A Harsh Reality for Palestinians: NY Times
Ahmad Tibi
JERUSALEM — The right-wing coalition of the new Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, does not bode well for Palestinians in Israel. With the appointment of Avigdor Lieberman as foreign minister, the extremists are going after the indigenous population and threatening us with loyalty tests and the possibility of “transfer” into an area nominally controlled by the Palestinian Authority.
Netanyahu’s intransigence vis-à-vis Palestinians in the occupied territories is certainly cause for concern. No less concerning is what the Netanyahu-Lieberman combination may mean to Palestinian citizens of Israel.
This government, particularly with Lieberman as foreign minister, should be boycotted by the international community, just as it once boycotted Jörg Haider, the late Austrian far-right politician who won global notoriety for his anti-immigrant views.
Lieberman, in one of many outrageous comments, declared in May 2004 that 90 percent of Israel’s Palestinian citizens “have no place here. They can take their bundles and get lost.”
But my family and I were on this land centuries before Lieberman arrived here in 1978 from Moldova. We are among the minority who managed to remain when some 700,000 Palestinians were forced out by Israel in 1948.
Today, Lieberman stokes anti-Palestinian sentiment with his threat of “transfer” — a euphemism for renewed ethnic cleansing. Henry Kissinger, too, has called for a territorial swap, and Lieberman cites Kissinger to give his noxious idea a more sophisticated sheen. Lieberman and Kissinger envision exchanging a portion of Israel for a portion of the occupied West Bank seized illegally by Jewish settlers.
Civil society shows its moral strength: The Electronic Intifada
Adri Nieuwhof
At a time when Western governments refrain from using their power to stop Israel’s ongoing violations of international law, many civil society organizations silently watch the moral corrosion of their governments. At the “Israel Review Conference” in Geneva this month and the Russell Tribunal slated for early 2010, however, civil society will use its power and call Israel to account.
The Israel Review Conference is organized in response to the efforts to leave out the case of the systematic violation of the rights of the Palestinian people from the United Nations Durban Review Conference in Geneva from 20-24 April. The World Conference Against Racism adopted a Program of Action to combat racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance in Durban, South Africa in 2001. The progress made will be reviewed at the UN Durban Review Conference. Israel has tried to avoid a review of its policies and practices by staying away from Durban II, and it successfully influenced its allies to do the same.
In October 2008 the Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions National Committee (BNC), representing more than 170 Palestinian civil society organizations, published a solid position paper for Durban II. It gives many examples of Israel’s systematic and institutional discrimination against the Palestinian people. This includes the continued prevention of the return of the Palestinian refugees, the ongoing appropriation of Palestinian land in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and in Israel, the adoption of new discriminatory laws to limit the fundamental human and civil rights of Palestinians, the siege of the Gaza Strip, the ongoing segregation and house demolitions of property owned by Palestinians in Israel, and the denial of due process and effective remedies for Palestinians in Israeli prisons.
It is obvious Palestinians have not enjoyed much improvement towards equal rights since Durban I. However, the Durban Review Conference will not examine this issue. To ensure that Israel’s treatment of the Palestinian people will be assessed, the Israel Review Conference is organized by a civil society coalition in Geneva on 18-19 April. The partners collaborating on the conference are the Palestinian BNC, the Civil Society Forum for the Durban Review Conference, the European Coordinating Committee on Palestine, the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network and the International Coordinating Network on Palestine. Internationally renowned experts and actors for social and political justice will examine how the UN anti-racism instruments apply to Israel’s policies and practices towards the Palestinian people, and develop practical recommendations on how to hold Israel accountable to international law and protect the rights of the Palestinian people.
Creative resistance in fair trade conferencing: The Electronic Intifada
Gen Sander
One of the goals of the ongoing Israeli military occupation of Palestine is to dampen and, over time, completely destroy the incredibly resilient spirit of Palestinians. But, as it stands, this amazing strength of mind and resoluteness continues to present itself as the biggest obstacle to a complete Israeli takeover of Palestinian land and identity. In the face of so much injustice, when it would be so easy to give up and proclaim defeat, Palestinians resolve instead to carry on their struggle for land and self-determination. Regardless of how debilitating and damaging the occupation is, they continue to live as best they can and to find creative ways in which to resist occupation while improving their common situation under the unjust circumstances in which they find themselves.
This unique determination and resistance was most recently exhibited during the very successful and well-attended second national fair trade conference in Palestine, which coincided with the inauguration of the Palestinian Fair Trade Network, made up of the Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committees (PARC), the Fair Trade Development Centre, the Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UWAC), the Palestinian Farmer’s Union, and Holy Land Cooperative Society — with Oxfam Great Britain as a supporter. From 16-18 March, representatives from Palestinian non-governmental organizations and cooperatives, farmers, academics and politicians, along with representatives from fair trade organizations and solidarity groups from Japan, Europe and North America, gathered amid the blossoming landscape of al-Zababdeh, Jenin, to discuss “Market Potentials for Palestinian Fair Trade Products.”
Given the difficulty for Palestinians to engage in any kind of trade — especially at the national/regional level where the majority of their market is — the fact that a national conference on fair trade even took place, let alone the creation of the fair trade network, is commendable. Israel has made it very difficult for the West Bank to trade both regionally and internationally by imposing restrictions on, and barriers to, trade. It has also flooded the Palestinian market with cheap Israeli goods, creating an incredible amount of competition locally, while forbidding Palestinian products from being sold in the Israeli market. Trade in the Gaza Strip, in contrast, has been completely forbidden under the crippling Israeli-imposed siege that has now lasted more than two years. Sadly, because of movement restrictions, farmers and cooperative representatives from Gaza were unable to attend the conference, which, according to Saleem Abu Ghazaleh, Director of the Fair Trade Department of PARC and one of the conference organizers, was the weak point of the conference. “When we talk about fair trade in Palestine, we are obviously talking about fair trade in both the Gaza Strip and the West Bank,” he said, “so the fact that there is no Gaza representation is very detrimental.” This absence could be felt throughout the conference, with whispers of “They [the people of Gaza] are in our hearts,” frequently heard. In spite of these dispiriting setbacks, however, there continues to be a groundswell of energy and dedication being put towards the advancement of fair trade and sustainable development agendas.
In Gaza, farming under fire: The Electronic Intifada
Eva Bartlett
KHAN YOUNIS, occupied Gaza Strip (IPS) – “They’re always shooting at us. Every day they shoot at us,” says Alaa Samour, 19, pulling aside his shirt to show a scar on his shoulder. Samour said he was shot on 28 December last year by Israeli soldiers positioned along the border fence near New Abassan village, east of Khan Younis in the south of the Gaza Strip.
“We were cutting parsley like we do almost every day, and the soldiers began shooting. We started crawling away. When I got out of the line of fire I realized my shoulder was bleeding and that I had been shot.”
A month later, out of necessity, Samour was back in the fields. Like many other impoverished laborers from the Khan Younis area, Samour is employed by farmers to harvest parsley, spinach and pea crops in the fertile eastern region. He brings home 20 shekels ($5) per day of labor, his contribution to a family where the father cannot earn enough to cover their food needs.
Sayed Abu Nsereh works on the same land. Well accustomed to the firing from the Israeli soldiers at the border, Abu Nsereh explains how farmers on the field crawl to a “safe” area — a slight depression in the field — when the shooting begins. Lying face down, they are temporarily safe, though they must still wait for the shooting to cease and the soldiers to leave before they can leave.
The field is roughly half-way into a kilometer-wide band of land running along the Gaza side of the boundary with Israel, an area unilaterally designated by Israeli authorities as the “buffer zone,” or more recently, the “no-go zone.” At inception a decade ago, the “buffer zone” encompassed a 150-meters-wide stretch of land flanking the border south to north. In this region Palestinians could not walk, live or work due to what Israel described as “security reasons.” It became wasted land, though extremely fertile.
Jayyus farmers at the mercy of the occupation: The Electronic Intifada
Ida Audeh writing from Jayyus, occupied West Bank, Live from Palestine
The wall Israel has constructed on occupied Palestinian land since 2003 has had a devastating effect on the 4,000 residents of Jayyus, a village northeast of the West Bank town of Qalqiliya. The wall near Jayyus separates the farmers from 75 percent of their agricultural land. This is a major disaster for farmers who cultivate seasonal fruit and vegetables, which require continual tending. The placement of entry gates (which remain locked almost around the clock) means that access to their farm lands is determined by whoever controls the gate keys.
Almost six years after Israel began erecting the wall and almost five years after the International Court of Justice July 2004 advisory opinion ruling that the route of the wall on occupied land is illegal, the community struggles to survive.
I went to Jayyus in mid-March to meet Mazooz Qaddumi, who works in the village’s municipality office for citizen complaints, and asked him to describe some of the problems faced by its residents.
“The permit system has been in place for five years,” Qaddumi explained, referring to the requirement that landowners apply for and receive a permit from Israeli authorities to go through the gate to access their fields. “From the beginning, we rejected the imposition of permits on us; we wanted to pass through the gates using our ID cards.”
He added that “the Israelis waited until the guava harvest season, and then they flooded us with permits. Everyone in Jayyus got one, whether living or dead, young or old. We didn’t know what to do; if we didn’t distribute the permits, the guava would rot. If we distributed them, we give legitimacy to the wall. The permits sat in the municipality for two weeks while the mayor spoke to various Palestinian Authority officials, and finally we were told to distribute the permits.
“The Israelis now give permits to whomever they want. Two days ago, I submitted 44 permit applications and got approvals for six. They might give to a farmer’s wife or his daughter but not to the one person in the family who needs it most. Or they give it to the handicapped father but not to the son who does the work. The length of the permits varies, too. It could be a week, a month, or a year. If I submit an application for someone who still has one, they say his permit is still good [and ask, so why are you applying?] Some get permits enabling them to work but if the permit expires before the harvest, there is no guarantee that they will be given another permit to harvest their crops.”
“Hebrew labor” lives on as Israel Railways fires Arab guards: The Electronic Intifada
Jonathan Cook
A decision by Israel’s state-owned railway company to sack 150 Arab workers because they have not served in the army has been denounced as “unlawful” and “racist” this week by Arab legal and workers’ rights groups. The new policy, which applies to guards at train crossing points, is being implemented even though the country’s Arab citizens — numbering 1.2 million and nearly one-fifth of the total population — have been exempt from serving in the military since Israel’s establishment. Ahmed Tibi, an Arab member of the Israeli parliament, complained to Israel Railways and the attorney general last week, arguing that the move was meant “to cleanse the railways of Arab employees.”
“It is an especially grave matter as this is a public company whose operations are meant to benefit all citizens,” he said. The Laborers’ Voice, a workers’ rights group based in Nazareth, said the new condition of employment was designed to reserve rail jobs for Jews, most of whom are conscripted for three years after finishing school. It added that Israel Railways was following dozens of other major Israeli firms and thousands of small businesses that keep jobs off limits to Arab workers by defining the roles as security related. Israel Railways announced last month that all crossing guards would be required to produce a discharge certificate from the army or face dismissal. The first 40 Arab workers received their notices last week, taking effect almost immediately. Taher Jayousi, 32, from the Arab village of Qalansuwa in central Israel, where 20 of the fired guards live, said they had been told their job would now require them to carry a gun and could therefore be performed only by former soldiers.
One commentator in Haaretz, a liberal daily newspaper, ridiculed the attempt to characterize the guards’ role as security related. “A dreamed-up security demand is one of the oldest tricks to reject Arab candidates in job interviews,” wrote Avirama Golan.
Police kill Palestinian motorist: BBC
Israeli police have shot dead a Palestinian motorist in East Jerusalem who tried to run over officers guarding the demolition of a home. The house belonged to a Palestinian man who killed three Israelis with a bulldozer last year. A police spokesman said officers shot the man after his car hit three guards, injuring them lightly. Police responded by firing more than 20 bullets into the windshield, killing the man in Sur Baher village. Clashes erupted in the area after the shooting, as about 50 Palestinians threw stones at police, who fired back with tear gas and stun grenades. The house was pulled down after the Israeli Supreme Court rejected an appeal by the family of the attacker, Hussam Dwayat. Israel says the demolition of the homes of attackers is a deterrent.
Bulldozer attack
Last July, Dwayat used a bulldozer to smash into cars and a bus in central Jerusalem, killing three and injuring more than 40. The 30-year-old father of two carried out his attack on Jaffa Road, one of the city’s main arteries, before an off-duty soldier shot him dead. The Israeli authorities have said that Dwayat acted alone and was not connected to any Palestinian militant group. Human-rights groups such as the Israeli group B’tselem have described the demolition of houses as “a clear case of collective punishment which violates the principle that a person is not to be punished for the acts of another”.
In 2005 an Israeli military commission concluded the policy of destroying a Palestinian attacker’s home was ineffective as a deterrent and might encourage further attacks. Two other attacks by Palestinians using bulldozers have been carried out since Hussam Dwayat’s death, though no Israelis were killed in these later incidents. Israel occupied East Jerusalem in 1967 and annexed it in 1981 but its claim to the area is not recognised internationally. Instead, under international law, East Jerusalem is considered to be occupied territory. Palestinians want East Jerusalem as the capital of a future state of Palestine.
Police kill Palestinian assailant at demolition of terrorist’s home: Ha’aretz
Border Police officers on Tuesday fatally shot a Palestinian man as he tried to ram into them with his car during the demolition of the East Jerusalem home of a terrorist who killed three Israelis with a bulldozer last July. It was the first such demolition since a military commission said in 2005 that destroying a Palestinian attacker’s home was an ineffective deterrent against future strikes on Israelis. The U.S. State Department lambasted Israel over the demolition, urging less “divisive steps” be taken to avoid further conflict. “Demolitions, evictions aren’t helpful, State Department spokesman Robert Wood said, calling on both Israel and the Palestinians to avoid taking steps that are “divisive and that are going to increase tensions in the region.” Clashes erupted at the scene of the shooting on Tuesday, as about 50 Palestinians stoned heavily armed border police with helmets and shields, who fired back with tear gas. A police spokesman said paramilitary border police who set up a roadblock in Arab East Jerusalem’s Sur Bahir neighbourhood, where the demolition took place, shot and killed a “terrorist” who drove into them. He said three policemen were hurt in the incident. The driver’s body was laid out on the street under a white plastic sheet. The windshield of his white Seat car was shattered by about 20 bullet holes. “One terrorist who was driving a vehicle attempted to run over a number of border police,” said police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld. “The three border police were lightly wounded on the legs when the vehicle hit them, they opened fire and shot and killed the terrorist at the scene.”
Israel successfully test fires Arrow missile defense system: Haaretz
Israel carried out a test launch of its Arrow II interceptor missile on Tuesday, the Defense Ministry said, a system designed to defend against possible ballistic missile attacks by Iran and Syria. “There was a successful test today of an improved Arrow [missile] that hit and intercepted a target more complicated than normal,” Defence Minister Ehud Barak told reporters after watching the launch from a helicopter. The defense establishment carried out a successful test launch of its Arrow II interceptor missile on Tuesday, a system designed to defend against possible ballistic missile attacks by Iran and Syria. The Arrow intercepted a target missile, simulating an Iranian Shihab, launched from an Israeli aircraft over the Mediterranean, a defense source said.
Israel Radio said it was the 16th test launch of an Arrow. The defense source said 90 percent of those tests have been successful. The source added that the aim of this test was to prepare for future threats as enemy missiles improve their capabilities. “The arrow’s interception altitude has been enhanced. Of course, the higher you go, the further out you can reach as well. Our doctrine is to intercept enemy missiles as far away from Israeli skies as possible. That gives you time for another try if you miss,” the source, who could not be named, said. The project is jointly funded by Israel and the United States to serve as a strategic shield against ballistic missiles in the arsenals of Iran and Syria. The defense ministry said Barak watched the launch while airborne in a helicopter after returning from a front-line visit of troops along Israel’s border with the Gaza Strip.
This week has exposed the height of hypocricy in western nation’s behaviour. A missile that is fired by Korea gets all of them intoa tis, though Israel has even more powerful missiles, which cover the whole of Europe, Most of Asia and Africa, and can carry one of 400 hundred nuclear bombs held by Israel – more than China has! What do you call this? This Israeli missile firing, two days after the Korean missile, has not even been covered by the main news agency!
Caryl Churchill’s Seven Jewish Children isn’t impartial. So What?: The Guardian
Mark Ravenhill
Seven Jewish Children, Caryl Churchill’s 10-minute history of Israel that ends with the bombing of Gaza, caused huge controversy recently. I was struck by how many commentators complained that the play wasn’t balanced. What a strange criticism. Art isn’t fair. It’s not neutral. Works of art exist to expose – and often to celebrate – the prejudices of the person who made them. A great film, song or sculpture exists because its creator had a strong, peculiar sense of how the world is and felt compelled to pick up a pen or a paintbrush in order to get that vision out there. Art that isn’t driven by this basic impulse to create an unbalanced view of the world is probably bad or weak.
And so art finds itself in a peculiar place in Britain today. We value consensus. We’re keen to be inclusive of everyone’s cultures, religions, sexualities, opinions. We apologise before we introduce anything into a conversation that might depart from the consensus, even though the liveliest conversations tend to occur when opinions aren’t apologised for but are loudly expressed. Apply this consensual approach to art and we’re in for a boring time. We might produce some jolly community spectacles for the 2012 Olympics, or make some marketable genre films, but we won’t produce work of lasting value. Picasso didn’t paint Guernica because he saw there was good and bad on both sides of the Spanish civil war. He painted those contorted bodies because he was angered by German bombs falling on ordinary men, women and children. Should we insist that when a gallery displays Guernica, it hangs a balancing piece nearby, showing atrocities committed by the Spanish Republicans? No we shouldn’t. So do we really expect Churchill’s play to be accompanied by one denouncing Hamas?
Israel created ‘terror without mercy’ in Gaza: The Guardian
Rory McCarthy in Jerusalem
The Israeli military attacked civilians and medics and delayed – sometimes for hours – the evacuation of the injured during the January war in Gaza, according to an independent fact-finding mission commissioned by Israeli and Palestinian medical human rights groups.
Physicians for Human Rights-Israel and the Palestinian Medical Relief Society yesterday said their findings showed Israel’s military committed serious violations of international humanitarian law. In their 92-page report, compiled by five senior health experts from across the world, they documented several specific attacks, with interviews from 44 separate witnesses. Human rights groups have accused Israel’s military, as well as Palestinian militants in Gaza, of war crimes. “The underlying meaning of the attack on the Gaza Strip, or at least its final consequence, appears to be one of creating terror without mercy to anyone,” the report said. In one incident, the researchers found a Palestinian, Muhammad Shurrab, 64, and his sons Qassab, 28, and Ibrahim, 18, were shot by Israeli troops at close range without warning on 16 January during a ceasefire. Qassab was hit in the face and died soon after. Ibrahim was hit in the leg. The soldiers refused to give medical aid, and only after 23 hours was an ambulance allowed to approach, by which time Ibrahim was also dead. Yohanna Lerman, a lawyer with the medical rights groups, said although their report was a preliminary investigation this one case alone was enough to indict Israel’s political and military leaders.
Lieberman: Peace talks have reached ‘dead end’: Ha’aretz
Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said on Tuesday that Western-backed
peace efforts with the Palestinians had reached a “dead end” and that Israel intended to present new ideas for diplomacy. “There is definitely a regression here and we must understand and admit that we are at a dead end,” Lieberman told members of Yisrael Beiteinu during a party meeting. “We definitely intend to present new ideas.” The Yisrael Beiteinu chairman also said that he planned to remain foreign minister for at least “four and a half years,” and vowed that his faction would stay a central component of the current government coalition until the next round of elections.
The State Department did not react directly to Lieberman’s statements, preferring instead to reiterate Washington’s commitment to a two-state solution. “We are going to hear comments from various parties about how they assess things,” State Department spokesperson Robert Wood said. “The important objective for us is to get this process back on track so that we can get to this two-state solution that we think is in the best interests of not only the Israelis and the Palestinians, but the United States and the rest of the world.” Lieberman’s comments came a day after U.S. President Barack Obama, on his first long presidential visit abroad, said that he believed peace in the Middle East as long as Israelis and Palestinians each make compromises. “I think we have a sense of what those compromises should be and will be. Now what we need is political will and courage on the part of leadership,” Obama told a students meeting in Istanbul at the end of a two-day visit to Turkey. In response to these remarks, Lieberman said Tuesday that external bodies must cease pressuring Israel with regard to the peace process. “[Israel] has never gotten involved in the business of other, and I expected the same, that nobody will stand there with a stopwatch in hand,” Lieberman told members of his party.
While it is easy to detest fascist such as Lieberman, we should remeber the other fascists – the whole Netanyahu cabinet, and the parties it represents – a fully representative governement of a fascist, militarist colonial power. Leiberman speaks for them all! A similar point is made in the next article:
Good cop, bad cop: Ha’aretz
By Yoel Marcus
We’ve seen enough thrillers to know the good cop, bad cop principle. The good cop is not necessarily good, and the bad one isn’t necessarily bad. It’s a role-playing tactic intended to break a witness or suspect in the course of interrogation. Avigdor Lieberman’s performance at the foreign minister’s handover ceremony looked menacing, a little because of what he said and a little because of his demeanor.
His credo did not exactly fit what is currently expected of an Israeli foreign minister. He does not recognize the Annapolis process, and he objects to territorial concessions. Add to that his telling Hosni Mubarak to go to hell and threatening to bomb Egypt’s Aswan Dam, and you ask yourself: Is this the new government’s position? And was his announcement coordinated with Benjamin Netanyahu?
It’s hard to answer that unequivocally on the basis of Bibi’s statements. Bibi, you see, said his government is bound by all the previous government’s commitments, including Annapolis and the road map. Are the contradictory declarations coordinated? If not, why doesn’t the prime minister call Lieberman to order and make it clear to him that he is doing Israel great damage? And if Bibi keeps mum, is that a sign he agrees with Lieberman, or worse, he’s afraid of him?
Work for Labor’s refugees: Ha’aretz
By Tzvia Greenfield
Ehud Barak and his friends saved Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing/ultra-Orthodox coalition, which appears unable to stand on its flimsy legs. The question is whether the Labor refugees will settle down to enjoy their considerable loot, or if they will try to be of some use to the Israeli people despite the political dead-end they’ve pushed themselves into.
It’s hard to believe that anything serious can come from these people, who haven’t lived up to a single promise in more than 30 years. Still, we should pray that some pangs of conscience and commitment are left over. They face a challenge, and it remains to be seen whether they can muster the strength and courage to live up to it.
To save Israel as a democratic country of the Jewish people we need forces that understand what hangs in the balance. The right ignored Napoleon’s famous warning that you can do anything with bayonets except sit on them; the right still maintains it is possible to rule millions of desperate people who demand their freedom from Zionist occupiers, at least in the territories. The insistence to expand the settlements and bypass roads in the West Bank shows that the people in power today believe that blunt, brutal force and self-righteousness are enough to put facts of occupation and control on the ground. On the other side stands the universalist left, which is uncomfortable with the Jewish identity of the Israeli state. Too many in that camp are caught up in the illusion that Israel’s Jewishness must be exchanged for an open democracy that will protect the rights of all those living between the river and the sea. This growing group knows full well that the Israelis will sink to oppression, apartheid and moral degradation before they hand their state over to the Palestinians. But they still go on hoping that Barack Obama, the Europeans, the rest of the world and sanctions will somehow shut down the current Israel and build up a wonderful new democracy where Palestinians and Israelis live in peace and quiet.
The notion that we will all drown in a murky mire of Jewish dictatorship and the entire region will go up in flames before Israel gives up its sovereignty to the Palestinian majority doesn’t appear to bother them too much.
The real question is why the two groups manage to outshout the third, most decent and appropriate solution. Why should the Palestinian people be denied a state of their own, where their freedom and sovereignity will be assured? And why should the Jewish people lose the basic right to maintain their own state, guaranteeing the security and rights of all who see themselves as Jewish?
You can try to avoid this admittedly difficult solution. You can pile up reservations and reasonable doubts and postpone the decision time. But in the meantime, do we risk finding we lost both the opportunity and our human character in the bargain? The demographic balance between the Jordan and the sea is already tipping toward the Palestinians. They are waiting.
Tzipi Livni showed foresight and good sense when she realized that the Netanyahu-Yishai-Lieberman government must be toppled. But the Labor Party decided to rescue it instead. The little they now owe their voters, history and their conscience is to relentlessly push the government toward the two-state solution. Anything else would be an unforgivable oversight.
Sign the petition: DETENTION AS A MEANS TO POLITICAL SILENCING
THE CASE OF THEATER ARTIST SAMIEH JABBARIN
The house-arrest for an indefinite period of time of Jaffa-based theater artist Samieh Jabbarin signals a sharp escalation in the harassment of citizens engaged democratically and legally in expressing their political views.
The case of Samieh Jabbarin exposes the close cooperation of the Israeli Security Services, police and Attorney General’s office. A crass attempt is being made to incriminate a peace-seeking social-political activist by fabricating charges of violence. Unfortunately, the courts of justice have not yet put a halt to this mode of action.
The facts:
Samieh Jabbarin, 41-years old, a citizen of Israel native of Um al Fahm, is a theater and film director. He was professionally and academically trained in Germany and is currently completing his Masters degree at the Theater Arts Department of Tel Aviv University. Upon his return to his native country, he settled in Jaffa and, among other things, engaged in the struggle against the current wave of attempts to evict Arab-Palestinian residents. Samieh is also active in the Abna al Balad movement and was among the organizers of last year’s Haifa conference on the Right of Return and a secular democratic state. Last December he helped organize public mourning rallies and non-violent protests against the Israeli offensive in Gaza.
In January 2009, Samieh was warned by the Security Services that a way will be found to punish him for this civil and political activity. The opportunity presented itself on February 10th, general election day in Israel. A group of extreme rightist fanatics announced their intention to serve as official monitors of the voting process in Um al Fahm, second largest Arab city in Israel. Samieh, a native of this town, joined residents in a protest demonstration. He was arrested along with a fellow-resident minutes after the event began. On the very next day – in unprecedented haste – detailed charges were presented at the Hadera court against him for supposedly assaulting the Chief of the Northern Border Patrol, Commander Uri Mor-Yossef.
All attempts to disprove and deny such outright deception have been in vain. The open ‘secret’ is that Israeli police video-document all demonstrations and arrests.
In this case, however, no evidence was produced beyond the police officer’s own statement.
Samieh was held prisoner in Kishon Prison under harsh conditions for seventeen days, and following a legal struggle, was transferred to strict house-arrest at his parents’ home in Um al Fahm. Two family members must be with him at all times, and an electronic shackle is attached to his ankle.
Officially, this ruling is in force “until the end of the legal proceedings”. These proceedings, however, have come to a strange near-halt: in sharp contrast to the speed with which it charged him, the system is in no hurry to expose the prosecution’s evidence at an open trial. The prosecution “forgot” to summon Samieh and his attorneys to the indictment last month. Consequently, another indictment has been set for April 27th and who knows how many months will elapse until the trial itself.
Thus, Samieh Jabbarin is denied access to his creative work, his studies, and his normal living environment. His fate also serves as a blatant warning to intimidate other social and political activists.
We appeal to all who are personally committed to fundamental democratic values to raise their voice and demand an immediate end to this deplorable affair. We must expose the questionable method of false accusations and frame-ups in attempting to silence political resisters. This appeal is directed at
� Stage, television and film artists both in Israel and abroad;
� Journalists of the printed and electronic media
� Persons visibly active in education and culture
� Lawyers and other members of the justice community
� Social and human-rights activists everywhere
� Citizens who still care about democracy – wherever they are –
we are all called upon to act for the freedom of speech, the freedom of congregation and the freedom of non-violent political activity of Samieh Jabbarin as well as all other citizens of Israel – Jews and Arabs alike.
IT IS INCONCEIVABLE THAT CRITICAL THINKING AND NON-VIOLENT RESISTENCE BE PUNISHED BY INCRIMINATION OF VIOLENCE, ARREST AND MASSIVE SILENCING!
friendsofsamieh@gmail.com
To sign, use the link above!
Democracy’s time: a reply to Tarek Osman
Shadi Hamid
The readiness of Islamist movements in the middle east to engage with democratic ideas is evidence that the region is ready for substantive democratic change. The United States should renew its efforts in this direction in deed as well as word, says Shadi Hamid.
In early March 2009, a group of more than 100 experts and scholars from the United States and the Muslim world issued an open letter to President Barack Obama, urging him to make support for democracy in the middle east a top priority. The letter – convened by the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy and the Project on Middle East Democracy – has drawn significant media and public attention, including an editorial in the Washington Post which said “[the letter’s] depth and breadth vividly shows that the Obama administration could find many allies for progressive change in the Middle East – if only it looks beyond the rulers’ palaces” (see “Democracy’s Appeal: Will President Obama listen to liberal activists in the Muslim world?”, Washington Post, 14 March 2009). This is indeed the message we hope to convey: that the region is ready – and has long been ready – for substantive democratic change, and that a diverse coalition of middle-eastern actors (including moderate Islamists, liberals, and leftists) hopes that the American president will not forget their struggle against autocracy. The attention to the letter has included a substantial article in openDemocracy by Tarek Osman, part of the debate on the subject of democracy-support co-hosted by openDemocracy and International IDEA. As one of the lead drafters and a co-convenor of the open letter, I am grateful that Osman has taken the time to carefully consider its contents (see “Democracy-support and the Arab world: after the fall”, 17 March 2009). At the same time, I wanted to respond to some of the concerns and criticisms he raises.
The reality
Tarek Osman begins by noting that the letter refers at various points to the “Arab world”, the “Middle East”, and the “Muslim world.” He is right, of course, that these are not the same. All, however, are relevant to our call.
The Arab world, as the only region of the world devoid of any real democracies, is where the United States must focus its democracy-promotion efforts. This is why we mentioned the cases of Egypt, Jordan, Tunisia, and Saudi Arabia – American allies that receive various levels of economic and political support but have failed to make any real progress on political reform. At the same time, the broader middle east and Muslim world are more than relevant for the lessons they impart. In Malaysia and Indonesia, the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party and the Prosperous Justice Party – Islamist parties significantly influenced by the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood – are “normal” political actors, whose electoral participation is taken for granted. Turkey, meanwhile, is a close American ally governed by the Islamist-leaning AKP. The Turkish model is one that Islamists throughout the region are watching closely.