war crimes and human rights abuses against the Palestinian people.

On 4 August, Veolia management held a conference call with major financial analysts to defend the company’s latest figures. It wasn’t an easy task. Veolia’s management was forced to gloss over the terrible financial situation of the group that has forced it to draw up sharp cost reduction plans, initiate a complete restructuring of management, plan the pullout from more than forty countries and search for more investors to cover a high debt.

Veolia has lost more than 50 percent of its share value since March 2011, according to tear sheet data from The Financial Times (“Marketdata: Veolia Environnement Ve SA,” accessed 25 August 2011).

However, among the underlying financial data discussed — €67 million ($96 million) in net loss during the first half of this year; €15 billion ($21.6 billion) net debts; €250 million ($360 million) yearly cost reduction — one number did not come up: the massive financial damage the company has faced at the hands of the BDS movement. Since the beginning of the Palestinian-led campaign in 2005, Veolia has lost contracts worth more than €10 billion ($14 billion) following high profile campaigns.

Veolia’s chief financial officer Pierre-Antoine Riolacci had to admit that its municipal services are suffering a downturn in some countries “in particular with pressure on the downside, namely in the UK where things are rather difficult.”

Ignoring London loss
Surely the CFO had heard the news from across the English Channel the day before the conference call, where Veolia had failed to be selected for a £300 million ($493 million) contract by Ealing Council in London following a determined campaign by the local branch of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign.

The worldwide campaign against Veolia was initiated in response to the company’s five percent stake in the consortium that is constructing the light rail project that links West Jerusalem with illegal Israeli settlements in occupied East Jerusalem and the surrounding West Bank, thereby cementing Israeli colonization and creating the necessary infrastructure for its further expansion. Moreover, Veolia holds a thirty-year contract for the operation of its first line, due to open later this month. Veolia and its subsidiaries also operate bus services, waste management and a landfill all deep within the occupied West Bank, and all for the use of Israeli settlers. All of these projects contribute to war crimes, as defined by the Fourth Geneva Convention and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

Refusal to withdraw from Israel
Despite its apparent desperation to reduce costs, Veolia has yet to implement the most effective cost reduction strategy it could: including Israel in the list of countries it plans to withdraw from. Rather than divesting from Israeli colonization of Palestinian land, Veolia is turning to the French state for financial assistance, involving public money in operations abetting Israeli war crimes.

This spring Veolia Transport merged with Transdev into a newly created company Veolia Transdev (“Veolia Transdev: Creation of the world’s leading private-sector company in sustainable mobility,” press statement, 3 March 2011).

Transdev was a subsidiary of the French Caisse des Dépôts (CDC), a public investment authority that manages public funds and is overseen by the French parliament. The CDC is now a 50 percent partner in the newly created Veolia Transdev transport company. According to Veolia’s Pierre-Antoine Riolacci, the entrance of Transdev intp the group has allowed Veolia to “cut back our debt by €159 million [$229 million].” The degree to which Veolia Transdev has come under the protection of the French state is evident in the fact that during the conference call, Veolia Transdev issues were directly dealt with by the CDC’s chief executive Jerome Gallot.

On its website, CDC boasts that it exists to “serve the general interest and the economic development” of France. But pumping French tax money into Veolia to make up for its financial troubles, thus allowing it to push forward projects that serve illegal Israeli population transfers into occupied Palestinian territory, is unlikely to help attain either goal. Moreover, the Jerusalem light rail project contradicts French government policy that East Jerusalem should be the capital of a future Palestinian state. Promoting the project in 2005, then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon stated, “This [light rail] should be done … to strengthen Jerusalem, construct it, expand it and sustain it for eternity as the capital of the Jewish people and the united capital of the state of Israel.”

Even before its partial ownership of Veolia Transdev, CDC was involved in the light rail project through its subsidiary Egis Rail, which won a contract in 2008 to assist with managing the project. The current role of Egis Rail is unclear.

Private companies have long been heavily involved in Israeli violations of Palestinian human rights, such as building and maintaining the illegal settlement infrastructure, and the wall built on Israeli-occupied Palestinian land in the West Bank. But by investing in Veolia, the French government is bucking a recent European trend of governments to start ensuring public enterprises and institutions are not complicit with Israeli violations of international law.

The German government recently responded to public pressure by taking steps to end the state-owned company Deutsche Bahn’s involvement in the construction of a train line from Jerusalem to Tel Aviv passing through the occupied West Bank. Explaining its intervention, the German transport ministry pointed to the “potentially illegal” nature of the project and the fact that it is inconsistent with government policy toward Israel and the Palestinians (“Letter from German government to Die Linke parliamentarian concerning A1 train project,” 10 May 2011). The German foreign ministry has admirably published an alert on its website warning German companies about the potential legal consequences of Israeli projects in the occupied West Bank (“West Bank, Economy”).

Precedents set by other European capitals
The Norwegian government took a precedent-setting step when it excluded Elbit Systems from its investment portfolio. Elbit is an Israeli arms company involved in the construction of Israel’s illegal wall in the West Bank. It subsequently also excluded Africa Israel and Danya Cebus, two companies which build illegal Israeli-only settlements in the West Bank (“Norwegian government pension fund excludes more Israeli companies,” 23 August 2010).

The British government also took a stand on the issue when, in 2009, the foreign ministry pulled out of a deal to rent office space for its embassy in a building owned by Lev Leviev, the Israeli diamond tycoon who owns Africa Israel and finances development of illegal settlements in the West Bank. The British government also withdrew export licenses to Israel from UK arms companies that provided the Israeli military with weapons or components that have been used during the winter 2008-09 attacks on the Gaza Strip (“Israel arms licenses revoked by Britain,” The Huffington Post, 13 July 2009).

In September 2009, the Spanish government excluded Ariel university from a state-sponsored architecture competition after having become aware that it was located in an illegal settlement.

The French government, however, has so far failed to take action to end such complicity. By doing so, France is not only undermining important precedents set by its allies. It also violates its obligations under international law and the voluntary commitments it has made regarding good governance and corporate social responsibility.

France must honor obligations
When the International Court of Justice ruled on the illegality of Israel’s apartheid wall and related infrastructure in the occupied West Bank, it also ruled that third party states are obliged not to aid or assist the maintenance of the unlawful situation created by Israel or infringements of the right to Palestinian self-determination. Two companies owned by the French state fund CDC — Veolia and Egis Rail — are involved with and profit from such unlawful acts. This calls France’s commitment to international law into question.

In June, the United Nations Human Rights Council approved its new Guiding Principles for the implementation of the Protect, Respect and Remedy Framework, designed to help states and businesses understand their duty to prevent corporate abuse of human rights and their obligations under international law (“Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ Framework,” 21 March 2011).

According to these principles, “states should take additional steps to protect against human rights abuses by business enterprises that are owned or controlled by the state … [including by] denying access to public support and services for a business enterprise that is involved with gross human rights abuses and refuses to cooperate in addressing the situation.”

Involvement in the light rail project also violates the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s guidelines on multinational companies. Considering that Paris is the seat of the OECD, this is particularly ironic (“OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises,” 2008 [PDF]).

The OECD guidelines call for companies to “respect the human rights of those affected by their activities consistent with the host government’s international obligations and commitments.” Israel’s settlements and associated infrastructure violate several key international law treaties, including the Fourth Geneva Convention, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, all of which have been ratified by Israel and France.

The French government has become a shareholder in Veolia in full knowledge of that company’s role in supporting Israeli occupation and colonization of Palestinian land. The principal victims of this French policy are the Palestinian people. However, this development should also be of concern to all those who believe in the importance of a functioning system of international law and the implementation of human rights standards. The French people, whose taxes have financed the Veolia Transdev merger, should be especially concerned.

It will be up to campaigners in France and all around the globe to stop governmental buy-ins to illegal operations of private or state enterprises. It will be their task to ensure that the Transdev deal will not be enough to shield Veolia from the impact of the BDS movement’s demand for accountability. The group is in financial trouble and its CFO has admitted that Veoila is losing municipal service contracts in cities and regions that have seen meticulous grassroots campaigning. In December, Veolia will present the full list of countries which it is leaving (“Veolia to leave 37 countries as loss spurs quicker revamp,” Bloomberg, 4 August 2011).

This might be another chance for the company to show that it has learned that failure to respect human rights and the Palestinians’ right to self-determination comes with a price.

Maren Mantovani is coordinator for international relations with Stop the Wall, the Palestinian Grassroots Anti-Apartheid Wall Campaign.

Continue reading August 31, 2011

The reason why the Egyptians hate us: Haaretz

The masses demonstrating against Israel now are the same masses who once welcomed the Israelis; the hatred has sparked, but it does not have to be this way.
By Gideon Levy
The Israeli flag that was taken down by a young Egyptian from the window of the Israeli Embassy in Cairo was faded and worn, flying from an old, nondescript office tower, invisible from the street to the naked eye. A great deal of murky water has flowed through the Nile since the flag was first unfurled; people who think that the hatred for Israel that is now boiling over is a divine edict, fate or the wrath of nature, should think back to the early days of peace between Israel and Egypt. Then, in the carefree 1980s, tens of thousands of Israelis streamed to Egypt and were welcomed with open joy. It was a pleasure to be an Israeli in Cairo in those days; sometimes even a great honor.

The masses demonstrating against Israel now are the same masses who once welcomed the Israelis. Even if Friday’s “million-man rally” against Israel only became a thousand-man march, the hatred has sparked. But it does not have to be this way.

The fact that it has not always been this way should be food for thought in Israel. But as usual, the question of why does not come up for discussion here. Why is there terror? Because. Why is there hatred? Because. It is much easier to think that Egypt hates us and that’s that, and divest ourselves of responsibility. Peace with Egypt, which is considered an asset only when it is at risk, was a peace that Israel toyed with and breached from the beginning.

It required recognizing the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and granting it autonomy within five years. Israel conducted ridiculous negotiations, headed by its interior minister (Yosef Burg ) with the intention of making the negotiations go away, and never met its obligations. The invasion of Lebanon the day after the treaty was completed in 1982 was dangerous and impertinent. Against all odds, Egypt withstood this baiting.

People who ask why Egyptians hate us should think back to these two pivotal actions by Israel. Public memory may be short-lived, but hatred is not. Its flames have been fanned since then. People who want to understand why the Egyptians hate us should recall the scenes of Operations Cast Lead and Defensive Shield, the bombing of Beirut and the shelling of Rafah. If Israelis were exposed to scenes in which some country acted in the same way toward Jews, such hatred would burn within us toward that country as well. The Arab masses saw terrible pictures and its hatred increased.

That hatred had fateful significance with the arrival of the Arab Spring. The rules of the game in the new Middle East changed. Peace and cease-fire agreements to which the tyrants in the old Egypt, Syria and Jordan held with much gnashing of teeth, could no longer be preserved in democratic or partially democratic regimes. From now on, the people are speaking; they will not stand for violent or colonialist behavior toward Arabs, and their leaders will have to take this into consideration. The occupation, and Israel’s exaggerated shows of force in response to terror attacks, are now being put to the test of the peoples, not just their rulers.

There is a positive side to this in that it may rein Israel in, as has already recently been seen with regard to Gaza: If not for the new Egypt, perhaps we would already be in the throes of Operation Cast Lead 2. But in the long-term, this will not be enough to hold back our forces and hold our fire.

It is becoming exhausting to reiterate this, but it is now truer than ever: Israel no longer has the option of living only by the sword. The dangers inherent in the new reality that is emerging before our very eyes are not of the type that military prowess alone can overcome for years. We cannot gird ourselves forever, no matter how protected and armed we are. The new Arab leaderships will not be able to ignore the desires of their peoples, and their peoples will not accept Israel as a violent occupier in the region. Not only does an Operation Cast Lead become almost impossible, the continued occupation endangers Israel – the longer it lasts, the stronger the resistance to Israel’s very existence.

It is not difficult to imagine how things could be different. It’s enough to recall the first days of peace with Egypt, or the early days of Oslo – until the Arabs recognized the fraud. It is not difficult to imagine peace agreements that would lead to the end of the occupation and a response to the Arab peace initiative. The only way is to create a new Israel in the eyes of the new Arab world. Only if this happens can we return to Cairo’s Khan el-Khalili market and be accepted there. Let us not waste words over the alternative; it does not exist for Israel.

MAD ISRAELIS: From the Horse’s Mouth

EDITOR: The Guide for discivering Anti-Semites

What can we do – anti-semitism is so prevalent: “the whole world is against us”, even the Arab potentates, like Mubarak, who did all they could to aid Israel, against the interests of their own Egyptain people, not to mention the Palestinians… Israelis cannot decide if they loved or hated Mubarak, and oscillate between the two positions daily.

There is only one certainty for Israelis of this kind, and without it their world would collapse: The whole world is anti-semitic and hates Jews and Israel. What would they do without their wet dream of anti-semitism? Of course, reading this diatribe of a demented mind, one can really see the anti-semitic thinking controlling Israel’s sick society. The anti-semites are mainly in Israel, rather than outside…

The two pieces below are quite typical of the kind of drooling right wing howling published daily in Israel.

Hosni Mubarak’s revenge: Ynet

Op-ed: Anti-Israel Mubarak, who encouraged Jew hatred, must be savoring Sinai catastrophe
Moshe Dann
For three decades, Hosni Mubarak tried to undermine the peace process that his predecessor, Anwar Sadat, set in motion. Except for one visit – for Yitzhak Rabin’s funeral – he never visited Israel and viciously attacked Israel whenever possible.

He taught his people to despise Israel and, along with Saudi Arabia and others, was a purveyor of Jew-hatred. Egypt was a major publisher of Hitler’s Mein Kampf and the notorious Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and promoted this poison throughout the Arab world.

On trial in Cairo for crimes against his own people, at least he can savor his legacy of hatred for Jews and Israel, watching the Sinai Peninsula becoming the dagger of his revenge.

He might also remember his accomplices in the US, Europe, and even in Israel who refused to challenge his ruthlessness and his policies. Although an unsavory partner, he was willing to keep minimal contractual agreements with Israel to supply natural gas, as long as the golden eggs from that goose fell into his pockets.

Mubarak played a delicate game of subterfuge regarding Israel. He understood that defeating Israel on the battlefield was not possible; indirect means were more effective.

Allowing the Sinai Peninsula to be used as a transit area for weapons and terrorists, for example, was easy; it provides revenue for Bedouins and Egypt was not held responsible. Israel’s interception of the Karine A, a ship filled with weapons for Palestinian terrorists headed for Sinai proved how the system worked. No one blamed Egypt.

Indeed, according to intelligence sources weapons flow freely from Libya, Iran and Sudan through Egypt into Sinai and the Gaza Strip.

Mubarak measured his hostility towards Israel – like other regional dictators – to placate his American and European supporters. But he also needed to pay attention to his domestic rivals, extremist Islamic groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, an indigenous Egyptian organization with wide popular support. Cracking down on them was tolerated by the West and the Egyptian power elite as the price of stability.

Heavily dependent on tourism, Egypt needed to maintain an aura of peace; terrorism against domestic targets, especially tourists, was a knife in the heart of Egypt’s economy.

Israel went along with Mubarak’s charade of peace because it meant no war. Mubarak understood this weakness and used it shrewdly, condemning and undermining Israel and supporting Israel’s enemies – called “cold peace.”

Sinai an extension of Gaza
Two events changed the game: Israel’s withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and the revolution in Egypt.

With Israel no longer in control of the border area known as the Philadelphia Corridor, Gazans were in direct contact and sometimes conflict with Egypt. Massive tunneling under the border required Egyptian compliance and cooperation; it also meant Egyptian responsibility for trade with Gaza. When Hamas took over, it provided the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamist and Jihadist groups with a de facto semi-sovereign territorial base directly on Israel’s borders. The Sinai Peninsula became the critical land bridge for terrorists between Egypt and Gaza to launch attacks on Israel.

Once Mubarak was overthrown, therefore, all nominal restraints on terrorists disappeared. Sinai became hostile and lawless territory, controlled by an estimated 350,000 Bedouin who don’t consider themselves Egyptians, or under Egypt’s authority. A few thousand Egyptian police, their number severely limited by the Camp David Agreements, were and are no match for the Bedouin.

The Sinai has now become an extension of the Gaza Strip with one main difference: It is under Egyptian sovereignty. In order to regain control Egypt will have to deploy a massive number of troops to subdue the Bedouin, Hamas, Islamists, Jihadists, etc. Their hands full with domestic turmoil, it’s doubtful they can, or want to do it, since Israel is the primary victim of semi-anarchy.

Israeli leaders who ignored these developments were either grossly incompetent or politically motivated. Once Hamas took over in the Gaza Strip, the imperative of building a fence along the Egyptian border should have been the highest priority. It was not.

Egypt’s ability and commitment to supply Israel with natural gas is now in doubt. Infiltration and smuggling are increasing. The vulnerability of this border is the most serious threat to Israel’s security today. Egyptian politicians and Islamists are calling for an end to peace treaty with Israel and may soon have the power to abrogate it.

Although Israel has no control over what happens in other countries, it does have the right to protect itself. According to international law, respecting the sovereignty and/or integrity of another country or entity becomes invalid when that country or entity is unable or unwilling to prevent attacks from its territory, or is a sponsor or co-sponsor of attacks.

The first obligation of a government is to protect its citizens. If it cannot, or is willing to do so, it has forfeited its mandate and should resign.

No more Israeli apologies: Ynet

Op-ed: In face of world indifference, Israel should be fighting terror without apologizing
Avi Yesawich
While rockets were falling on Israeli towns and innocent Jewish blood was being spilled, an odd debate raged on in the UN Security Council: whether to issue a condemnation of the recent terror attacks perpetrated against innocent Israeli civilians, including children. Amazingly enough, a current member of the Security Council – Lebanon – prevented the condemnation from coming to fruition.

The Lebanese demanded a toned down, more “balanced” denunciation that includes criticism of Israeli retaliatory strikes in Gaza. It did not matter that the IDF responded by attacking legitimate targets – leaders of the terror group that executed the attacks, weapons compounds, smuggling tunnels and rocket and mortar cells aiming to kill Jews indiscriminately. No condemnation was issued, and no one blinked an eye.

The Arab League also announced an emergency session over Israeli retaliation in the Strip. Apparently, the death of some murderers was a more pressing affair than the thousands of casualties in Syria, ongoing riots in Yemen, and the civil war in Libya.

The Palestinian Authority, as usual, issued a lackadaisical rebuke of the loss of innocent life, while focusing on punitive anti-Israel censure. This leadership is expected to lead a Palestinian statehood bid in September, despite the absence of even a semblance of government unity, adequate control over terror groups, undefined borders, massive corruption and economic mismanagement. Still, the world doesn’t seem to mind too much.

The Egyptians, without even a shred of corroborating evidence, rushed to blame the IDF – rather than lunatic Islamic fanatics – for the death of Egyptian soldiers. Hundreds of demonstrators gathered outside Israel’s embassy in Cairo, demanding the abrogation of the 1979 peace treaty. It seems quite evident that many Egyptians were looking for a reason to blame us, even when such blame was bogus, but this seems to have fallen on deaf ears as well.

Meanwhile, hours after a “ceasefire” was mediated by Egypt and supposedly accepted by Hamas and other Gaza factions, Israel was hit by several rocket attacks. Again, condemnations from the international community remained elusive.

And where are the NGOs, media commentators, politicians and heads of state, social activists and proponents of human rights? The answer to that question is mostly rhetorical.

Aggressive PR campaign
How much more of this blatant hypocrisy can we possibly endure? The world expects us to act with restraint every time we face violence and odium from our enemies. Yet when Islamic fanatics are murdering Israeli civilians, global media’s silence is deafening. The time has come for us to say enough is enough. We will proudly defend our country, we will respond forcefully to the threats against us, and we will not lie down silently as the enemies sworn to our destruction attempt to turn their vision of a Jew-free Palestine into reality.

Above all, we will not apologize for our actions.
If the rocket fire doesn’t stop willingly, we will ensure its cessation by appropriate military and political action. No apologies will be necessary, as our enemies have provided us with no other feasible option. Nearly a million citizens will not be subjugated to permanent disruption of their daily lives. If we have to traverse into Gaza and root out terrorist elements by force, then that’s exactly what we will do.

If our enemies do not want to engage in dialogue or respect ceasefires, Israel will make them pay, heavily. Let the international community cry foul, but we should meet our national obligations and defend our honor: as long as foreign observers do not have civilian buses being shot up or rockets falling on their cities, their criticisms should be respectfully, yet sternly, put aside while we tend to our own national interests. We are fighting for our lives, not theirs.

The defensive PR campaign strategy must be eradicated. When Israel faces these violent confrontations, it must initiate an aggressive, pro-active approach highlighting the atrocious nature of our enemies’ actions. Remind the world that the Palestinians are not united and that a peaceful Palestinian state at this moment is nothing more than a pipedream. Hamas can’t even reign in the terror in its own 140 square mile backyard.

Show the world images of hundreds of rockets falling on our cities, buses riddled with bullet holes and Israelis running for their lives, huddled in bomb shelters trying to evade death.

Whatever action we decide to pursue in the face of repeated attacks on our civilians, one thing is clear: Even if the world demands an apology, it doesn’t the demand is justified. We live under daily threats of terror and death, and we will tend to those dangers without apologizing.

Avi Yesawich is an independent journalist and political commentator on Middle East politics. He holds degrees from Cornell University and Tel Aviv University, is an IDF combat reservist and contributor to the IDF activism website, www.friendasoldier.com

 

EDITOR: Is Cairo forgetting the Palestinians again?

Over the last week, since the attacks on the road to Eilat and the death of five Egyptian soldiers killed by the IDF, it seemed that the Egyptian society is returning to the unfulfilled Camp David agreements, and the fact that both Sadat and Mubarak have abandoned the Palestinians to their miserable fate, becoming Israel’s security guarantor, and delivering its policy in Rafah. Without this willing collaboration, Israel could not have inflicted the terrible massacres on Gaza, especially in 2008-2009 and ever since.

While the million-march has petered out this Friday, one hopes that the fate of the Palestinians will not again be forgotten by the Egyptian revolution.

Report: Egypt convinced Israel not to assassinate Hamas leader in Gaza: Haaretz

Israel planned to target Hamas PM Ismail Haniyeh after the terror attacks in south last week but cancelled the operation due to Egyptian pressure, Al-Ahram reports.
Egypt convinced Israel to cancel a plan to assassinate Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh following the terrorist attacks near Eilat last week, the Egyptian Al-Ahram newspaper reported on Saturday, citing Palestinian sources.

According to the report, Egyptian officials also applied pressure on Islamic Jihad to declare a ceasefire. At the same time, Hamas swayed other factions in the Gaza Strip, particularly the Popular Resistance Committees, to halt rocket attacks on Israel.

The report also said that the Palestinian Authority was involved in convincing factions in Gaza to halt rocket fire.

Eight Israelis were killed in the terrorist attacks on the Israel-Egypt border north of Eilat on Thursday, August 18.

The Israel Air Force responded with airstrikes in the Gaza Strip. targeting Popular Resistance Committes operatives.

In the following days, dozens of rockets were fired from Gaza into Israel, killing one Israeli.

A ceasefire declared by Gaza militants on Sunday quickly broke down.  A second ceasfire was declared on Friday.

April 6 Movement suspends sit-in at Israeli embassy, but demands big changes in Israel-Egypt relations: Ahram Online

The April 6 movement ends their protests at the Israeli embassy, but entrenches their stance; demanding the end to trade agreements with Israel and creating a free-trade zone with Gaza to lift Israel’s siege
Salma Shukrallah, Saturday 27 Aug 2011
Egypt’s April 6 youth movement released a statement on Friday declaring that they have suspended their week-long sit-in in front of the Israeli embassy in Cairo, as their stance has been made clear. The movement has also put forward several demands to Egypt’s ruling Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) and the government that would vindicate  troops Israel killed at the border last week.

The Movement demanded that the SCAF and government insist on an official apology from the Israel and a joint investigation into the killings; the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador; cancelling all trade agreements with Israel, including QIZ; amending the Camp David treaty to guarantee that Egypt has full authority over Sinai and the establishment of a free trade zone with Gaza, allowing in all products, in effect, completely ending Israel’s siege on Gaza and ensuring that the Palestinian resistance is fully supported.

Following the killing of two Egyptian police officers and three soldiers by Israel on Egypt’s borders, thousands of Egyptians have been protesting at the Israeli embassy in Cairo, the Israel consulate in Alexandria as well as in public squares in many cities across the country.

Last week, during the protests in front of the embassy, an Egyptian young man climbed 13 floors at the embassy building to take down the Israeli flag.

Last night, hundreds participated in the sit-in in front of the Israeli embassy  including members of the April 6 Movement.

Israel must lower its profile in face of the Arab tumult: Haaretz Editorial

The man on the street who brought down his rulers in a fit of rage and demanded that they be tried is directing similar hatred toward Israel, with much less justification.
One after the other the leaders of our Arab neighbors, whom Israel has long considered permanent like the Golan Heights and the Sinai Desert, are falling: Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali in Tunisia, Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, Muammar Gadhafi in Libya and probably soon Bashar Assad in Syria. Thanks to the Internet and Facebook, a major change is taking place: The hitherto invisible political factor in most of these countries is claiming his place – the man on the street.

In Israel, the joy and enthusiasm in light of the “spirit of Tahrir” are accompanied by a certain sadness and disappointment. Not only has the process of democratization on the Arab street not been accompanied by peaceful intentions, it has been followed – for example in Egypt – by an anti-Israel wave that is so strong the temporary military rulers are having a hard time coping with it. That same man on the street who brought down his rulers in a fit of rage and demanded that they be tried is directing similar hatred toward Israel, with much less justification.

On the face of it, these developments reinforce the old argument of the right wing and those opposed to an Israeli withdrawal and concessions; they said there was no point in agreements with dictators – that we should wait for democratization in the Arab states. Now all they see in the coming of democracy is proof of the Arab nations’ atavistic hatred of Israel; they find in it a new excuse to toughen their stance and freeze the peace process.

But when the Arab street is in tumult and all political, military or diplomatic nuance is picked up simultaneously by modern electronic gadgets and the heart of the man on the street, the last thing Israel needs is to turn its back on the hope for peace in arrogance and aggression, which only provide excuses for hatred of it.

On the contrary, the Israeli government should lower its profile and stick closely to the desire for peace and the proof that it does not seek to expand.

It must radiate calm, conciliation and moderation as much as possible. It must do this in the hope that when the flames die down, the Arab street will also understand that peace is a key element of the spirit of equality, freedom and democracy.

Night of anti-Israeli protest draws hundreds rather than the promised hundreds of thousands: Ahram Online

Anti-Israeli demonstrations continue into Friday night in front of the Israel Embassy in Cairo, but the Facebook call for a million man march was met with little support
Saturday 27 Aug 2011
Demonstrators across Egypt want Israeli ambassador out
Tensions are beginning to flare up, according to users of the social networking site Twitter, after the reported arrest of a protester by the military police.
Protesters began to return to the Israeli Embassy in Dokki, Cairo after Iftar. By about 8pm, a couple of hundred had stood on the bridge and in front of the neighbouring buildings. The blue lines and star of the Israeli flag were being painted on a white banner several metres in length. Demands were written as well as demonstrators stood on the flag and paced back an forth, showing there indignation and outrage.

Earlier, hundreds had gathered in Tahrir Square to march to the embassy in defiance and to mark Al-Quds (or Jerusalem) Day – an annual day of protest against the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land.A Facebook call urged Egyptians to demonstrate en mass at the Israeli embassy in Cairo to demand the expulsion of the ambassador. The demonstrators marched around Tahrir Square carrying Egyptian flags and chanting “The People want the Israeli ambassador expelled.”

In front of the embassy a dozen or so protesters performed the Ishaa prayer (dusk) as military police looked on from their armoured vehicles. After the prayer, chanting resumed as people waved black flags proclaiming the oneness of God. Signs bore the name of several groups. Some were clearly Nasserists, others pro-Palestinian and still others of a religious nature. One group was called “the Movement of the Oneness of God.”

The metres long Israeli flag, by now completed, was spread across the street, blocking both traffic directions and then set alight. Some protesters called for the “doors of jihad to be opened” and weapons to be given to the volunteers who would go and free Palestine from Zionist bondage. Protesters have not forgotten the military council, however, and many directed their anger at de-facto leader Field Marshall Hussein Mohammed Tantawi and General Sami Anan, the Chief of Staff of the Egyptian Armed Forces. “We are not cowards,” they shouted, demanding that the council take a position and stick to it.

The main cries among the press of people, however, was centred around two basic demands. The first was the for removal of the embassy and the expulsion of the ambassador. The second demand called for an immediate halt to the sale of natural gas to Israel.

Hundreds of demonstrators started a sit-in in front of the Israeli embassy on 19 August, following the killing of two Egyptian police officers and three soldiers by Israel on Egypt’s borders. Thousands of Egyptians have since taken to the streets in anger, demanding that the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador. An Egyptian young man, dubbed “Flagman”, thrilled protesters across the world after he climbed 13 floors to bring down the Israeli flag and replace it with the Egyptian one.

Social justice also means ending the occupation: Haaretz

Justice is not merely the right to decent housing for Jews, it is also the right to freedom of a nation under occupation.
By Zeev Sternhell
Be the internal ills of Israeli society as they may, and they are too numerous to count, most of them can be treated and even cured; but the occupation and colonialism are terminal illnesses. Therefore anyone who refuses to understand – as did Shelly Yachimovich in her interview with Haaretz’s weekend magazine – that the socialism of masters, and on behalf of masters, is no less ruthless and despicable than the neoliberalism of the rich on behalf of the rich, is not worthy of seeking the leadership of a party that has pretensions of charting the future.

Indeed, in order to achieve quick results in the social sphere, it is possible to take steps that are relatively easy – cancel the tax reductions for companies, raise the tax percentages on high incomes, transfer money from the settlements to the welfare budgets immediately. If it is permitted to impose heavy customs on a small car, it is also permitted to collect luxury tax on a penthouse on the shores of Tel Aviv, or a large yacht in mid ocean. It is reasonable to assume that it is also possible to find a swift way to renew the construction of public housing in the form of small and inexpensive apartments. On the other hand, the occupation is an existential threat – if Israeli society does not find a way to deal with the settlements, there will be an end to the Jewish state.

Already today, Zionism, in the simple and initial significance of the term, has vacated its place to radical and ruthless nationalism that is partially racist and seeped in professed antidemocratic tendencies of the kind that already led to huge disasters in Europe in the previous century.

Traditional Zionism was based on two mainstays. It was a movement to save an entire nation from destruction and expressed the natural right of that nation to self-rule. Both of these goals were achieved with the establishment of the state – that was a special hour of benevolence and it was supposed to put an end to the period of conquering the land. That was also the hour in which Zionism was supposed to absorb the liberal principles of human rights and civic equality. The terrible disaster of the Six-Day War destroyed this possibility when it turned Israelis into lords over another nation whose rights were denied. But our failure to deal with the injustice implicit in the conquest does not justify our coming to terms with it.

Therefore the Labor Party cannot suffice with the role of a pressure group for one issue, be that issue as lofty as it may. Social and political life is not one dimensional; there is no society without politics, there is no economy without political decisions, and there is no worthy life without morals. The correct demand for a revolution, in the way of thinking that will lead to a different social policy, is not cut off from the larger question of freedom and democracy, human rights and the future of the territories; freedom, justice and equality cannot be divided.

Already from the start of the social protest movement, many people have been bothered by the questions: What is the actual significance of the term “justice” to the youngsters protesting in the street? How is it possible to achieve social justice without justice as a universal value? What are the boundaries of justice and its implementation?

In this respect, there was always a big difference between the right and the left in the world, and now also in Israel. The left considers equality to be a universal value, an expression of a human being’s right not merely to the freedom to sleep under a bridge but also to the freedom to live a decent life. The left – and this is the big difference between it and the various types of conservatives – does not consider equality to be an element that restricts freedom but rather a different aspect of a human being’s right to control his life.

This takes us back to the occupation. Justice is not merely the right to decent housing for Jews, it is also the right to freedom of a nation under occupation. An enormous opportunity for changing the face of Israel’s political culture and charting the face of the future will be lost if the flag-bearers of the protest decide to ignore this truth.

Continue reading August 27, 2011

EDITOR: What is the Middle East advancing towards?

While the protest movements cum revolutions in the Arab countries are pressing towards a more democratic society, with Lybia’s Gaddafi being freed from the tyrant and his murderous sons, and Syria moving inexorably towards the end of the Assad regime, in Israel the protest fizzle out, and the guns and helicopters sound clearly, and old patterns take over. If in the Arab world the future is, at least a promise, at best, a great improvement, in Israel the future seems to be in the past. What there was is what there shall be. Quite depressing. Robert Fisk is trying to map the near future below. Is history at an end (Fukuyama) or is just about to move forward again?

Robert Fisk: How long before the dominoes fall?: Independent

The West is offering lessons in democracy to New Libya; how to avoid the chaos we ourselves inflicted on the Iraqis
The remaining Arab potentates and tyrants have spent a second sleepless night. How soon will the liberators of Tripoli metamorphose into the liberators of Damascus and Aleppo and Homs? Or of Amman? Or Jerusalem? Or of Bahrain or Riyadh? It’s not the same, of course.

The Arab Spring-Summer-Autumn has proved not just that the old colonial frontiers remain inviolate – an awful tribute to imperialism, I suppose – but that every revolution has its own characteristics. If all Arab uprisings have their clutch of martyrs, some rebellions are more violent than others. As Saif al-Islam Gaddafi said at the start of his own eventual downfall, “Libya is not Tunisia, it’s not Egypt…It will become civil war. There will be bloodshed on the streets.” And there was.

And so we gaze into the crystal ball. Libya will be a Middle East superpower – unless we impose an economic occupation as the price of Nato’s “liberating” bombardment – and a less African, more Arab country now that Gaddafi’s obsession with central and southern Africa has disappeared. It may infect Algeria and Morocco with its freedoms. The Gulf states will be happy – up to a point – since most regarded Gaddafi as mentally unstable as well as mischievous. But unseating tyrannical Arab rulers is a dangerous game when unelected Arab rulers join in. Who now remembers the forgotten 1977 war in which Anwar Sadat sent his bombers to pulverise Gaddafi’s airbases – the very same airbases Nato has been attacking these past months – after Israel warned the Egyptian president that Gaddafi was planning his assassination? But Gaddafi’s dictatorship outlived Sadat by 30 years.

Yet like all the others, Libya suffered from the cancer of the Arab world: financial – and moral – corruption. Will the future be any different? We have spent far too much time honouring the courage of Libyan “freedom fighters” as they scurried across the desert floor, far too little time examining the nature of the beast, the glutinous Transitional National Council whose supposed leader, Mustafa Abdul Jalil, has still been unable to explain if his own chums connived in the murder of their own army commander last month. Already, the West is offering lessons in democracy to New Libya, indulgently telling its unelected leadership how to avoid the chaos which we ourselves inflicted on the Iraqis when we “liberated” them eight years ago. Who will get the backhanders in the new regime – democratic or not – once it is in place?

And just as all new regimes contain dark figures from the past – Adenauer’s Germany as much as Maliki’s Iraq – so Libya will have to accomodate Gaddafi’s tribes. The scenes in Green Square yesterday were painfully similar to the crazed adoration on display at the same location for Gaddafi just a few weeks ago. Recall, then, the day De Gaulle was asked by an aide how the crowds greeting him after the 1944 liberation of France were as large as the crowds applauding Pétain a few weeks earlier. “Ils sont les mêmes,” De Gaulle is said to have replied. “They are the same.”

Not all. How soon will the world be knocking on the door of the supposedly dying Abdulbaset al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber – if indeed he was guilty of the crime – to discover the secret of his longevity and of his activities within Gaddafi’s secret service? How soon will the liberators of Tripoli get their hands on the files of Gaddafi’s oil and foreign ministries to find out the secrets of the Blair-Sarkozy-Berlusconi love affairs with the author of the Green Book? Or will British and French spooks beat them to it?

And how soon, we must ask, before the people of Europe demand to know why, if Nato has been so successful in Libya – as Cameron and his mates now claim – it cannot be used against Assad’s legions in Syria, using Cyprus as a territorial aircraft-carrier, devastating the regime’s 8,000 tanks and armoured vehicles as they besiege the country’s cities. Or must we heed the neighbours; Israel still secretly hopes (as it shamefully did in the case of Egypt) that the dictator will survive to be a friend and make an ultimate peace over Golan.

Israel, which has been so skewed and immature in its response to the Arab awakening – why on earth did its leaders not welcome the Egyptian revolution, opening their arms to a people who showed they wanted the democracy which Israel always boasts of, instead of shooting dead five Egyptian soldiers in the latest Gaza shoot-out? – has much to ponder.

Ben Ali gone, Mubarak gone, Saleh more or less gone, Gaddafi overthrown, Assad in danger, Abdullah of Jordan still facing opposition, Bahrain’s minority Sunni monarchy still suicidally hoping to rule for eternity. These are massive historical events to which the Israelis have responded with a kind of appalled, hostile apathy. At the very moment when Israel might be able to claim that its Arab neighbours are only seeking the freedoms that Israelis already possess – that there is a brotherhood of democracy that might go beyond frontiers – it sulks and builds more colonies on Arab land and continues to delegitimise itself while accusing the world of trying to destroy it.

But the Ottoman empire cannot be forgotten at so critical an hour. At the height of its power, you could travel from Morocco to Constantinople without papers. With freedom in Syria and Jordan, we could travel from Algeria to Turkey and onwards into Europe without so much as a visa. The Ottoman Empire reborn! Except for the Arabs, of course. Be sure they will still need visas.

We are not there yet. How soon will the Shiites of Bahrain and the listless Saudi masses, sitting atop so much wealth, ask why they cannot control their own countries and press on to overthrow their effete rulers? How gloomily Maher al-Assad, brother of Bashar and commander of Syria’s infamous 4th Brigade, must have listened to al-Jazeera’s last phone call to Mohammed Gaddafi. “We lacked wisdom and foresight,” Mohammed complained to the world before gunfire broke across his voice. “They are in the house!”. Then: “God is great.” And the line went dead.

Every unelected Arab leader – or any Muslim leader “elected” through fraud – will have pondered that voice. Wisdom is certainly a quality much lacking in the Middle East, foresight a skill which the Arabs and the West have both neglected. East and West – if they can be divided so crudely – have both lost the ability to think of the future. The next 24 hours is all that matters. Will there be protests in Hama tomorrow? What is Obama to say on prime time? What is Cameron to say to the world? Domino theories are a fraud. The Arab Spring is going to last for years. We better think about that. There is no “end of history”.

EDITOR: Normality returns to Israel

After some lull in the murderous routine in Gaza, all has returned to ‘normal’. Rockets fly one way, then rockets fly the other way, civilians are hurt both sides, the occupying army presents its tough stance, and nothing seem to change. How can it change, when in Israel no one can think beyond the bullet and the tank? There is no willingness or intent to end the occupation, and conflict is hardening into something which resembles the Northern Ireland situation. Israel, the occupying power, is holding all the cards, and refusing to part with any of them. What can the Palestinians do beyond futile armed resistance at the moment? Until the international protest movement gathers momentum, their support in the UN seems doomed. No positive change is likely if the current trends continue, but a change for the worse is quite possible.

IDF strikes Gaza after more than 20 rockets hit southern Israel: Haaretz

Palestinians report two killed, some 20 wounded from IDF strikes; nine-month-old baby lightly wounded after rocket hits Ashkelon region on Wednesday night.

A renewed barrage of rockets hit Israel’s south overnight Wednesday, prompting Israel Defense Forces planes to carry out strikes on the Gaza Strip on Thursday morning, killing two and wounding about 20, according to Palestinian reports.

Five grad rockets fell in open areas on Wednesday night, one near Ofakim, one south of Ashkelon and three in Be’er Sheva. Rockets also fell in the Eshkol Regional Council. A nine-month-old baby was lightly wounded after a rocket hit a private car in the Hof Ashkelon Regional Council.

Rocket fire continued late into Wednesday night, with two rockets also landing in Sderot.
In response to rocket attacks, Israel Air Force aircraft targeted a weapons storage facility in the northern Gaza Strip as well as a smuggling tunnel and weapons manufacturing site in the southern Gaza Strip overnight on Wednesday. The Israel Defense Forces said in a statement that “direct hits were confirmed.”

Earlier Wednesday, IAF aircraft targeted two militants in separate locations on Wednesday in northern Gaza, who had launched projectiles at Israel shortly before, the IDF said in a statement.

The military branch of Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the rocket attacks later on Wednesday night, saying that they were a response to the killing of an Islamic Jihad operative, Ismael al-Asmar, early on Wednesday morning, according to a report by Israel Radio.

Palestinian sources reported on Wednesday evening that a member of the Islamic Jihad was killed by an IDF strike in Sheikh Radwan neighborhood in the Gaza Strip. Shortly afterwards a Grad rocket was launched toward Be’er Sheva and was intercepted by the Iron Dome system.

EDITOR: Another barbaric and enraging murder goes unpunished

As usual, murdering a Palestinian is nota punishable offence. Indeed, it is no really an offence at all in Israel. Below, Gideon Levy charts the bizarre routes of the IDF ‘justice system’.

IDF’s law enforcement is a joke of a justice system: Haaretz

The law enforcement mechanism of the Israel Defense Forces is nothing but a ridiculous simulacrum of a justice system.

Firas Qasqas was a gardener. Thirty-two years old and the father of three daughters, he came from his village with his family to visit his brother-in-law, who had moved to a new home in Ramallah. After an especially rainy, stormy night they woke up to a glorious sunny day and decided to go for a hike in the gorgeous valley of olives opposite the house. Yes, there are also Palestinians who love nature.

They were three hikers – Firas and his two brothers-in-law – when they saw a herd of deer fleeing down the slope. They knew that behind the herd there would also be people coming but it did not occur to them that on the heels of the deer would come hunters – in this case, people hunters. Very soon they saw a group of soldiers coming down to the valley. A few minutes later the soldiers started firing two or three rounds at them, from a very long range. Firas fell, bleeding to death. He managed to reassure his brothers in law and tell them everything was fine, they shouldn’t worry. But not long after that he started to gurgle and foam covered his mouth. At the hospital in Ramallah the young gardener expired.

That was in the winter of 2007, a relatively quiet winter. A few days after the killing I came to the valley of olive trees with his brother-in-law Jamil Mator, who was with Firas when he died. Hundreds of meters had separated the shooters and their victim. Far from there, at the dead man’s home in the village of Battir, I met the black-garbed young widow Majida and the three little orphaned girls. As her daughters blew soap bubbles inside the small room, Majida asked simply: “I want to know why he was killed because I don’t know.” And the bubbles (and the tears ) filled the room.

I too wanted to know why Firas was killed. The Israel Defense Forces Spokesman, as usual, said everything was in order. The soldiers discerned “suspicious behavior,” the three Palestinians were seen “doing something with the ground,” before the shooting they were “properly warned,” the incident was investigated “at all levels,” the conclusions have been “implemented” and the material has been sent “for review by the military prosecution.”

Four years have elapsed since then and Firas’ death has been forgotten. Since then I have reported on dozens more cases of killing in the West Bank, nearly all of which of course were sent for review by the military prosecution, which is usually the decisive phase on the way to burying the material of investigation of the truth in the IDF.

And now my colleague Haim Levinson published an astonishing piece of news in yesterday’s Haaretz. The military prosecution has decided to try the commander of a company in the reserves, Shahar Mor, “a well-known educator in the religious Zionist community,” who shot Firas in the back from a great distance and killed him.

It took the prosecution nearly four years to investigate such a clear case, the details of which cried out from the soil of the valley where the shooting of an unarmed person from an illegal distance occurred, without any danger to the soldiers, without any justification. Even this indictment would not have happened had not B’Tselem – The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories intervened again and again, demanding the shooter be brought to trial. And this is such a rare occurrence. Data from Yesh Din – Volunteers for Human Rights show that only 8 percent of the investigations that were opened in the dark years of 2002-2009 culminated in an indictment. Only 14 people have been tried and there have been only 173 investigations in the wake of the killing of 5,518 individuals.

This is how the law enforcement mechanism of the IDF looks, with its army of investigators, prosecutors and judges, which is nothing but a ridiculous simulacrum of a justice system. In the four years that have elapsed dozens more Palestinians have been killed in the West Bank, not counting the Gaza Strip, some of them not guilty of anything. In Haaretz I documented the death of a paralyzed bean seller in Nablus, a 71-year-old accountant in Balata, a 19-year-old student in Tekoa, a woman demonstrator in Bil’in, a Palestinian policeman from Bethlehem, a laborer from the Far’a refugee camp, a laborer from the village of Sa’ir and a driver from Jerusalem who was going to pick up his family for a vacation in Eilat and was killed by scandalous shooting at his car. All of them were guilty of nothing and were killed for no reason. All of these cases are under investigation by the military prosecution, strenuous investigation that will be completed four years from now, or maybe in 40. During this time the educator, Company Commander Mor, went about teaching his students. No doubt he taught them “values,” love of the land and Jewish morality, as only religious Zionism can do. At the same time, one can guess, his conscience did not bother him much about the criminal killing of Qasqas the gardener.

The extreme Israeli right’s alliance with lunatics: Haaretz Editorial

In recent years, the extreme Israeli right has developed an alliance with heads of the evangelical movement, who define themselves as Christian Zionists, some of whom believe that another Holocaust of the Jews will ensure the resurrection of Jesus.

Against the backdrop of what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his spokesmen call the “delegitimization” of Israel, a “support event” was held in Jerusalem yesterday evening led by American preacher-broadcaster Glenn Beck. Beck was accompanied by personages identified with the Republican Party’s extreme right and a group of Christian Zionist evangelical leaders.

Beck never misses an opportunity to speak ill of U.S. President Barack Obama and to challenge his leadership. His television program fell out of favor even with rightist Fox Broadcasting, which took Beck off the air. A few weeks ago, Beck received publicity for comparing the young Norwegians who were killed by an extreme right-winger to the Hitler Youth. Hundreds of rabbis in the United States, from all streams of Judaism, have expressed disgust with Beck’s incitement on the air against Jewish financier George Soros and Jewish intellectuals “accused” of harboring liberal, leftist views.

In recent years the extreme Israeli right has developed an alliance with the heads of the evangelical movement, who define themselves as Christian Zionists. National religious rabbis and politicians connect with these preachers, including those who spread the belief in the need for another Holocaust of the Jews in order to ensure the resurrection of Jesus. These rabbis and politicians accept donations from these preachers. It is mystifying that people from Israel’s ruling party, Likud, foremost among them Vice Prime Minister Moshe Ya’alon and World Likud Chairman Danny Danon, have joined the circle of Beck’s fans. So has Atzmaut MK Einat Wilf.

One might have expected the government and police to prohibit the East Jerusalem Development Corporation (a government-municipal company ) from making available the archaeological park near the Al-Aqsa Mosque and Silwan neighborhood for the fulminations of extreme rightists. These are unnecessary and harmful fulminations that testify to Netanyahu’s distorted priorities.

It was just a few weeks ago that the government denied dozens of peace activists entry into Israel; they wanted to demonstrate nonviolently their support for the Palestinians’ struggle for independence. At the time, it was claimed that this was a “provocation.” The “support event” in Jerusalem was no less provocative.

Israel’s left now has a chance to awaken the public: Haaretz

Yachimovich frankly enunciated our position as Israeli Jews: We are profiting from the occupation even as we groan under regressive taxation.
By Amira Hass
Were Shelly Yachimovich the only one to raise the banner of selective justice, there would be no need to state here that the settlements are no sin in exactly the same way that traffic in women is no crime and concentrating Jews from Arab lands in weakened towns on the periphery is no injustice. There would be no reason to recall that once, there was a consensus over slavery, and that there is ever only one Master; he merely changes his name from time to time: men in a patriarchal society, whites in South Africa, Jews in the state for Jews-above-all.

Unfortunately, however, many activists in and supporters of the Israeli protest movement accept the logic of social-nationalist justice. Were Yachimovich in the minority, at least 10 percent of the quarter-million demonstrators would have protested against the wall of sin in Walaja, Bil’in, Na’alin and Ma’asara. They would have marched en masse to the stolen Nebi Saleh spring and liberated it. Then, they would have returned home with the soldiers, together prevented the destruction of houses in Lod and demonstrated in front of the Interior Ministry until its bureaucrats were ordered to immediately prepare a master plan for every unrecognized village, starting with Al-Araqib. It’s so simple.

Because Yachimovich represents the many, does that mean that leftists (both Jewish and Palestinian ) ought to desist from their internal debate over whether to participate in a protest movement whose justice is selective and simply walk away? If this new social movement were a final paper awaiting a grade, the answer would be “Yes. This is a movement that launders the dispossession of Palestinians both past and present with superficial yuppie charm. We do not belong in it, so we’ll return to the tear gas, the rubber-coated steel bullets and the arrests.”

But the social movement that sprung up in Israel this summer is not a final paper. Nor is it a political party. It is a process, a new and developing situation that reinvents itself frequently, an intensive course in developing political understanding. It must not be left to the new-old social right.

In effect, the challenge goes much deeper than merely conflicting opinions. Yachimovich frankly enunciated our position as Israeli Jews: We are profiting from the occupation even as we groan under regressive taxation. Whether our families came from Katrielevka or Baghdad, we are profiting from the structural discrimination against Palestinian citizens of Israel and from the very fact that they have become a minority in their own land.

So is the solution to this troubling existential dilemma simply to leave? To emigrate to countries free of injustice and dispossession, like the United States of America, Germany or South Africa, in which apartheid based on class is competing successfully with its predecessor, apartheid based on race?

Internal contradictions are the daily fare of liberation struggles, and purist excuses for not participating don’t resolve them. As the female activists of every national liberation struggle know quite well, patriarchy is not a secondary, negligible mechanism of oppression compared to colonialism. Sexism was present in the Solidarity Movement in Poland and the African National Congress in South Africa. Nevertheless, women joined these movements and were active in their ranks.

The role of the left – for whom the value of equality is its Ten Commandments – is not to look on from the sidelines and make do with handing out grades. The left must try to influence this new, dynamic process. Its role is to learn from other people’s struggles and to teach, without lowering itself, while abandoning the arrogance of the past and bearing in mind the terrible wrongs committed in its name.

Leftist activists are educated to make use of their excess privileges insofar as possible to fight the whole system of privileges. Now, when, there is a collective awakening from long years of apathy, the left can and must use the experience, knowledge and human and cultural capital it has accumulated. For there is now a great chance of proving to at least parts of this awakening public that the benefits of occupation today are the strategic danger of tomorrow.

Continue reading August 25, 2011

EDITOR: Who is in control?

Over the last few weeks, most people in Israel and the Occupied Territories would have been certain to witness the fast decline in Israel’s options, even when the government seems immune to such understanding, and continues to operate like a damaged automaton.

The days since the attacks on buses and cars en route to Eilat, have brought about the usual knee-jerk bombing of Gaza, but this time Israel is unable to stop the rockets – larger and more accurate than in the past – despite its futuristic armaments and its panopticon of electronic Surveillance devices and aerial means of destruction. It just does not work. From left and right, the usual suspects are challenge for bloodshed and a territorial attacks by ground forces, and the media seems to be even more berserk than some politicians, and term they use is Cast Lead 2.0. Well, you cannot teach an old dog new tricks.

Typically, the old dog does not know how to apologise for its brutal bites – neither to Turkey on the Mavi Marmara murders, or to Egypt on its five killed soldiers this week, or to the Israeli population on its socio-economic policy. All they know are the old tricks, and when these fail, they are looking rather lost.

Interestingly, Netanyahu has decided last night, in a special cabinet meeting called for 3.00 AM at short notice, not to start a ground attack on Gaza. The reasons are rather exciting – he and others now see the Hamas as an ally against the activists who have carried out the attacks, belonging to a more radical coalition of small groups. Netanyahu also knows that a ground attack now will achieve exactly nothing, or even worse than nothing – a further isolation of the Israel in the international community, especially before the planned September vote on the Palestinian State at the UN. In the circumstances, and despite the many frenetics in his own party and in the opposition, all calling for such an attack, he has decided to go to a cease-fire with Hamas, and to see if it can be kept. The fear of losing the peace with Egypt must be high on his mind, as Egyptians are in Tahrir again, now against Israel.

While the leopard will not change his spots, especially this leopard, he obviously realises that he has run out of options, especially military ones, unless he wants to actively worsen Israel’s position further in the international arena. This is a new development, which has been prepared by the BDS campaign abroad, and the by the growing realisation in many countries that to support Israel now is just off the scale. Now, this realisation has strted limiting Israel’s options for military massacres substantially.

This is not to say that they can’t or won’t go for another round of mass murder in Gaza; it only means that they do not immediately run for it as the obvious and easy option – it is no longer easy, or safe. What it also means is that the international pressure must be upped and increased, to further guarantee that the options of mass murder become all but impossible. This we all must do!

Israel lacks an opposition to stop escalation of violence: Haaretz Editorial

It is in Israel’s interest not to make the current spasm of violence more extreme, but to act in a proportionate manner while working to find points of consensus that will break the automatic cycle of violence.

The escalation in the south contains all the components that allow a prime minister to do what he pleases without significant opposition. Continued rocket fire on Israel’s cities, a criminal act that should be unequivocably denounced, comes at a heavy cost to the residents of the south, in lives and property. It disrupts normal life in the country and increases pressure on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to rain down destruction on Gaza that will restore “deterrence” and “change the equation.”

The pressure comes not only from the right, which traditionally prefers aggressive solutions, or from the inner cabinet or forum of eight senior ministers, whose members mostly represent aggressive worldviews. Even the main opposition party, Kadima, which is supposed to act as a brake and barrier between the government and decisions that might turn out to be Pyrrhic victories, is urging Netanyahu to take advantage of Israel’s military superiority over Hamas and the other organizations that have claimed responsibility for the rockets.

The chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, Kadima lawmaker Shaul Mofaz, said yesterday morning: “The state must expand its actions vis-a-vis Hamas and bring down infrastructures,” while Kadima’s deputy chairman, MK Yohanan Plesner, pledged that “the committee will back any move the government makes to restore deterrence vis-a-vis Hamas and the terror organizations.”

For her part, Kadima chairwoman MK Tzipi Livni went even further. She announced on Friday that she would back the Netanyahu government if it undertook a major operation. “Terror must be fought with force,” she said.

The fact that no significant political entity stands between Netanyahu and a reenactment of the violent military operation of 2008, Operation Cast Lead, shows that Kadima, which should be leading the opposition, is not being true to its function. But more importantly, it exposes a political vacuum that lays all responsibility at the doorstep of one person.

Precisely because all options are open to him, and despite his tendency to buckle under to political pressure, the prime minister must use maximum good judgment and restraint.

It is in Israel’s interest not to make the current spasm of violence more extreme, but to act in a proportionate manner while working to find points of consensus that will break the automatic cycle of violence.

IDF soldiers are also protesting… by Carlos Latuff

Palestinian official: Israel, Hamas implementing Gaza cease-fire: Haaretz

Hamas reportedly agreed to enforce truce on smaller militant groups in Gaza; cease-fire supposed to have already started.

Israel and the Hamas-rulers of the Gaza Strip have agreed to a cease-fire after five days of cross-border violence, officials said on Monday, after a previously reported truce was not implemented Sunday night.

One official who was involved in mediating talks between Israel and Palestinian factions in Gaza said the groups had “reached an understanding on a truce and that the truce has started”.

A Palestinian official said Hamas had agreed to enforce the cease-fire on smaller militant groups which were responsible for most of the rockets fired at Israel in the recent surge in violence.

The understandings were reached via Egyptian mediation, Ghazi Hamad, Deputy Foreign Minister for the Hamas administration in the Strip, said.

The radical Popular Resistance Committees, which often act independently of the other Gaza militias, also announced a temporary halt to its rocket fire.

A Hamas official said Sunday that the Gaza-rulers planned on enforcing a cease-fire on Sunday evening at 9 P.M., however 12 rockets have been fired from Gaza toward Israel since then.

Israeli diplomatic sources said earlier Monday that Israel has no desire for an escalation on its southern border, and that the Hamas decision to undertake a cease-fire is a unilateral step which Israel is examining its implementation.

Meanwhile, President Shimon Peres visited the southern Israeli city of Ashdod on Monday and said that Israel must respond to the rocket attacks from Gaza, but not in an overly violent manner.

“The situation in Gaza is not simple and we must examine all options,” said Peres. “We were not the ones who opened fire first. Whoever started the escalation must stop it, not us.”

Ceasefire talks intensify as Israeli PM orders continuation of Gaza air strikes: The Guardian

Hamas official quoted as saying a truce had been endorsed by all militant groups, but no official announcement has been made

Ehud Barak, the Israeli defence minister, talks to soldiers in Ashkelon. Photograph: Tsafrir Abayov/AP
Efforts to end the cycle of attack and counter-attack between Israel and Gaza have intensified as Egyptian brokers, backed by the United Nations, sought to persuade militant groups to agree to a ceasefire.

A Hamas official was quoted in the Israeli media as saying a truce had been endorsed by all militant groups in the Gaza Strip and would be effective by the end of the day.

But no official announcement was made, and the Popular Resistance Committees – blamed by some Israeli officials for last week’s audacious attack on the Israel-Egypt border – said it would not abide by a ceasefire.

The UN was “actively engaged and supporting Egypt’s important efforts” to restore calm, according to a statement from the office of the UN special co-ordinator for the Middle East peace process, Robert Serry, who was in Cairo.

Meanwhile, the Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu instructed the military to continue air strikes in Gaza for as long as rockets were being fired from the territory.

Netanyahu gave orders for the air strikes to be as surgical as possible, telling military chiefs that the militants responsible for the rocket fire were the target, not civilians, his spokesman said.

Despite the claim of precision airstrikes, a 12-year-old boy was seriously injured when an Israeli missile struck a group of children in Beit Lahiya in northern Gaza. Three children have been among the 15 Palestinians killed by the military since Thursday’s bloodshed on the Israel-Egypt border triggered the crisis.

In Ofakim, an Israeli town close to the border with Gaza, a funeral was held for a 38-year-old man killed in nearby Be’er Sheva by a Grad rocket. About 100 rockets have been fired from Gaza since Thursday, most of which have landed on open ground.

Some Israeli politicians called for a more sustained assault on the Gaza Strip. Shaul Mofaz, the chairman of the parliamentary foreign affairs and defence committee, said: “Israel must decide: will we continue with this intolerable reality of a war of attrition or will we strive for an unequivocal decision with regards to Hamas, including targeting its leaders and infrastructure with the aim of toppling its reign in Gaza?”

Brigadier General Yoav Mordechai, a military spokesman, said Israel had not finished its operations in Gaza and would not hesitate to widen them if necessary.

Israeli officials were also reported to be in Cairo, presumably attempting to ease tensions with Egypt, one of its few allies in the region. Egypt rejected as insufficient a statement of regret from Israel over the deaths of five Egyptian police officers during a battle between Israeli forces and militants along the border last Thursday.

Protesters continued to demonstrate outside the Israeli embassy in Cairo shouting “Death to Israel” and waving Palestinian flags.

The Israeli government sought to link the cross-border attack on Thursday, in which eight Israelis were killed and which it blamed on Gaza militants, to the Palestinians’ bid for statehood at the United Nations next month, which it opposes.

“The Palestinian leadership’s failure to condemn Thursday’s bloody attack raised serious questions as to their readiness for statehood and their commitment to fighting terrorism,” said Mark Regev, the prime minister’s spokesman.

Adam Keller: A changed agenda?: Adam Keller blog

19 AUGUST 2011
Someone in the wild Sinai peninsula took a decision and sent a big, well equipped squad to infiltrate across the border into the Israeli Negev, attack buses and cars and engage in running battles with soldiers and  shoot and kill and kill indiscriminately. And presto, in one minute the agenda changed and the public mood changed into a state of emergency and war at the gate and in all communications media there was no more talk of social protests, nothing but terrorism and army and security issues.

It had been a difficult month for Prime Minister Netanyahu – truly, a very hard month. A Prime Minister under siege, caught in a bind. Tent encampments and more  tent encampments sprouting up all over the country, demonstrations and protests and more demonstrations. The demands for affordable housing and for Social Justice and for a Welfare State occupy the center stage, and the Free Market economics which Netanyahu had worked so hard to foster since he was Finance Minister are suddenly cast into doubt. What did he not try? He used sticks and he used carrots, he tried to entice the protesters with committees and benefits and rabbits drawn from the hat and he tried to castigate them as Leftists and pampered sushi-eaters, and they went on to protest and demonstrate and extend ever further the tent encampments and get their rallies to the peak of three hundred thousands in Tel Aviv. Just yesterday morning, the protesters arrived at the home of Eyal Gabbai, Nethanyahu’s Chef de Bureau, and he spoke forthrightly and made it clear to them that the Free Market system will not change, and there will be no taxation on the rich and there will be no Welfare State in Israel. And these cheeky youths did not accept these clear clarifications from their government, and just announced that they will increase ever more their protests and demonstrations.

How, how to change the focus and move the public agenda in a different direction? Perhaps finally September will come and the Palestinians will go to the UN and demand to have their state and thus help to distract public opinion in Israel? But the big show at the UN is only due on September 20, how to get through another month until then? Besides, would even that change the tendency of public opinion? What if the Palestinians hold mass demonstrations in late September, without any violence, and demand to have some Social Justice, to be free in their country and no longer live under occupation – would this be enough to change the agenda? It might even get a bit of sympathy among Israelis.

But not all is lost, and relief for the harassed Netanyahu came from the usual quarter, out of the deserts of Sinai came the dramatic initiative to change the Israeli public agenda. And it so happened that Israel’s fine security services had long since prepared a plan to liquidate Gazan leaders which just needed to be put into operation, and now put into operation it was forthwith, and all at once Israel’s Air Force took off for  Rafah and made the hit, an instant and huge success, and immediately afterwards could the Prime Minister make a full-blooded patriotic Address to the Nation people over all channels and offer congratulations to the brave soldiers and the valiant pilots and the diligent security operatives and deliver a stern warning to the Palestinians and offer condolences to the bereaved and wish the injured a speedy recovery and how great it felt at last to make a long speech without a single word about social problems, just like in the good old days. And of course, as soon as Gaza was hit, Israelis all over the South knew that the time has come to seek shelter and expect the worst, and indeed the Qassam and Grad rockets were not slow in coming, naturally prompting the Air Force to counter-attack on more Gaza targets and bring on more missiles on Israel the escalation is mutually escalating – and who would now dare demand a cut the in the defense budget in order to promote social causes?

But what the social protest activists do now in their tent encampments? Would they quietly yield to the changed agenda and meekly disappear from the scene? If that’s what Netanyahu is counting on, he should think again.

Continue reading August 22, 2011

EDITOR: The true face of the Israeli ‘left’

Much has been written and said about the amazing spectacle of the tent cities in Israel. Pitched not just in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem, but in many of the small town in the periphery, this inventive movement has caught Israeli society by suprise, and has spread like bushfire. To date, however, the leaders of the movement have been careful NOT to speak of the main issues dividing Israel – that of the occupation and subjugation of Palestine. The movement has avoided references to the occupation like the plague, and has been also careful not to alienate the settlers. The fact that the war economy riding Israel is directly responsible not just for political, legal and social injustice, but also for the skewed economy which so many suffer from, is, for the time being, taboo.

Recently, it has become clearer than ever, that none of the Israeli main parties is able or willing to speak or act against the occupation, whether they are considered ‘left’, ‘right’ or ‘centre’. Obviously, the Likud party is supporting what is now termed ‘piggish capitalism’ in Israel, as well as also suppoprting the settlements full tilt. The picture is hardly different with Kadima, headed by Zippy Livni, which is now dubbed the “Tycoons party” due to its support of the richest section of society. On the occupation and settlements, they are a carbon copy of Netanyahu, though Livni does make noises as if she would speak more and bomb less, there is no evidence that this is indeed the case.

The third force is a spent one – Ha’Avoda or the Labour party. Its leading candidate, MK Shelly Yachimovich, has come out with a new platform fully in support of the settlements. In a long interview in Haaretz, she comes clean and supports the occupation like never before, with what can only be described as a national-socialist, racist agenda, combining apartheid with socialism for the Jewish masses.

Between the five leading parties in Israel (Ha’Avoda is in the fifth place) the consensus between right, left and centre is undoubted – thet are united behind the criminality and madness of the settlements. It is actually quite good to know the real situation, so as not to develop any illusions about political change in Israel, before or after the tent protests.

Labor’s Shelly Yachimovich represents the fake left: Haaretz

Shelly Yachimovich reveales her worldview in weekend Haaretz interview: social democracy without ethics, chauvinism just like that of the right.
By Gideon Levy
The fake left came out of the closet once again this week, and this time it’s called Shelly Yachimovich. In an interview with Gidi Weitz in Haaretz magazine, the candidate for the leadership of Labor revealed her worldview: social democracy without ethics, chauvinism just like that of the right – a distorted, disguised and laundered left.

Bad old Labor has come in from the cold: social justice for Israelis only. There is no such thing, except in a country where ostensible social democrats established the disinheritance enterprise. And now an ostensible social democrat is their successor.

Drink the olive oil produced in the settlement of Har Bracha (Mount of Blessing ), Shelly, whose curse you don’t even begin to understand. You will find it tasty. But olive oil that is produced from stolen trees on exploited land cannot touch the lips of a person of conscience. You say that you are against boycotts? Any moral person will have to boycott you from now on. Anyone but Yachimovich in the primaries.

We already thought we had been weaned from that, that Labor had expressed remorse for the settlements, for which it bears more responsibility than any other party; Labor is their founding father. But even in the summer of 2011, Yachimovich sees no sin in them. The land was stolen, its owners are oppressed, their nation is battered, living under a tyrannical regime – one reason being the existence of the settlements. And the pretender to the throne of the left sees nothing wrong in that. She has a particularly original explanation. They were in the consensus. From now on, be aware: All the injustices and crimes of history will be justified after the fact, if they were in the consensus.

Nor does the princess of Israeli social democracy see any ethical problem in the disgraceful exploitation of Palestinian workers. She has never taken an interest in their tribulations, their checkpoints, their inhuman daily routine, nor in the tens of thousands of unemployed produced by the occupation, who are denied work because of their national affiliation.

She hasn’t heard about the regime of separation in the territories, she is concerned only about the Jewish poor. But every night, half an hour’s drive from her home, thousands of workers crowd at the checkpoints like domestic animals. Thousands of others sleep and are hunted like wild animals. That doesn’t interest the priestess of social justice. Just as there is no social democrat in the world who isn’t concerned about the rights of the immigrants in his country, there is no genuine Israeli leftist who won’t fight against this injustice.

Nor does Yachimovich see any connection between the huge sums that stream into the settlements on the one hand, and social hardship on the other. The philosopher of the left says “that is unrelated to the situation.” Why? Because a school that is built in the settlements would have been built in Israel. For her too, money is everything, as it is for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and businessman Nochi Dankner. But even if we set aside the huge expenditures allocated for protecting the students of this school and the inflated budgets of the settlers’ networks, what about the immorality of building it, for heaven’s sake? It doesn’t interest her.

With a left like that we no longer need a right. Just when an impressive social protest has awakened here, one of its spiritual leaders is taking us back to Labor’s dark days, when with one hand it presumed to take care of the workers and with the other it was involved in disinheritance. Just when it seemed that Israelis were beginning to ask the right questions, this idea came and hit us between the eyes. Yachimovich’s justice remains chauvinist justice.

The interview with her is important: it exposed a truth. About 10 months ago, I published an article about her in this newspaper, entitled: “Sweden’s welfare minister.” I thought at the time she was suited to be a Scandinavian welfare minister, but (still ) not an Israeli leader. At the end I wrote – excuse me for the lack of modesty – “Run, Shelly, run, but finally get up your courage and wave all the flags.”

I naively believed at the time that Yachimovich’s problem stemmed from opportunism and a lack of courage to risk getting burned, and that was why popular struggles – such as those against the tycoons and in favor of the workers – sufficed for her. I thought that deep in her heart she understood that social justice does not go hand in hand with occupation, and that only fear was silencing her. I was wrong.

It was neither opportunism nor cowardice, but something far worse. A provincial and benighted worldview, with a double standard, which maintains that social justice stops at the Green Line. Now all those who favor social justice must rid themselves of this enemy of justice. A star was born in Labor, and she is the star of the chauvinists and the settlers.

Lia Tarachansky: Dubious evidence Israeli bus attackers based in Gaza: The Real News Network

20 AUGUST 2011
By Lia Tarachansky
Two terror attacks shook Israel on Thursday and Friday. The attackers fired on an Israeli bus, set of a suicide bombing and roadside bombs, fired on civilian vehicles, and engaged in a fire battle with the Israeli army. The day after, 20 Grad rockets hit the Southern Israeli city of Ashdod, damaging a synagogue. By the weekend, eight Israelis were killed and nearly forty injured. Immediately after the attacks, the Israeli air force bombed many locations in Gaza. Nine were killed and nearly thirty injured. In an interview with The Real News’ Lia Tarachansky, Lt. Col. Avital Liebovitz admits the army does not connect the attack to the Popular Resistance Committee, whom the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu blames. Tarachansky also spoke with Yossi Gurvitz, a contributing editor to +972 Magazine and Mohammed Fares Al Majdalawi, a Journalist and social worker based in Gaza City.

A woman’s place: Haaretz weekend

Shelly Yachimovich sounds off
By Gidi Weitz
A few weeks ago, Shelly (Rachel ) Yachimovich, 51, who wants to become the next head of the Labor Party, was in Jerusalem for a meeting organized by her supporters. During our interview at her apartment in central Tel Aviv, she recalls: “The membership drive was at its height and during the meeting a charming and intelligent young woman told me she was thinking of joining the party. She said she wanted to know whether, as head of the party, I would lead its members to demonstrate in Bil’in. I told her, ‘The answer is no, unequivocally, and if that’s your concern then you shouldn’t join Labor, or maybe you should join, but not through me.'”

Bil’in – the West Bank village where Israelis, Palestinians and internationals demonstrate every week against the separation wall – is not the only place Yachimovich will not visit. She has not been to the tent camp on Rothschild Boulevard in Tel Aviv, either, though it’s very close to both her home and her heart. She has only passed by on her bicycle as she makes her way from place to place on a nonstop round of visits.

Where did you disappear to? Why haven’t you been to the tent camp?

“I object vehemently to photo-ops like that. I consider photos like that to be cheap and contemptible. From my point of view, this protest is the fulfillment of a dream – for the first few days I walked around with tears in my eyes. At a moment like this, when something so authentic is sprouting, with such tremendous power, I think you have to leave it alone and be happy for it and not do anything to it that could be taken as political spin.”

Were you afraid to visit the tents?

“Not in the least – many of my campaign staff are among the tent dwellers. It’s definitely a supportive crowd. I pass Rothschild by bike quite often and chat with people, many of whom I know personally, but I do so in a natural vein and not as a politician paying a visit. The moment I see a camera I just avoid it. The protest is a wild stallion that doesn’t need to be shown the way.”

What do you think about the fact that the settlers joined the protest? Do you welcome them, does it make you happy?

“Yes, unequivocally. One of the most significant points of strength of this protest is that you don’t see the conventional political posters. There is a new language, a unifying language, a uniting language.”

But if the billions that were invested in the settlements had been invested inside the Green Line, maybe we wouldn’t need the tents.

“I am familiar with that well-known equation: that if there were no settlements there would be a welfare state within Israel’s borders. I am familiar with the worldview that maintains that if we cut the defense budget in half there will be money for education. It’s a worldview with no connection to reality. I reject it; it is simply not factually correct, even though it is now perceived as axiomatic. A school that is located in a settlement and has X number of students would be located inside the Green Line and have the same number of children at the same cost. I don’t say that the settlements themselves did not cost more money. But even if the defense budget were cut in half, and even if the settlement costs were cut in half, the economic ideology that led us to them would not seek to divert the newly available funds to the service of the state.

“Both Netanyahu and Olmert constantly spoke about thinning out the public service. Netanyahu said that the education system is a fat cow that doesn’t give milk. When you consider that there is a fat man and a fat cow that doesn’t give milk, you don’t transfer budgets to them, period, because you think they should be thin or privatized. That is a Thatcherist approach which has nothing to do with the political right or left.

“What is happening now is so potent that it is shaking off the old discourse that shackles us to the same dogmas and the same rhetoric, but is finally connecting to the truth. Until now that truth has been kept hidden.”

What is your opinion of the settlement project as such? Is it a terrible sin and a crime, or the continuation of Zionism by other means?

“I certainly do not see the settlement project as a sin and a crime. In its time it was a completely consensual move. And it was the Labor Party that founded the settlement enterprise in the territories. That is a fact. A historical fact.”

Would you buy products from the settlements, such as olive oil from Har Bracha?

“Yes. I am not in favor of boycotts.”

What about the performing artists who refuse to appear in Ariel?

“They have every right to do that; I would not do it.”

Perfect timing
Prime Minister Netanyahu was recently heard saying, in private conversations with MKs and journalists, that he is convinced that Yachimovich will win the contest for the Labor Party leadership, which is scheduled to take place within a few weeks. “She will win and take votes from Kadima without hurting the right-wing bloc, just like Yair Lapid,” Netanyahu said complacently – referring to the popular journalist and television personality who might enter politics. He seemed totally oblivious to the political big bang that the tent protest could generate. Nor could the protest have been better timed for Yachimovich.

She could not dream of a more congenial atmosphere in which to make a run for the position once held by David Ben-Gurion, Levi Eshkol and Golda Meir. Who cares about Abu Mazen, the settler outposts, the separation fence and Gaza flotillas when a long chain of tents is changing the landscape of the iconic Tel Aviv boulevard? Who is thinking about the possible events in September or contemplating the centrifuges in Iran when hundreds of thousands are shouting that the people want social justice?

The former student from Be’er Sheva and member of Peace Now in the early 1980s is now an MK who says that already at the start of her career as the political correspondent of Israel Radio, she understood that the real story lay elsewhere. “What is happening now,” she says, “is as though a cataract has been removed from the eyes of masses of people simultaneously. At one of our many meetings she says passionately: “That cataract was removed from my eyes many years ago, when I was still a journalist.”

Are you against the consumer protest and accompanying boycott to fight the high price of cottage cheese?

“I see my mission and my role as one of providing the context. And by the way, there is an essential difference between the cottage cheese episode and the tent protest. To say “I want my cottage cheese here and now cheaply, no matter what,” is not the protest I want. But to talk about a basic, collective need for housing and connect it with the social-democratic discussion and to challenge the system is to catapult the issue 10 floors upward.”

What did you think of the tent leaders’ request to hold talks with Netanyahu that would be broadcast live?

“I identify strongly with the logic of that request, which boils down to: Stop striking deals in back rooms, let’s finally hold a discussion about public issues in public.”

Should the government provide free education for children up to the age of five – and not just from compulsory kindergarten – as the protesters are demanding?

“Yes, unequivocally.”

If someone inherits NIS 4-5 million, should he have to share it with other people?

“Yes.”

Are you in favor of stopping the privatization process totally?

“Certainly.”

Would you raise the minimum wage? “Of course. It’s impossible to live on NIS 3,800 a month. And by the way, if you want to know how to fund a large part of these necessary changes, all you have to do is freeze the tax reform. Nothing else, nothing dramatic, a totally gentle move. And freezing the tax reform is a move everyone agrees on, except for Bibi and [Finance Minister Yuval] Steinitz.”

Will Kadima leader Tzipi Livni, who marched red-cheeked with the resident doctors, be able to reap the fruits of the struggle?

“The person who signaled the start of extreme-right, Thatcherist, neoliberal, unbridled and also outdated economics was Netanyahu as finance minister in 2003-2005. But those who danced to the piper’s tune in full faith and submission were from Kadima, unequivocally. Kadima is now in large measure a more economically neoliberal party than Likud. The dominant economic voice in Kadima is a privatizing one, a voice that protects the owners of capital. Take note than even on the natural-gas issue, there was authentic opposition in Kadima to a redistribution of the profits from the gas.

“Livni is unequivocally a neoliberal – she was CEO of the government corporations authority. What we have here in large measure is a costume ball in which people who were totally alienated from economic and social problems, or did not deal with them, or did not discern a problem, or preferred out of convenience to focus only on political right-left issues are suddenly changing their rhetoric.”

Maybe Yair Lapid – who called the middle class “my enslaved brethren” – will be the dark horse of the next elections?

“I like Yair personally; he is a talented person. I was a very close friend of his father, but a fierce ideological adversary. In our meetings, which were based on deep friendship, 80 percent of the time was taken up by bitter ideological arguments. Yair does not reflect a social-democratic agenda, but its complete opposite.”

What about Aryeh Deri? Will he be the big gainer from this earthquake? Does he deserve to return?

“It’s very hard for me to accept the concept that a person who was convicted of criminal offenses will be a leader. We do not see contrition here. What we see is a rejection of the court’s authority and the total absence of regret for what he did. I find it very difficult to accept the return of someone like that to politics. People tell me, ‘The public will decide,’ ‘He paid his debt to society,’ ‘He will be an essential political partner after the elections’ – but that does not influence my position of principle that criminals should not be leaders. Isn’t that self-evident?”

Betrayal of trust
Yachimovich entered politics six years ago at the behest of MK Amir Peretz, who was the head of the Labor Party at the time. Back then, she viewed him as an “idealist.” Today, he is a bitter rival.

Your leading opponent in the race for the Labor Party leadership is Amir Peretz. How do you respond to those who say you betrayed him on a colossal scale, because without him you would never have entered the Knesset?

“That is of course baseless. When I enjoyed massive backing from Amir Peretz I finished ninth in the primaries, and when he worked against me with all his might, in the second contest, I got to fourth place in the primaries. So, simple arithmetic shows that I possess my own electoral power and that the public is attentive to my worldview. I entered politics because Amir Peretz was the head of the Labor Party. I had known him for years and held him in very high regard. I thought that this was truly a historic opportunity in which Labor would become a social-democratic party – but that proved false in an extremely acute and unequivocal way. In other words, Labor, even though it won 19 seats – a very fine achievement at the time – betrayed the trust of its voters.”

When did you discover this?

“Immediately after the elections. By the way, in the bluntest possible terms, I was against Peretz taking the defense portfolio. I knew it would be a mistake, and it indeed turned out to be a very, very serious mistake.”

So Peretz, who for years has been considered a courageous and sharp-toothed fighter for social justice, is simply pulling the wool over our eyes?

“I can’t see inside people. I look at the result, which I found totally unacceptable and grieved me deeply. There is no doubt that it was a moment of acute crisis – personally, ideologically and politically.”

In 2007, in the second round of the race for the party leadership, you said that you and Ehud Barak hold the same macroeconomic outlook. How did you reach that conclusion?

“I met with Barak several times and he persuaded me with deep conviction that he was in favor of budgetary expansion. All the macroeconomic theses he put forward sounded reasonable to me. But even when I announced I was supporting him, I made it clear that I was doing so because I am a political person and I can’t sit on the fence. And I made it clear that I abominated his way of life. I didn’t think any new dawn was about to break.”

If Yachimovich wins (and nothing is certain in this race ), she knows she won’t have even a minute to celebrate. “I can take pain,” she told her supporters at a meeting last week.

Some people still find you antipathetic and you stir antagonism in them. Are you aware of that image?

“I see a great many polls and they suggest that I arouse not only esteem but also sentiments. A politician cannot act without generating emotion. The nuance of what you are saying implies simple chauvinism. That found expression in the well-known ‘bad bad bad’ of Rani Rahav [what the PR man called Yachimovich in a letter he published in the press]. It’s a discourse aimed specifically at women. You will find it in every discussion where there is a woman who has reached a place where some do not want to see her. Even Tzipi Livni – a completely unthreatening and non-defiant politician, and also not a feminist – got the same treatment. I accept it with resignation.”

Is your aim to become prime minister?

“As a future vision, certainly; as a realistic goal, no. The head of the Labor Party will not be asked to form a government after the next elections. The Labor Party has a long way to go before it gains public trust, and it has to proceed on a true, deep, ideological and honest path. Not by hocus-pocus.”

Anthem and tomb
Do you support the proposal put forward by your friend, Education Minister Gideon Sa’ar, for children from the age of three to start the morning in nursery school by singing the national anthem?

“Yes, completely. I don’t think that is even a left-right issue. It seems to me self-evident. I am sometimes very embarrassed to stand among high-school students who don’t even know the national anthem. That’s the ABC of every civilized country and it has nothing to do with nationalism.”

Are you also in favor of the visits he wants schools to make to the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron?

“It depends on the context. If the tours are made with historians who explain our heritage – the tomb and its mention in the Jewish sources, the developments since then – and also talks about the present-day political context, that is legitimate. Heritage values do not belong only to the right wing in Israel.”

Does the Temple Mount speak to you, those archaeological ruins?

“Yes, definitely, it speaks to me. Our existence here is not a fleeting one, it has ongoing historical grounds, and I do feel all the layers, which include belonging to the Jewish people, with all its history, and yes, I identify with symbols.”

Have you met with Palestinian leaders in recent years?

“I know them personally from my period as a reporter – I interviewed many of them. That is not part of my route of visits. Not at this stage. The moment I hold an executive position that will enable me to influence those developments I will of course do it happily. At the moment, these are groundless symbolic acts.”

Since 1967, would you describe our relations with the Palestinians as one of criminals and victims?

“Unequivocally not. We are certainly not criminals. It is clear to me that suffering exists, deep suffering on both sides, and I am not ignoring that suffering, but I see the Zionist enterprise as one of the most moral and just projects, I would say, in human history.”

Immediately after Operation Cast Lead, in Gaza, you wrote your activists about Ehud Barak: “I am certain that there is no one worthier than he to lead a crisis of this kind.” How do you reconcile that with what you know about his views on attacking Iran?

“Barak did not want to carry out Operation Cast Lead – he absolutely bowed to political pressure. I know that with certainty. I was there. Barak thought that the same results could be achieved without an operation that would entail a steep price. I saw the erosion and the political pressure that was applied, Olmert’s manipulations, Tzipi Livni’s pushing, and the straw that broke the camel’s back was when Jumes [Haim Oron, at the time head of Meretz] called for an attack against Gaza. I saw it happening before my eyes, so what I wrote then is still valid today. I assume that Barak’s narrative today is that he did it on the basis of a conscious decision, because people don’t like to depict themselves as having been dragged into such dramatic actions.”

What would you accept as a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

“I can live peacefully with the Clinton blueprint: preserving the settlement blocs, a certain separation of the neighborhoods in Jerusalem and of course opposition to the right of return.”

Is it tactical considerations that stop you from dealing with the conflict, a wish to be part of the consensus?

“Absolutely not. I believe with every fiber of my being that a social-democratic agenda will also bring about a political breakthrough and peace. Wherever there is poverty and ignorance and broad social disparities, you will find fascism and racism and a tendency to formulate the common formative ethos around xenophobia and war. Tzipi Livni intones “two states for two nations” three times a day – not that she is spearheading any political breakthrough – and Meretz says “Down with the occupation” splendidly and faithfully. I have a different mission.

Taking on the tycoons
Here is a passage from a forthcoming book by Yachimovich, entitled “Us,” which is dedicated to her ex-husband Noam Ziv and her close friend Shalom Kital, a well-known journalist:

“I was five years old when, to my parents’ shame, I kicked a neighbor after he kicked a street cat in the stomach … I was 13 when I refused to enter the classroom for the home economics lesson after the teacher wrote on the blackboard that the wife’s role is to clean, iron, cook, etc; and 15 when I was thrown out of school for hanging up posters denouncing a despotic principal.”

In addition to new material, the book also contains posts, articles and speeches which give expression to her complex worldview. In one passage she rips into Peace Now for ordering peace flags from China: “When a peace movement orders made-in-China flags and completely ignores the significance of the social-economic-moral process this symbolizes, I see this as an ocean-sized moral lacuna.” Parts of the book are devoted to her effective parliamentary work, the many laws she sponsored and her struggle against corruption. Betwixt and between, there are acid anecdotes from life in the Knesset. In Yachimovich’s first week as an MK, the finance minister at the time – and current jailbird – Avraham Hirchson was the guest of the Knesset’s Finance Committee. “In my dream,” he said, “Israel is managed like a business in every sense.”

“I was appalled,” Yachimovich recalls. “I was the only MK who clashed with him. I told him that my parents, Holocaust survivors, had not immigrated to Israel in order to live in a grocery store or in a business corporation. And I am certain that today his words would rupture people’s eardrums.”

Parts of the book are devoted to the tycoons and her continuing war against them: from Shari Arison to Nochi Dankner and Lev Leviev – the same people who are now targets of the protesters and possibly of Netanyahu, too.

Should the tycoons now be the target in a real way?

“Of course they should. I am in favor of personalizing discussion of this subject. I think that the lack of personalization and the attempt to hide behind public companies that are traded on the stock exchange is causing a moral breakdown and effectively allowing people, in their capacity as corporations, to do deeds that are immoral. If a private person were to do such things, they would be considered completely criminal. We are not talking about 100,000 nameless and faceless security guards who earn NIS 20 an hour. These are about 10 people, more or less, who control the economy, the credit market, the capital market and the labor force, as well as people’s consciousness through their control of the communications media, whether as owners or advertisers, and also control the political constellation. It’s a mortal blow to democracy.”

What is dangerous about someone like Yitzhak Tshuva, who with his own two hands rose from the margins of society to the status of a tycoon?

“I reject that thesis. There is a large group of owners of capital who ostensibly made their fortune with their own hands, but they did it thanks to the state education system that afforded them a good education by means of public taxes and they also did it thanks to the excellent health-care system that existed in Israel until not long ago. Another contributing factor was the thousands of other people who worked for them for low wages and thus allowed them to augment their fortune. The concept of ‘making my fortune with my own two hands and it belongs to me and only to me’ is morally very defective and is, by the way, unique to Israeli tycoons. You see in texts by people like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates that they are authentically grateful to the society for helping them to become rich. That is why people like Buffett and Gates, for example, are fighting for an inheritance tax; they are simply the strongest lobby for that such a tax.”

Would you expect people like Nochi Dankner and Yitzhak Tshuva to share part of their future estate?

“Unequivocally yes, and I would expect them not to generate a false social discourse by means of dubious philanthropy, which is also based on public money. After all, the money they donate, sign for and leverage for endless public relations is not money they took from their own pockets – it is the public’s money, which is invested in bonds and stocks, in pension funds and provident funds, in companies they control. It follows that this is a totally false, fabricated mechanism that is intended to prepare the ground and forge good PR for actions that are unfair and immoral.”

Can you give examples of immoral behavior by Israeli tycoons?

“Nochi Dankner’s IDB swallowed Ganden, which was losing money, and what happened was that instead of Dankner paying the debts out of his own pocket, the public paid and is continuing to pay those debts. There is a whole set of behaviors that would be considered immoral if done by an individual. When Leviev creates a “haircut” for investors and concurrently builds the most expensive home in the history of Britain, made of slate and gold and God knows what, that is a very deep moral breakdown. Or take Ilan Ben Dov [owner of Partner Communications]: Where does his great talent lie? He didn’t build anything. He didn’t build a factory, he didn’t make machines, he didn’t provide people with jobs, he is not an industrialist, he is not Stef Wertheimer and he is not Dov Lautman, he is not someone who built something and created something in the Land of Israel. His only talent is his ability to get the capital market to allow him to raise more and more money from the public. And I say that anyone who does not meet his commitment should simply be forbidden to raise more money from the public.”

Since 2006, when you entered the Knesset, have you seen this force of capital succeed in penetrating the corridors of the Knesset, the regulatory agencies, politics?

“All the time. I saw it from the first moment. A case in point is Israel Chemicals, which belongs to the Ofer brothers. When the treasury did the right thing and excluded Israel Chemicals from tax benefits granted in the periphery, for the simple reason that you can’t move the Dead Sea to China, IC fought back hard. They had a whole army of people who ran roughshod over the MKs, and you saw that MKs had been briefed by them.

Is that a widespread phenomenon?

“There is a very clear way to tell, in an economic committee, whether the subject at hand belongs to large parts of the public and affects their fate, or has to do with one powerful individual: you can tell by how crowded the room is. If you enter the room and see a routine, sometimes sleepy discussion, you can understand that the subject has to do with, say, public housing. If you can’t get into the room and feel tremendous excitement in the air, if ushers are bringing in chairs because there is no place to sit, if lobbyists are scurrying to and fro and saving places for their bosses, if there is a glut of lawyers and experts whose services have been hired, you can be sure that what’s at stake is the vested interests of one tycoon. You sometimes see a very deep and thorough discussion, which lasts into the night, with people arguing, learning and reaching conclusions, and then suddenly, when it comes time to vote, the door opens and MKs who didn’t take part in the discussion for even a minute enter, sometimes nudged by lobbyists, and simply vote as they have been told. That is an intolerable, indecent phenomenon.”

When Nochi Dankner wanted to create a monopoly in cement production, you were in favor. You stated in the Finance Committee that a monopoly can sometimes be a good thing. Explain, please.

“True. Unequivocally. To begin with, I am not against monopolies. I do not share the rising melody that says monopolies are destructive and deadly. A monopoly in the right circumstances can be good. I don’t belong to the school that says monopolies are bad and decentralization is good. By the way, I have no problem with government monopolies. The privatizations of national electric companies in other countries turned out to be terrible failures.”

It is axiomatic that every monopoly is a bad thing, especially if it’s private.

“Not so. If a private monopoly is broken up in favor of a dumping of imports from abroad and we are flooded with cheap goods that are made in Turkey or China, and I see Israeli firms collapsing and people left without a livelihood – and given the fact that local industry is also export-oriented and increases growth and contributes to the whole economy – at such moments I will defend a monopoly wholeheartedly.”

You have given sweeping support to the strong work committees and you were an ally of Histadrut labor federation chairman Ofer Eini, the darling of the rich.

“In every normal country the trade unions are an integral part of a struggle, they are hugely important in stopping the process of a transfer of capital from the many to the few, and I am vehemently opposed to curtailing them. The right to organize was acquired with blood in the United States and Europe. At present we are regressing, and one of my tasks is to put a stop to that. If everything is privatized, everyone will become human dust. If the Electric Corporation is privatized, instead of 10,000 workers from the middle class and a management that does not earn a very large salary, you will get 10,000 workers from manpower companies at NIS 21.04 an hour, and an Ofer family that mines its fortune from a state-owned resource. That is a recipe I will fight against.”

What about Eini and the Histadrut?

“People like to personalize things. As someone who has a ‘doctorate’ in the Histadrut, going back to my reporter days, I can say that the Histadrut was always a victim of verbal abuse. There is something suicidal in this. The Histadrut was a fashionable victim in the privatization of Hevrat Haovdim holding company, when 30,000 people were sent home and everyone applauded the late genius [Benny] Gaon, who by then had already come to regret the move. The Histadrut was a fashionable victim when Haim Ramon separated payment to Kupat Holim [the health maintenance organization] and payment to trade unions, and everyone applauded out of the same suicidal attitude toward the Histadrut. And what happened? Seventy percent of the workers remained without health protection! I am not willing to be part of the fashionable trend that serves Netanyahu, [Haaretz analyst] Nehemia Shtrasler, [economist] Dr. Omer Moav and all those for whom trade unions are a curse.”

BREAKING NEWS: Israel is attacking Gaza with aircraft and artillery fire – 18:30 local time

EDITOR: The new attack on Gaza is now certain

As I write this in Jerusalem, it is clear that the IDF attack on Gaza is hours away. The Israeli government is sure to attack the residents of Gaza, a knee-jerk reaction to the attack by some 20 fighters, 7 who have been killed by the IDF, who may or may not have originated in Gaza, who have caused 7 detahs and some 30 wounded in southern Israel. While Israel must be quite clear that such an attack will be as effective as all the ones before it. More than a measure of security, the coming attack will be an obvious punitive step. Israel does not know any other techniques – punishment and revenge have always been the only measures they have used.

It is a welcome change from the protest which took over the whole country over the last five weeks – the attack in the south, and the reaction against Gaza will be useful in removing the protest from the streets and piazzas of Israeli towns and cities, and may well terminate the process altogether, in an explosion of hysteria and nationalism. The Israeli media is full of rumours about Israeli Jews planning to revenge the deaths by attacking Palestinians in Israel and the Occupied Territories, and this may well happen, the way things are at the moment.

All in all, the region is ready for a major collapse of rationality. Israel is gripped in the throes of protest, with the government at a nadir of its popularity, so it will look to gain by a bloody attack on Gaza, as it tried to achieve the same result by posing ‘thoughly’ on the Mavi Marmara issue, when Netanyahu has announced that he is not ready to apologise for killing nine Turkish citizens on the ship during the Flotilla events in May 2009. The events in Syria, far from a conclusion and a departure by Assad, add to the destabilising the region, and the fact that the Sinai peninsula is itself not under full Egyptian control since the January revolution, as the 360,000 bedouins living there are strongly opposed to the Egyptain army, and also to its close relationship with Israel.

The coming crisis which Israel is stoking is motivated by the decision of the regime to stop the planned vote on Palestinian recognition during September 2011 at the UN, is now nearing its bloody conclusion in Gaza. It also means that the PA will be even less popular in Palestine, as the coming attack will clearly discredit its political measures, not leading anywhere with a militaristic, extreme government in Jerusalem which is prepared to shoot and bomb, but never to speak and listen. This bodes very bad developments and the US and Europe will do nothing to stop the coming atrocities. Nothing good will come out of this.

Deadly attacks hit Israeli vehicles near Egypt: BBC

At least six people have been killed in a series of attacks on vehicles in southern Israel, Israeli medics say.

The attacks began when gunmen fired at an Israeli bus that was travelling near the Egyptian border.

Officials said two other vehicles were hit – one by a rocket and one by an explosive device – and that several gunmen died in an ensuing firefight.

It is the first major attack on Israel’s border with Egypt for several years, the BBC’s Paul Danahar reports.

Israeli officials said the gunmen came from the Gaza Strip and had entered Israel through Egypt’s Sinai desert.

“The real source of the terror is in Gaza and we will act against them with full force and determination,” said Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak.

He also said that the “incident underscores the weak Egyptian hold on Sinai and the broadening of the activities of terrorists”.

The Hamas government in the Gaza Strip denied any connection with the attacks.

But Hamas MP Salah Al Bardaweel told the BBC: “The attack is a natural reaction of the occupation aggression in Gaza.”

‘Glass flying’

Whether or not Hamas are to blame for this attack, Israel will hold them responsible and there is likely to be a tough military response in the coming hours.

Hamas run Gaza but there are a number of splinter groups that want to see a more violent response to Israel and its occupation of the Palestinian territories.

For Israel to come out so quickly after the attack and say they know it came from Gaza is surprising. If they had had good intelligence of their own about possible attacks in Eilat they would normally have issued a warning to people in the area.

That suggests that perhaps intelligence came from another country like Jordan, but came too late to tackle the gunmen before they carried out the attack.

Israeli authorities say the first attack took place on bus 392 carrying passengers between the Israeli town of Beersheba and the coastal resort city of Eilat, about 20km (12 miles) north of Eilat.

Reports say two or three men climbed out of a car as the bus travelled on Highway 12 next to the Egypt-Israel border and opened fire on it.

The bus driver carried on until he reached a nearby military base where the wounded received treatment before being flown to a hospital in Eilat.

No-one was killed in this incident, but Israeli officials say the assailants fired an anti-tank missile at another vehicle and a military patrol hit an explosive device.

The attacks are believed to have been carried out by the same gunmen, who were then involved in a firefight with Israeli security forces near the border.

The Israeli military said seven “terrorists” had been “hit”. At least 25 people were reportedly wounded.

Khalid Fuda, governor of Egypt’s South Sinai region, denied reports that any shooting targeting Eilat had came from the Egyptian side in Taba.

The Israeli military confirmed that four soldiers had been “moderately injured and one soldier lightly injured”.

Most people on the bus were tourists, although there are reports that some soldiers were also on board.

A passenger on board the bus described the attack: “I was just talking to a guy sitting next to me and we suddenly heard shots, and we immediately bent over and that’s it, pieces of glass were flying, and we realised some people were injured.”

Initial reports about the attacks were conflicting and confused.

It was earlier reported that an explosion had taken place in the southern city of Beersheba, but Israeli radio later retracted that report.

Seven killed in series of terrorist attacks in southern Israel: Haaretz

Several killed, at least 26 wounded after armed gunmen fired on bus traveling near Eilat, close to Egypt border; IDF trades fire with gunmen; mortars are fired from Egyptian border; IDF kills several terrorists.

Seven people were killed and at least 26 people were wounded Thursday in a series of terrorist attacks on Israeli targets approximately 20 kilometers north of the southern city of Eilat, close to the border with Egypt.

The first attack, at around 12 P.M., was a drive-by shooting targeting Egged bus 392 traveling from Be’er Sheva to Eilat, near the Netafim junction.

Shortly afterward, IDF forces rushed to the scene and were faced with several explosive devices that were detonated alongside an IDF vehicle.

At approximately 12:35, a mortar was fired from Egypt to Israel. No casualties were reported.

At 1:10 P.M., a terrorist cell fired an anti-tank missile at a private vehicle, wounding seven.

Minutes later, another cell fired an anti-tank missile at a private vehicle, killing six.

The IDF Spokesman reported that two to four terrorists were killed during the clashes.

According to reports, the terrorists in the car opened fire at the Egged bus, which carried a significant number of soldiers leaving their bases for the weekend.

In the aftermath of the first attack, Israeli security forces launched a search for the vehicle thought to have transported the gunmen, setting up barricades in the area. A firefight erupted once the IDF troops caught up with the vehicle, in which several of the armed men were killed.

Two IDF helicopters were called to the scene in order to evacuate those wounded to Yoseftal hospital in Eilat and to Soroka hospital in Be’er Sheva.

Officer who defended beating Palestinians to take over infantry: Haaretz

Col. Itai Virov, head of the Kfir infantry brigade, was censured by IDF Central Command chief Gadi Shamni, was subject to criminal investigation against him before closing the case for lack of evidence.

IDF Chief of Staff Benny Gantz plans to promote a colonel who has been censured for justifying the use of violence on Palestinians to become the top commander of the infantry and paratrooper corps.

Col. Itai Virov, head of the Kfir infantry brigade, was censured by Israel Defense Forces Central Command chief Gadi Shamni, and the IDF opened a criminal investigation against him before closing the case for lack of evidence. The promotion would carry with it a rank of brigadier general.

Virov’s most controversial statements were delivered when he testified in 2009 in military court, during the trial of Lieutenant Adam Malul, who was convicted of assaulting Palestinians. In his testimony in military court, Virov stated that “a slap, sometimes a blow to the neck or chest, or sometimes choking to calm down [a suspect], is reasonable.”

Virov stressed that the extent of violence required should be in proportion to circumstances. Under certain situations, he testified, “a blow can be a grave transgression, whereas in another situation it is an integral part of carrying out an assignment.”

In response to the outcry following his statements, Virov issued clarifications, claiming that his remarks “were not understood properly.” He stated that “things should be understood precisely, so that in the field we behave with values.” He added that Malul’s behavior “was mistaken.”

As a result of the controversy surrounding his statements, Virov was passed over for promotions for the past two years, during which he studied at the national security college. He also served as commander of a reserve unit he had headed in the past over this period.

Virov’s attorney, Oded Savoray, pointed out yesterday that the IDF closed its criminal investigation of Virov.

“Though statements made by [Virov] in the courtroom were taken a certain way, the IDF investigation showed that Col. Virov did not use violence; nor did he give orders for the use of such violence.”

Haim Erlich, director general of the human rights organization Yesh Din, stated that “the promotion of someone who justified the beating-up of innocent civilians shows that the IDF has not come to terms with the importance of attitudes displayed toward a civilian Palestinian population.”

Hamas braces for IDF retaliation: YNet

Terror group vacates HQ after Barak announces Gaza to be ‘severely hit’ in response to terror attacks

Palestinian sources reported Wednesday that Hamas’ interior minister has ordered the the security forces headquarters in Gaza to be immediately evacuated for fear of IDF retaliation for the multiple terror attacks on the south, where at least seven people were killed and about 30 were injured.

It was also reported that Israel closed the Kerem Shalom border crossing without further notice. The central cargo channel was shut immediately after the terror attack.

Hamas voiced concerns that Israel “is trying to export the crisis that has befallen it, and transfer it to Gaza.”

Defense Minister Ehud Barak has hinted that harsh retaliation is to follow, saying while visiting the south that “Gaza is a source of terror, and we will take full-force action against them.”

“There will be a price tag to this event,” he said. “Gaza will be severely hit. It is clear that the plan (for the attack) came from terror organizations in Gaza…The IDF will soon prepare for a response.”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu conferred with Barak earlier over security issues. The Prime Minister’s Office said that the attack was “a planned terror event.”

Around noon Thursday an Egged bus traveling from Beersheba to Eilat was ambushed by a three-man terror cell. Over a dozen people were wounded in the attack, which took place on Highway 12, about 30km north of Eilat, near the Ein Netafim junction.

Soon after that a second incident was reported, involving multiple roadside bombs and rocket fire at IDF forces patrolling the Israel-Egypt border fence.

A third incident was reported at around 1pm, involving yet another shooting on a bus and a private vehicle traveling south. Five people reportedly suffered mortal wounds in the attack.

Israelis killed in attacks near Egypt border: Guardian

Gunmen attack a bus carrying soldiers, a car and a military patrol near southern resort of Eilat

Israeli bus attacked near border with Egypt. Link to this video
At least five people have been killed in a series of attacks in southern Israel near the resort town of Eilat.

The attacks hit a bus carrying off-duty soldiers back from their bases, a passenger car and a military patrol.

An Israeli military statement said a “large number” of assailants were working in multiple squads.

“Terrorists fired at a bus on its way to Eilat and fired an anti-tank rocket at another vehicle. At the same time, a military patrol hit an explosive device,” it said.

A television station, Channel 10, later reported a fourth attack. There was no immediate confirmation from Israeli officials.

Reports from the first attack said a vehicle followed the bus, then two to three gunmen got out and opened fire with automatic weapons. The assailants fled with Israeli security forces in pursuit and a gun battle followed.

The second attack, which rescue services said was on a passenger car, happened close to the site of the earlier ambush.

Haaretz reported that in addition mortars were fired from the Egyptian side of the border.

Israel’s military spokesman, Brigadier General Yoav Mordechai, said soldiers had been targeted by heavy weapons and explosive devices. He said civilians and soldiers were among the casualties.

TV footage showed the bus pulled over by a red rocky cliff. Windows and a door of the bus were shattered, and soldiers were patrolling the area on foot.

The picture is very confused at the moment. Roads in the area and the local airport have been closed, and the Israeli media is reporting a big manhunt is under way.

The ambush will fuel concerns that Egyptian security forces are losing control of the Sinai desert region bordering southern Israel following the removal of the longtime president, Hosni Mubarak, earlier this year.

According to Israeli security officials, the Sinai has long been a base for militant activity and the smuggling of arms to Palestinian groups in Gaza. The Egyptian military launched an operation earlier this week targeted at militant cells in the Sinai.

“The incident underscores the weak Egyptian hold on Sinai and the broadening of the activities of terrorists,” the Israeli defence minister, Ehud Barak, said in a statement. “The real source of the terror is in Gaza and we will act against them with full force and determination.”

A Hamas official, Ahmed Yousef, told the German DPA press agency the group welcomed the attacks but he did not believe it was behind them.

Continue reading August 18, 2011

EDITOR: The unbelievable is here at last…

Who would believe that reason main rein Washington, in a difficult year for the Democratic President? A pleasant surprise, nonetheless, and it may also be a sign for some future moves against the massive support if Israel, one of the richest countries, by the US, one of the countries most affected by the crisis, with its massive budget problems, not to mention morality and political wisdom…

U.S. Senator seeks to cut aid to elite IDF units operating in West Bank and Gaza: Haaretz

Senator Patrick Leahy claims Shayetet 13 unit, undercover Duvdevan unit, and the Israel Air Force Shaldag unit are involved in human rights violations in occupied territories.

U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy is promoting a bill to suspend U.S. assistance to three elite Israel Defense Forces units, alleging they are involved in human rights violations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Leahy, a Democrat and senior member of the U.S. Senate, wants assistance withheld from the Israel Navy’s Shayetet 13 unit, the undercover Duvdevan unit and the Israel Air Force’s Shaldag unit.

Defense Minister Ehud Barak, a long-time friend of Leahy’s, met with him in Washington two weeks ago to try to persuade him to withdraw the initiative.

According to a senior Israeli official in Jerusalem, Leahy began promoting the legislation in recent months after he was approached by voters in his home state of Vermont.

Should American politicians intervene in Israeli defense strategy? Visit Haaretz.com on Facebook and share your thoughts.

A few months ago, a group of pro-Palestinian protesters staged a rally across from Leahy’s office, demanding that he denounce the killing by Shayetet 13 commandos of nine Turkish activists who were part of the flotilla to Gaza last May.

Leahy, who heads the Senate Appropriations Committee’s sub-committee on foreign operations, was the principle sponsor of a 1997 bill prohibiting the United States from providing military assistance or funding to foreign military units suspected of human rights abuses or war crimes. The law also stipulates that the U.S. Defense Department screen foreign officers and soldiers who come to the United States for training for this purpose.

Leahy wants the new clause to become a part of the U.S. foreign assistance legislation for 2012, placing restrictions on military assistance to Israel, particularly to those three units.

Leahy says these units are responsible for harming innocent Palestinian civilians and that no system of investigation is in place to ensure that their members are not committing human rights violations. According to Leahy’s proposal, U.S. military assistance to Israel would be subject to the same restrictions that apply to countries such as Egypt, Pakistan and Jordan.

The senior Israeli official said that the Israeli Embassy in Washington had been trying unsuccessfully now for some months to persuade Leahy to back down from the initiative.

Two weeks ago, during Barak’s visit to Washington, Israel’s ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, asked Barak to meet with Leahy to dissuade him from promoting the legislation.

Leahy, who is on the Democratic Party’s left flank, has for many years promoted human rights issues globally. He has been sharply critical of Israel in recent years, especially following Operation Cast Lead in late 2008.

However, he also signed Congressional resolutions supporting Israel’s right to self-defense.

Leahy, 71, has served in the Senate for 35 years. He was a personal friend of former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and has known Ehud Barak since the latter was IDF chief of staff.

Barak, who met with Leahy privately, was quoted by the senior Israeli official as telling the senator: “The difference between Israel and terror groups or other countries in the Middle East is that we give an accounting and there is monitoring.”

Barak also said the IDF had a strict judiciary with broader powers than the judiciary in the United States armed forces.

Barak was also quoted as telling Leahy that the IDF military advocate general is not subservient to the military command, but rather to the attorney general, and has complete autonomy.

“If a Palestinian is injured, he can approach the High Court of Justice,” Barak said. “The investigations undergo judicial review that is independent of commanders. There are dozens of hearings every year that are based on Palestinians’ complaints against soldiers. They reach the highest and most independent authorities,” he said.

Leahy listened to Barak, but he did not say whether he would withdraw his initiative. According to the senior Israeli official, Israel does know whether Leahy has done so.

However, the official said Barak felt Leahy had understood his message, and that the Israeli Embassy in Washington was following the matter. If necessary, Barak and Leahy would hold another talk, the official added.

Leahy’s spokesman, David Carle, said the senator did not comment on his private conversations.

Israeli air strikes on Gaza after rocket hits Beersheba: BBC

Israel has carried out a series of air strikes on the Gaza Strip, after militants in the Hamas-run territory fired a rocket into southern Israel.

One Palestinian was killed and at least five others were wounded, Palestinian health officials said. Some of the pre-dawn strikes targeted an area east of Gaza City, they said.

The rocket had been fired from the Gaza Strip into the southern Israeli town of Beersheba.

No-one was hurt in that attack.

“We learned of the martyrdom of the youth Musa Shtawe, 29, who died of his injuries after a strike east of Gaza City,” Adham Abu Selmiya, spokesman for the Hamas-run emergency services in the Gaza Strip, is quoted as saying by the AFP news agency.

Recent weeks have seen an increase in mortar and rocket fire from Gaza after months of relative calm.

Further south, two more raids were carried out east of Khan Yunis and on a tunnel under the border with Egypt near Rafah, Palestinian sources said.

“The raid in Rafah left three people injured, including a child,” Mr Abu Selmiya said.

Continue reading August 16, 2011