EDITOR: Who believes the Jerusalem Charade?
It is now unclear who still hangs on to this charade set up by the combined efforts of the US and Israeli administration. No one in Israel or Palestine is confused about what happened here – how could they be? After all, this comedy routine has been played to international audiences for over four decades: Israel wants peace, is crazy for peace, loves peace, eats and drinks peace, etc. If it wasn’t for those terroristic Palestinians, peace would already be here, and Israel would be able to continue building settlements in peace…
It is interesting that the writing in Israel about this charade is even clearer and stronger than that aboroad.
Biden to address Israelis as peace talks crisis looms: Haaretz
U.S. condemns Israel after E. Jerusalem building plans threaten negotiations with Palestinians.
United States Vice President Joe Biden will address the Israeli public directly on Wednesday amid a growing diplomatic storm after Israel approved the construction of 1,600 Jewish housing units in East Jerusalem.
According to his official itinerary, Biden is due to focus on American commitment to Israel’s security, Iran’s nuclear program and the peace process.
But the vice-president, the most senior official in the administration of President Barack Obama to visit Israel, has already seen his schedule disrupted as the surprise announcement of the new building work by Interior Minister Eli Yishai coincided with his arrival.
Biden reportedly came close to canceling a state dinner with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over the issue and on Tuesday censured Israel in strong language rarely used by the U.S in reference to its close ally.
“I condemn the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem,” Biden said.
Earlier Tuesday, the Interior Ministry approved the building of 1,600 new housing units in Ramat Shlomo, beyond the Green Line in northeast Jerusalem, with a ministry official saying the plan would expand the ultra-Orthodox neighborhood to the east and south.
Israel’s commitment last year to suspend new settlement construction in the West Bank, a response to continued U.S. pressure, did not include East Jerusalem. But the timing of Tuesday’s decision, which came just as Israel and the Palestinians apparently agreed to renew mediated peace negotiations, aroused anger in the U.S. and across the Arab world.
Biden said: “The substance and timing of the announcement, particularly with the launching of proximity talks, is precisely the kind of step that undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions that I’ve had here in Israel.”
On Wednesday Amr Mousa, General Secretary of the Arab League, said that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas had told him he intended to pull out of the negotiations.
Collapse of the latest round of talks before they are even underway would be a blow to the Obama government, which has so far made little progress in its efforts to revive the deadlocked peace process.
Thank you, Eli Yishai, for exposing the peace process masquerade: Haaretz
By Gideon Levy
Here’s someone new to blame for everything: Eli Yishai. After all, Benjamin Netanyahu wanted it so much, Ehud Barak pressed so hard, Shimon Peres wielded so much influence – and along came the interior minister and ruined everything.
There we were, on the brink of another historic upheaval (almost). Proximity talks with the Palestinians were in the air, peace was knocking on the door, the occupation was nearing its end – and then a Shas rogue, who knows nothing about timing and diplomacy, came and shuffled all the proximity and peace cards.
The scoundrel appeared in the midst of the smile- and hug-fest with the vice president of the United States and disrupted the celebration. Joe Biden’s white-toothed smiles froze abruptly, the great friendship was about to disintegrate, and even the dinner with the prime minister and his wife was almost canceled, along with the entire “peace process.” And all because of Yishai.
Advertisement
Well, the interior minister does deserve our modest thanks. The move was perfect. The timing, which everyone is complaining about, was brilliant. It was exactly the time to call a spade a spade. As always, we need Yishai (and occasionally Avigdor Lieberman) to expose our true face, without the mask and lies, and play the enfant terrible who shouts that the emperor has no clothes.
For the emperor indeed has no clothes. Thank you, Yishai, for exposing it. Thank you for ripping the disguise off the revelers in the great ongoing peace-process masquerade in which nobody means anything or believes in anything.
What do we want from Yishai? To know when the Jerusalem planning committee convenes? To postpone its meeting by two weeks? What for? Hadn’t the prime minister announced to Israel, the world and the United States, in a move seen at the time as a great Israeli victory, that the construction freeze in the settlements does not include Jerusalem? Then why blame that lowly official, the interior minister, who implemented that policy?
What’s the big deal? Another 1,600 apartments for ultra-Orthodox Jews on occupied, stolen land? Jerusalem won’t ever be divided, Benjamin Netanyahu promised, in another applause-winning move. In that case, why not build in it? The Americans have agreed to all this, so they have no reason to pretend to be insulted.
The interior minister should not apologize for the “distress” he caused, but be proud of it. He is the government’s true face. Who knows, perhaps thanks to him America will finally understand that nothing will happen unless it exerts real pressure on Israel.
What would we do without Yishai? Biden would have left Israel propelled by the momentum of success. Netanyahu would have boasted of a renewed close friendship. A few weeks later, the indirect talks would have started. Europe would have applauded, and Barack Obama, the president of big promises, would even have taken a moment away from dealing with his country’s health-care issues to meet with Netanyahu. George Mitchell, who has already scored quite a few diplomatic feats here, would shuttle between Ramallah and Jerusalem, and maybe Netanyahu would eventually have met with Mahmoud Abbas. Face to face. Then everything would have been sorted out.
Without preconditions, certainly without preconditions, Israel would have continued to build in the territories in the meantime – not 1,600 but 16,000 new apartments. The IDF would have continued arresting, imprisoning, humiliating and starving – all under the auspices of the peace talks, of course. Jerusalem forever. The right of return is out of the question, and so is Hamas. And onward to peace!
Months would go by, the talks would “progress,” there would be lots of photo ops, and every now and then a mini-crisis would erupt – all because of the Palestinians, who want neither peace nor a state. At the very end, there might be another plan with another timetable that no one intends to keep.
Everything was so ready, so ripe, until that scoundrel, Yishai, came and kicked it all into oblivion. It’s a bit embarrassing, but not so terrible. After all, time heals all wounds. The Americans will soon forgive, the Palestinians will have no choice, and once again everyone will stand ceremoniously on the platform and the process will be “jump-started” again – despite everything that the sole enemy of peace around here, Eli Yishai, has done to us.
The Obama administration asked for the East Jerusalem fiasco: Haaretz
By Yossi Sarid
Don’t believe Benjamin Netanyahu for one moment when he says he “never knew.” The Jerusalem planning committee is only too aware of what the bosses want, and the government has decided to step up construction in greater Jerusalem. Dispossession and taking possession, kicking out and moving in – that’s what it’s all about.
Over the years, a streamlined and generously lubricated machine has evolved, one that makes it possible to take solace in the building of Jerusalem (in the phrase used to console mourners) and to take pride – but also to take cover – behind a facade of disingenuousness and disowning. Yesterday, it was convenient to disown.
No pretext is more dismal than “bad timing.” Ehud Barak immediately put out a press release about the “harmful timing of the publication.” As if there were a proper time for provocations. If the announcement of the 1,600 planned housing units had come before Joe Biden’s trip, they would have said it was aimed at sabotaging the visit, and if it happened after he left, they would have said Biden himself was in on the secret.
But with Barak, that willing slave-minister of Netanyahu’s, everything’s cool, but if only they had kept that call for bids confidential, if only they built apartments in some dark secluded hideaway, like the Western Wall tunnel.
Don’t believe for a moment that they never knew: The chaos works like clockwork. The detonation mechanism is activated remotely and a safety range is carefully observed. It will always be possible to make procedural claims – “it’s a technical matter” or “the political echelon wasn’t involved” or “the timing was purely coincidental” or “three years of deliberations happened to end now.” What judge hearing a case would accept “I didn’t know” as a mitigating circumstance?
This is one visit Joe Biden will not quickly forget. First he was compelled to sit through 25 minutes of an annoying speech in his honor by our president. Shimon Peres really believes that he is the destination for pilgrims from all over the world who drink in his musings and are intoxicated by his vision.
Later, Biden was given a certificate memorializing his mother, but the glass broke. Once again, Bibi didn’t pay attention, leaned on it and shattered it. No fear, his speeches have always diverted attention from such mishaps. And finally, to add a finishing touch of infuriating disgrace, the Haredi neighborhood Ramat Shlomo was dumped on the vice-presidential head.
Truth be told, the Obama administration just about asked for this slap. In Jerusalem, the lesson has been learned that the White House doesn’t fulfill its obligations – it just goes through the motions by issuing insincere rebukes. And now, they’ll begin the “proximity talks” – Orwellian for distance, which is greater than it’s been in 20 years.
If I were Rahm Emanuel, I wouldn’t advise Barack Obama to follow in his Veep’s footsteps and visit Israel soon. It’s safe to predict that on the day he’s addressing the Knesset, they’ll tell him work has begun on the Temple Mount. The first Temple was that of Solomon the Wise, the Second was that of Ezra the Scribe, and the Third of Netanyahu and Eli Yishai. Let the Temple be built, and the home of the nation will be laid waste.
EDITOR: Sleepless in Gaza and Jerusalem
Two more excellent episodes of this unique and courageous project. Each day, 26 minutes of new material is filmed, edited, and put onto YouTube. The material is just amazing – this is like being there on a daily basis! A big Thank You to all the incredible women working on this project!
Sleppless in Gaza and Jerusalem 6
Ala’ from Jerusalem attends a lecture on gender issues in Bethlehem University in the Holy Land, where she is going for a master degree.
Nagham waits for her brother to arrive from Dubai in the bus station but was her waiting in vain?
Sleepless in Gaza and Jerusalem Day 9
Two IDF soldiers charged with using 9-year-old ‘human shield’ in Gaza war: Haaretz
IDF court free soldier convicted of beating Palestinian, rejects demand to return officer to the ranks.
The Israel Defense Forces prosecution on Thursday filed an indictment against two combat soldiers suspected of inappropriate conduct during Israel’s offensive in the Gaza Strip in 2008.
The soldiers, who served as staff sergeants in the Givati Brigade during Operation Cast Lead, allegedly forced a 9-year-old Palestinian boy to open a number of bags they thought might contain explosive materials.
The soldiers, who breached the army’s rule against using civilians as human shields during war, will be tried for violating their authority and for inappropriate conduct.
The incident in question occurred in the Tel Al-Hawa neighborhood in south Gaza City in January 2009, toward the end of the war.
IDF court releases soldier convicted of beating Palestinian
In a separate incident earlier Thursday, the military court ordered the release of Adam Malul, an IDF officer convicted in December on charges of aggravated assault and conduct unbecoming an officer after hitting a Palestinian in the West Bank.
In sentencing the officer, 1st Lt. (res.) Adam Malul of the Kfir infantry brigade, the court ruled that he had already served a sufficient punishment after spending 64 days in jail and a further 32 days under house arrest.
The court also rejected a request by the prosecution to demote Malul to the rank of private.
Malul was convicted in of hitting a man while making an arrest in the West Bank village of Kadum in September 2008.
In its December verdict, the court rejected testimony by a former commander of the Kfir infantry brigade, Col. Itai Virob, and a former commander of the Shimshon unit, Lt. Col. Shimon Harush, in which they justified hitting Palestinian detainees under exceptional circumstances.
Malul’s family has said that the trial was a smear campaign against him and accused the court of scape-goating him while acquitting his superiors.
During his trial, Malul testified that he was not ashamed of hitting the Palestinian man, saying, “It was what I had to do”.
However, GOC Central Command Gadi Shamni testified during the military trial that IDF soldiers were not authorized to attack Palestinian civilians during arrest raids, adding that those who cross the army’s “red lines” must be put to trial.
Shamni added that the IDF never authorized the use of such aggression during questioning of detainees.
Joe Biden steps up pressure on Israel over E Jerusalem: Haaretz
Joe Biden: Israeli government’s decision “undermines trust”
US Vice-President Joe Biden has again condemned Israel over a controversial building project, saying its approval undermined trust in the peace process.
Mr Biden was speaking after meeting the Palestinian Authority President, Mahmoud Abbas, in the West Bank.
Mr Abbas also said the approval of another 1,600 homes in occupied East Jerusalem threatened the peace process and demanded the plans be scrapped.
Israel has insisted the move had nothing to do with Mr Biden’s visit.
‘Lasting peace’
Israel and the Palestinians had agreed to hold indirect “proximity talks” in a bid to restart the peace process, which has been stalled for 17 months.
However, the Israeli settlement announcement has cast a shadow on those talks, with the Palestinian Authority saying the approval showed Israel believed US negotiation efforts had failed before they had even begun.
Joe Biden was forthright in condemning Israel’s approval of plans for another 1,600 homes in East Jerusalem.
In the future, he asserted, Washington would hold both sides accountable for any statement or actions that inflamed tensions or prejudiced the outcome of talks. Strong words. But was Israel’s prime minister listening?
Many observers see Mr Netanyahu’s priority as being political survival, and he is practiced in the art of navigating between domestic pressures and those coming from Washington.
Historical boldness, as Mr Biden put it, is not in his nature – nor in fairness is it part of the make-up of President Abbas. But that is just what the US now expects.
Mr Biden’s mission underscores the fundamental ambivalence in the US position. It must seek to make Israel feel secure, because only a secure government – it is said – can take the risks needed for peace.
But equally it wants to exert some pressure over a government that, in resisting a full-scale settlement freeze, has pretty well outfoxed the US during the first year of President Obama’s tenure.
Mr Biden told a joint press conference with Mr Abbas that he would condemn all statements that inflamed the situation or prejudiced the peace process.
He said the US would play an active and sustained role in the talks process and warned that it was “incumbent on both sides not to complicate the process”.
“Yesterday, the decision by the Israeli government to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem undermines that very trust – the trust that we need right now in order to begin as well as produce profitable negotiations.”
Mr Biden said achieving peace would require both Israel and the Palestinians to take “historically bold” steps.
Mr Abbas said he was addressing the Israeli people in saying that the “time is right for peace based on two states – an Israeli state living in peace and security alongside a Palestinian state”.
He said there should be a “permanent, lasting and just peace” that took in all areas, including Syria and Lebanon.
But he was also highly critical of the planning decision, saying it represented “the ruining of trust and a serious blow” to peace efforts.
Mr Abbas has refused to resume direct negotiations with the Israeli government because of its refusal to put a complete stop to the expansion of settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Israeli denial
In November, Israel announced a 10-month suspension of new building in the West Bank, under heavy US pressure. But it considers areas within the Jerusalem municipality as its territory and the restrictions do not apply.
Close to 500,000 Jews live in more than 100 settlements built since Israel’s 1967 occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. They are considered illegal under international law, although Israel disputes this.
During their dinner on Tuesday evening, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Mr Biden that he had no prior knowledge of the decision to authorise the new housing units in the ultra-Orthodox settlement of Ramat Shlomo, officials said.
He said the plans had been submitted three years ago and had only received initial approval that day.
“The district committees approve plans weekly without informing me,” Interior Minister Eli Yishai, the chairman of the ultra-Orthodox Shas party, told Israel Radio on Wednesday morning.
“If I’d have known, I would have postponed the authorisation by a week or two since we had no intention of provoking anyone.”
But the US government has not accepted Israel’s explanation that the announcement was essentially part of a bureaucratic process that had no connection with Mr Biden’s visit, says BBC Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen in Jerusalem.
Israel, deliberately or not, inflicted something close to a humiliation on the Obama administration and the words they chose in reaction reflected that, our correspondent says.
The UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband condemned the announcement by Israel.
“This is a bad decision at the wrong time. It will give strength to those who argue that Israel is not serious about peace,” he said in a press statement.
“I condemn it as certain to undermine the mutual confidence we need.”
EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton also condemned the move, saying it risked peace talks before they had even begun and called on Israel to reverse the decision.
The Arab League was due to meet in Cairo to decide on a response.
Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev insisted Israel had “a very good working relationship and a very good personal relationship” with the US.
He dismissed speculation that the interior ministry’s announcement was a deliberate move by some members of Mr Netanyahu’s cabinet to scupper any chance of peace talks.
The US special envoy to the Middle East, George Mitchell, is scheduled to arrive in the region next week to conduct the second round of proximity talks.
Palestinians snub peace talks because of Israeli homes expansion: The Guardian
Mahmoud Abbas ‘not ready to negotiate’ after Israel announces 1,600 new homes for East Jerusalem
The Palestinians pulled out of a new round of indirect peace talks last night, even before they had begun, as a protest at Israel’s decision to announce approval for hundreds of new homes in a Jewish settlement in East Jerusalem.
The decision to pull out, announced in Cairo by Amr Moussa, head of the Arab League, represents a major setback to months of diplomacy by the US administration and comes after the US vice-president, Joe Biden, delivered an unusually strong rebuke to Israel.
Amr Moussa said he had been told by the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, that even this low-key process of so-called “proximity talks” could not start unless Israel stopped expanding its settlements.
“The Palestinian side is not ready to negotiate under the present circumstances,” Moussa said.
Israeli and Palestinian leaders have not held direct negotiations since Israel’s war in Gaza last year. The White House had won agreement on Monday from the two sides to begin the indirect talks, hoping they would lead to face-to-face meetings.
The Palestinians had insisted there would be no direct talks unless Israel halted all settlement expansion, in line with the demands of the US administration and the roadmap, which remains the framework of peace talks.
But Israel’s prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, leading a rightwing coalition government, offered only a temporary, partial curb to new building.
Then, on Tuesday, hours after Biden met Israeli leaders, the Israeli interior ministry announced approval for 1,600 new apartments in Ramat Shlomo, an ultra-Orthodox Jewish settlement in East Jerusalem. All settlements on occupied land are illegal under international law.
Israel’s opposition Kadima party said it is planning a no-confidence vote in the prime minister in parliament for “destroying” the Biden visit.
Yesterday, Biden emerged from talks with Abbas in Ramallah, on the occupied West Bank, and repeated his criticisms of the timing and substance of Israel’s announcement. “It is incumbent on both parties to build an atmosphere of support for negotiations and not to complicate them,” he said.
“The decision by the Israeli government to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem undermines that very trust, the trust that we need right now in order to begin … profitable negotiations.”
Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayyad said the Palestinians appreciated “the strong statement of condemnation” by the US administration.
Eli Yishai, Israel’s interior minister, apologised for the timing of the announcement, admitting that it had caused Biden “real embarrassment”.
Leading article: Israel shows what it really thinks: The Independent
Thursday, 11 March 2010
Israel apologised apologised for the embarrassment it had caused its most important ally by announcing it would build 1,600 new homes in disputed East Jerusalem at the very moment the US vice-president, Joe Biden, was in the country for a visit. But no apology – nor the implausible explanation that the announcement was a “procedural” matter of which Benjamin Netanyahu had not been informed in advance – can obscure the truth that this episode has revealed.
The timing was breathtaking. Only hours earlier, Mr Biden had sought to banish doubts about President Obama’s support for Israel by proclaiming Washington’s “absolute, total, unvarnished” commitment to the country’s security. The previous day, George Mitchell, the administration’s Middle East envoy, reported that Israel and the Palestinians had agreed to “proximity talks” that would restart the Middle East peace process. The housing announcement however shows what Israel truly thinks of that process. So much for the partial freeze on settlements in the West Bank that Hillary Clinton last year naively hailed as an unprecedented concession by Israel. East Jerusalem, which Israel insists is part of its united capital, was excluded, and the latest announcement makes clear Israel will not yield on this point, crucial to any final deal between the two sides.
The wider message is no less obvious. Mr Netanyahu may be willing to go through the motions of peace talks, but his priority is to create facts on the ground that no subsequent negotiation can roll back. And in a short-term sense, that policy is succeeding. Thanks not least to the wall constructed along the border, terrorist attacks by Palestinians have all but ceased. Why jeopardise this seeming stability by putting everything back on the table in the quest for a final settlement? Instead Israel can focus on the security threat that concerns it far more, namely Iran.
In fact of course, the two issues are linked, since the continuing conflict between Israel and Palestine only fuels Iran’s campaign against the Jewish state. But Israel calculates that no US president – not even Barack Obama who has spoken so movingly of the historical injustice visited on the Palestinians – will dare deliver it a serious slap. And who is to say that calculation is wrong?
An Academic Blunder: Counterpunch
By SASAN FAYAZMANESH
The International Society for Iranian Studies (ISIS), defined on its website as “an academic society to support and promote the field of Iranian Studies,” has found itself in hot water lately. In its forthcoming conference in Santa Monica, California, it has included a paper by an individual representing “Ariel University of Samaria, Israel,” a “university” built on an illegal Israeli settlement in the occupied West Bank.
The history of “Ariel University of Samaria, Israel” and academic attempts to boycott it have been discussed recently in CounterPunch essays “Israel’s ‘Army-Owned’ University” and “The Two-Headed Monster” and need not be repeated. Suffice it to say that “Ariel College” began as a campus of Bar-Ilan University in 1982 on “Ariel,” the fourth largest Israeli settlement in the West Bank. Lately, the illegal campus was upgraded and given the status of a university by the Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak. The upgrade created much uproar within academic circles, not only outside of Israel but inside the Jewish State itself.
Initially, ISIS’s inclusion of a representative of the illegal “university” in its conference had come to the attention of several academics, including a professor of religion and politics in England who had written to the leadership of ISIS and raised concerns about the legitimacy of “Ariel University of Samaria, Israel.” Instead of addressing his concerns, the ISIS leadership had tried to change the affiliation from “Ariel University of Samaria, Israel” to simply “Ariel University.” Disappointed by the act of concealment, the university professor in turn contacted a few other professors around the world. A group of eight academics then drafted a letter of protest and collected supporting signatures from other university professors, some very well-known scholars of the Middle East (a copy of the letter is available here).
The letter was mailed to the ISIS leadership and they were informed that more signatures are being collected. The response from ISIS was more cover up. They removed the link to the abstract of the paper affiliated with the illegal “university.” Attempts to view the abstract by following the old URL, would result in the message “ACCESS DENIED.” In the meantime, the eight professors secured signatures of well over 100 academics around the world. The letter, with new signatures, was resubmitted to ISIS. The leadership of ISIS responded by stating that the “Iranian Studies is already subjected to a very intense scapegoating campaign from the Right” and that the “petition drive is further placing” ISIS “in a highly vulnerable situation.” “Anything that we do,” it was written, “will intensify the rightwing attack.” It was also stated that ISIS is “drafting a public statement that we will release as soon as it is approved by the Board.”
On March 2, 2010, ISIS finally announced its official position on the controversy (http://iranian-studies.com/announcements/516). The opening lines of the announcement, entitled “Scholarly Autonomy and Academic Civility,” were quite interesting. It began by stating that ISIS “has received a petition distributed by the U.S. Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel [USACBI].” This was a misrepresentation of the letter of protest and an attempt to connect it to the campaign for the academic and cultural boycott of Israel. The intention was to discredit the letter among those who disagree with the boycott. The academics who had drafted the letter, and collected signatures from other colleagues, had carefully avoided any reference to the general boycott, since some of the signatories even opposed it. The letter of protest did, indeed, appear on the website of USACBI to alert its own constituency, but it showed no signatures.
The second sentence of the announcement was not much better. It was, once again, an attempt at concealment: “Academics leading this campaign are protesting against the inclusion of a scholar from Ariel University Center, a recently upgraded college located in the occupied Palestinian territories in the heart of the West Bank.” The sentence borrowed from the protest letter the expression “in the heart” of the West Bank, but then substituted “Ariel University Center” for “Ariel University of Samaria, Israel.”
The rest of the announcement was a mixture of incoherent, false, illogical and deceptive arguments intended to confuse the rank and file members of the organization, many of whom are sympathetic to the cause of the Palestinians. For example, it stated: “While respecting the ethical position of colleagues who have called for the exclusion from our conference of a scholar teaching at an institution illegally established on confiscated Palestinian land, as an academic society ISIS does not regulate the institutional affiliations of its members.” But who had asked ISIS to “regulate the institutional affiliations of its members”? What does it mean to “regulate” such affiliations? Apparently, what the leadership meant to say was that ISIS does not inspect or police the institutional affiliations of its members. But this implied that the leadership is either inept or ignorant. The affiliation of the representative of the illegal “university” was clearly listed on his abstract and in his curriculum vitae, which was attached to the abstract and posted on the Internet. Didn’t the leadership read the CV? Did they not know where “Ariel University of Samaria, Israel” is? Had they not heard of “Judea and Samaria”?
It is interesting to note that the CV of the representative of the “Ariel University of Samaria, Israel” spells out his research agenda: “The Development of the Mojahedin Khalq Organization and its struggle against the Islamic Republic of Iran, 1987-1997.” The history of the Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) is well known and need not be repeated here. But as my 2003 CounterPunch essay “The Good Terrorists” and subsequent writings point out, prior to the overthrow of Saddam’s regime this cult made strange bedfellows out of the US, Israel and Iraq. Afterward, MKO became a tool in the US-Israeli policy of containment of Iran. It is this containment policy that explains the interest of the Israelis in MKO.
The announcement then goes on to discuss how “rigorous,” “blind” and “stringent” the peer review process of ISIS is. The papers for the conference, the announcement states, are only “selected on the basis of their scholarly merit alone.”
ISIS, of course, had by now hidden the abstract of the paper entitled “The Hojjatiyeh: The Real Bringers of the Islamic Revolution of Iran.” The readers were denied access to it and could not judge for themselves the “scholarly merit of the paper.” Had they had access to the abstract, they could have seen that the “paper’s main questions are: Who are the Hojjatiyeh? . . . Does nuclear Iran represent their main goal? How does it do so? Why should the West as well as the Islamic Republic fear this group? Do they represent any threat to the Middle East, or maybe to the world itself?”
A cursory check of “Hojjatiyeh” on the Internet shows that the above questions are answered on numerous trashy, gossipy and pro-Israeli websites. Indeed, one of the most popular websites on the subject matter, after Wikipedia, reads “Ahmadinejad’s Connection to the Hojjatiyeh Movement: The Terrorist Nightmare.” It covers the same ground as the “scholarly” abstract that ISIS accepted after “rigorous,” “blind” and “stringent” peer review. Is that why ISIS is hiding the abstract?
The arguments of ISIS’s announcement get even better. “ISIS,” the statement reads, “does not discriminate on the basis of nationality, ethnicity, religious belief, gender, sexual preference, political persuasion, or institutional affiliation.” But who had asked ISIS to discriminate? What does criticizing ISIS’s decision to give legitimacy to an illegitimate “university” and, by extension, legitimacy to the military occupation of a people’s homeland, have to do with discrimination?
Then comes the one-two punch part of the announcement: “Having experienced the politicization and ideologization of our field of scholarly inquiry and having witnessed sustained profiling of our colleagues in different national contexts, we are committed to the scholarly autonomy of our society,” reads the statement. It further reads: “The International Society for Iranian Studies firmly believes that scholarship is not politics by other means, and scholarly societies cannot be substitutes for political parties and political campaigns.” Even though deceptively and intentionally unclear, these statements seem to imply that ISIS is a politically neutral organization. But can a Middle Eastern organization remain politically neutral when it comes to the brutal military occupation of Palestine? Is ISIS a politically neutral “scholarly” organization when it includes a paper from “Ariel University of Samaria, Israel” that deals with “nuclear Iran” and its “threat to the Middle East, or maybe to the world”?
Actually, the ISIS leadership has never been politically neutral. Its non-neutrality and political preferences are well exhibited on its website by the inclusion of a huge and glaring emblem of the Achaemenid Empire.
The last two lines of the “Scholarly Autonomy and Academic Civility” are intended to give the knockout blow:
We stand firm against the attempts by any government to dictate the principles of research in the humanities and social sciences and to regulate and control academic and scholarly inquiry. While respecting the work of political pressure groups and recognizing their significance, we likewise remain fully committed to the scholarly autonomy of our society, and we disapprove any attempt to use it as a venue for the advancement of political agendas, regardless of how justified those agendas might be.
Which government has tried to “dictate the principles of research” to the ISIS leadership? Do the original eight professors who drafted the letter of protest, and the subsequent hundred other professors who signed it, represent a government? Which government do they represent? Who are the “political pressure groups” that are using ISIS “as a venue for the advancement of political agendas”? Are the independent scholars whose signatures appear on the letter of protest a political pressure group? What is their “political agenda”? Is defending the human rights of a people under military occupation, or protesting against giving legitimacy to a “university” built on an occupied land, a political agenda?
The leadership of ISIS has committed a grave blunder by including in its upcoming conference a paper from “Ariel University of Samaria, Israel.” Subsequently, it has committed more blunders by trying to hide the affiliation, conceal the abstract of the paper, obfuscate the issue by writing an incoherent, false, illogical and deceptive “announcement” against those who have criticized its actions and asked it to correct its ways. These blunders, unfortunately, were expected. While the rank and file of ISIS consists of scholars who, like many other academics, are troubled by the plight of the Palestinians, the leadership of ISIS still represents mostly an old guard of conservative individuals with little or no sympathy for a people living under occupation. The time has come for the rank and file to ask some serious questions from the ISIS leadership.
Sasan Fayazmanesh is Professor of Economics at California State University, Fresno. He is the author of The United States and Iran: Sanctions, Wars and the Policy of Dual Containment (Routledge, 2008). He can be reached at: sasan.fayazmanesh@gmail.com.
British activist saw Rachel Corrie die under Israeli bulldozer, court hears: The Guardian
Richard Purssell describes ‘shocking event’ in Haifa court on first day of civil suit brought by Corrie family against Israel
Court begins hearing civil suit brought against Israeli government over death of US activist killed by Israeli army bulldozer in Gaza Link to this video
A British witness told a court today about how he had watched an Israeli military bulldozer run over and kill the American activist Rachel Corrie while she was trying to stop Palestinians’ homes being demolished in Gaza.
Richard Purssell, who was also a volunteer activist in Rafah at the time, seven years ago, described the “shocking and dramatic event” in an Israeli court in Haifa on the first day of a civil suit brought by Corrie’s family against the Israeli state.
Twenty-three-year-old Corrie, from Olympia, Washington, in the US, went to Gaza for peace activism reasons at a time when there was intense conflict between the Israeli military and the Palestinians.
The Corrie family lawyer, Hussein Abu Hussein, said he would argue that her death was due either to gross negligence by the Israeli military or that it was intended. If the Israeli state were found responsible, the family would press for damages.
Purssell, a Briton, now working as a landscape gardener, said he volunteered with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) to witness events in the occupied Palestinian territories for himself. In Rafah he had been hoping to prevent the Israeli military from demolishing Palestinian homes. The organisation was strictly non violent, he said. “Our role was to support Palestinian non-violent resistance.”
On the day of her death, 16 March 2003, Corrie was with seven other activists, including Purssell, in Rafah, close to the Israeli-guarded border with Egypt. They saw an Israeli military armoured Caterpillar D9 bulldozer approaching the house of a Palestinian doctor.
Purssell described how the bulldozer approached at a fast walking pace, its blade down and gathering a pile of soil in its path. When the bulldozer was 20 metres from the house Corrie, who like the others was wearing an orange fluorescent jacket, climbed on to the soil in front of it and stood “looking into the cab of the bulldozer”.
“The bulldozer continued to move forward,” Purssell said. “Rachel turned to come back down the slope. The earth is still moving and as she nears the bottom of the pile something happened which causes her to fall forward. The bulldozer continued to move forward and Rachel disappeared from view under the moving earth.”
The bulldozer continued forward four metres as the activists began to run forward and shout at the driver.
“It passed the point where Rachel fell, it stopped and reversed back along the track it first made. Rachel was lying on the earth,” Purssell said. “She was still breathing.” Corrie was severely injured and died shortly afterwards.
The Israeli military says it bears no responsibility for Corrie’s death. A month after her death the military said an investigation had determined its troops were not to blame; the driver of the bulldozer had not seen her and had not intentionally run her over. It accused Corrie and the ISM of behaviour that was “illegal, irresponsible and dangerous”.
Hussein will argue at the Haifa district court that witness evidence shows that the soldiers did see Corrie at the scene, with other activists well before the incident, and that they could have arrested her or removed her from the area before there was any risk of injury.
Before the hearing began, Craig Corrie, Rachel’s father, said the family had been on a “seven-year search for justice in Rachel’s name”. He added: “I think when the truth comes out about Rachel the truth will not wound Israel, the truth is the start of making us heal.”
Cindy Corrie, Rachel’s mother, said the family was still waiting for the credible, transparent investigation Israel first promised regarding her daughter’s death. “I just want to say to Rachel that our family is here today trying to just do right by her and I hope that she will be very proud of the effort we are making,” she said. She said the family had met the staff of US vice-president Joe Biden on Tuesday to talk about the case.
Three other witnesses, two more Britons and an American, who were all at the scene in Rafah when Corrie was killed will give evidence at the Israeli court. It is not clear if any Israeli military officials will speak.
The hearing is scheduled to run for at least two weeks.
EDITOR: The Great Lie
While demolishing houses of Palestinians, some which have there for centuries, Israel now plans, while holding dummy-talks with no one in particular, to build 50,000 more homes in occupied East Jerusalem. This is done with US full knowledge and tacit approval, of course, while on the face of it the US admonishes Israel, mainly for the timing of such announcements.
Israel planning 50,000 housing units in East Jerusalem: Haaretz
Some 50,000 new housing units in Jerusalem neighborhoods beyond the Green Line are in various stages of planning and approval, planning officials told Haaretz. They said Jerusalem’s construction plans for the next few years, even decades, are expected to focus on East Jerusalem.
Most of the housing units will be built in predominantly Jewish neighborhoods beyond the Green Line, while a smaller number of them will be built in Arab neighborhoods. The plans for some 20,000 of the apartments are already in advanced stages of approval and implementation, while plans for the remainder have yet to be submitted to the planning committees.
The planned construction includes the 1,600 homes in the ultra-Orthodox East Jerusalem neighborhood of Ramat Shlomo that were approved Tuesday. Saying the decision undermines peace talks, U.S. Vice President Joe Biden has publicly condemned the move, which the Interior Ministry announced during his visit to Israel.
Ministry officials said the announcement was not intended to coincide with Biden’s visit.
If the East Jerusalem construction plans are implemented, they will make it impossible to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, said an activist of the left-wing Ir Amim non-governmental organization.
“The first, most explosive ‘circle of construction’ in East Jerusalem is in the Old City,” said Orly Noy of Ir Amim, which says it seeks to promote Israeli-Palestinian relations in Jerusalem. “The second circle is the ideological settlements being built in the heart of Palestinian neighborhoods in the historic basin, and the third is expanding the existing neighborhoods in the east of the city.”
Taken together, the East Jerusalem construction “will move Israel beyond the point of no return, as far as an agreed solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is concerned,” she said.
Municipal planning officials said the only direction in which Jerusalem can grow is eastward. The municipality ruled out westward development after the controversial Safdie Plan – a massive construction project planned for the hills west of the capital – was axed three years ago under pressure from environmental groups.
Massive construction within Jerusalem’s older neighborhoods was also scrapped, since it clashed with other considerations: keeping buildings low, preserving historic buildings and streets, and retaining quality of life.
Ir Amim data show that the construction plans in advanced stages of approval are for Gilo (3,000 housing units), Har Homa (1,500), Pisgat Ze’ev (1,500), Givat Hamatos (3,500), Ramot (1,200), Armon Hanetziv (600) and Neveh Yaakov (450).
Several construction plans are not being advanced at the moment, including a plan to build 1,300 housing units in a neighborhood in the south of the city. In addition, a plan to make Atarot an ultra-Orthodox neighborhood was put on hold after Mayor Nir Barkat decided to revitalize the industrial area there.
The state – in the form of the Israel Lands Administration and the Housing and Construction Ministry – is the main force behind these projects. Private businesses and political organizations – including settlers groups, which are building in the midst of Palestinian neighborhoods – are also advancing the projects.
The settlers groups are advancing plans to expand the Ma’aleh Zeitim settlement in Ras al Amud from 60 housing units to more than 200.
The housing shortage in Jerusalem has become more acute in recent years, especially in ultra-Orthodox areas, pushing thousands of ultra-Orthodox families a year to the Haredi cities Betar Ilit and Modi’in Ilit, in the West Bank. The West Bank construction freeze has increased the pressure to create more housing in Jerusalem.
Biden: Status quo in Israel unsustainable: Haaretz
Vice President says that Palestinians, Israelis must decide for themselves if they want peace.
“The demographic realities make it difficult for Israel to be a Jewish homeland and a democratic country,” said Biden in a speech at Tel Aviv University. “The status quo is not sustainable.”
“To end this historic conflict, both sides must be historically bold,” he said.
Biden stressed that peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians must continue, despite Israel’s recent announcement that it plans to expand building in East Jerusalem.
“The most important thing is for these talks to go forward and go forward promptly and go forward in good faith,” Biden said. “We can’t delay because when progress is postponed, extremists exploit our differences.”
Biden said Palestinians had misunderstood Israel’s announcement of the settlement plan, thinking that building would begin immediately. With no construction scheduled for now, he said, negotiators would have time to “resolve this and other outstanding issues.”
The vice president also reassured the Israeli public that the United States is committed to take a strong stance on the Iranian nuclear issue.
Biden said that “the U.S. is determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Period.”
“Iranians are suffering under a leadership that supports terrorism,” said Biden. He further said that “Iran has refused to cooperate” and that the “U.S. is determined to keep up pressure on Iran to change its course.”
At the beginning of his speech, Biden repeatedly emphasized the United States’ commitment to Israel’s security, and said the United States has “no better friend than Israel.”
“Every day Israel faces threats no country should have to endure. America stands with you shoulder to shoulder facing these threats. The United States stands firmly next to Israel against the scourge of terrorism,” he said.
Biden said that the U.S. stands with Israel against the “insidious campaign to challenge Israel’s right to exist.”
“We lead the fight against the campaign to question Israel’s legitimacy,” said Biden. He stressed that Israel-U.S. ties are “impervious to shifts in partisan politics.”
On Tuesday, however, Biden condemned Israel’s move to expand an ultra-Orthodox neighborhood in East Jerusalem.
The Interior Ministry on Tuesday approved the building of 1,600 new housing units in Ramat Shlomo, beyond the Green Line in northeast Jerusalem, with a ministry official saying the plan would expand the ultra-Orthodox neighborhood to the east and south.
Biden said on Tuesday that “the substance and timing of the announcement, particularly with the launching of proximity talks, is precisely the kind of step that undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions that I’ve had here in Israel.”
On Wednesday Amr Mousa, General Secretary of the Arab League, said that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas had told him he intended to pull out of the negotiations.
Collapse of the latest round of talks before they are even underway would be a blow to the Obama government, which has so far made little progress in its efforts to revive the deadlocked peace process
EDITOR: The ”Only Democracy” in the Middle East: Arabrein, For Jews Only!
For those who still prattle about Israeli democracy, those figures should prove adequate medicine for their delusions, I hope. Those figures are even higher than in similar polls in South Africa in the 1980s. It seems that the Israeli educational system is doing an excellent job, training Jewish citizens for Jewish-only, Arabrein democracy!
Poll: Half of Israeli high schoolers oppose equal rights for Arabs: Haaretz
Nearly half of Israel’s high school students do not believe that Israeli-Arabs are entitled to the same rights as Jews in Israel, according to the results of a new survey released yesterday. The same poll revealed that more than half the students would deny Arabs the right to be elected to the Knesset.
The survey, which was administered to teenagers at various Israeli high schools, also found that close to half of all respondents – 48 percent – said that they would refuse orders to evacuate outposts and settlements in the Palestinian territories.
Nearly one-third – 31 percent – said they would refuse military service beyond the Green Line.
The complete results of the poll will be presented today during an academic discussion hosted jointly by Tel Aviv University’s School of Education and the Citizens’ Empowerment Center in Israel. The symposium will focus on various aspects of civic education in the country.
“Jewish youth have not internalized basic democratic values,” said Prof. Daniel Bar-Tal, one of the conference organizers.
The poll was commissioned last month by Maagar Mochot, an Israeli research institution, under the supervision of Prof. Yitzhak Katz. It took a sampling of 536 Jewish and Arab respondents between the ages of 15-18.
The survey sought to gauge youth attitudes toward the State of Israel; their perspective on new immigrants and the state’s Arab citizens; and their political stances.
The results paint a picture of youth leaning toward political philosophies that fall outside the mainstream.
In response to the question of whether Arab citizens should be granted rights equal to that of Jews, 49.5 percent answered in the negative. The issue highlighted the deep fault lines separating religious and secular youths, with 82 percent of religious students saying they opposed equal rights for Arabs while just 39 percent of secular students echoed that sentiment.
The secular-religious gap was also present when students were faced with the question of whether Arabs should be eligible to run for office in the Knesset. While 82 percent of those with religious tendencies answered in the negative, 47 percent of secular teens agreed. In total, 56 percent said Arabs should be denied this right altogether.
The survey also delved into the issue of military service and following orders that are deemed politically divisive.
While an overwhelming majority (91 percent) expressed a desire to enlist in the Israel Defense Forces, 48 percent said they would not obey an order to evacuate outposts and settlements in the West Bank.
Here, too, researchers note the religious nexus. Of those who would refuse evacuation orders, 81 percent categorize themselves as religious as opposed to 36 percent who are secular.
“This poll shows findings which place a huge warning signal in light of the strengthening trends of extremist views among the youth,” said an Education Ministry official.
The survey, which also revealed that a relatively high number of youth plan on voting and that democracy is still the preferred system of government, indicates “a gap between the consensus on formal democracy and the principles of essential democracy, which forbid the denial of rights to the Arab population,” the official said.
“The differences in positions between secular and religious youth, which are only growing sharper from a demographic standpoint, need to be of concern to all of us because this will be the face of the state in another 20-30 years,” said Bar-Tal. “There is a combination of fundamentalism, nationalism, and racism in the worldview of religious youth.”
Truth in labeling: EU court challenges “Made in Israel”: The Electronic Intifada
Phon van den Biesen and Adri Nieuwhof, 10 March 2010
On 25 February, the European Court of Justice ruled that imports manufactured in Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank shouldn’t benefit from a trade agreement between Israel and the European Union. The ruling follows protests of Israel’s export of products from the illegal settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) to the EU and Switzerland labeled as “Made in Israel.” Products labeled as such benefit from favorable import taxes under the EU-Israel Association Agreement of 2000.
European parliamentarians, nongovernmental organizations and consumers in France, the UK, the Netherlands and Switzerland have continuously protested the labeling of products from Israeli settlements ranging from agricultural produce to Ahava cosmetics as “Made in Israel.”
Israel’s settlements in the OPT and the occupied Golan Heights violate the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits the Occupying Power from deporting or transferring parts of its civilian population into the territory it occupies. In its 2004 Advisory Opinion on Israel’s wall in the occupied West Bank, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) confirmed that “the Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (including East Jerusalem) have been established in breach of international law.”
In January 2005, the Official Journal of the European Union informed importers that the preferential treatment provided by the EU-Israel Association Agreement will be refused to goods whose origin is in the OPT. A precedent was set in 2004 when German customs authorities excluded products from the Israeli company Soda-Club, Ltd., which manufactures in the Mishor Adumin settlement in the occupied West Bank.
However, Brita, the German importer of Soda-Club supplies, contested the decision. The EU’s Court of Justice was asked by the German court dealing with this issue if the goods manufactured in the OPT are covered by the EU-Israel Agreement as the Israeli customs authority claims.
In response the EU Court of Justice declared last month “that products originating in the West Bank do not fall within the territorial scope of that agreement and do not therefore qualify for preferential treatment under that agreement.” In other words, the court confirmed the obvious and ruled that the occupied territories cannot legally be considered to be part of the State of Israel.
According to the court, goods certified by the Israeli authorities as originating in Israel can receive preferential treatment only if they have been manufactured in Israel proper. Under the EU-Israel Agreement, the court added, Israeli authorities are obliged to provide sufficient information to enable the member states to determine the real origin of its exported products.
The Court of Justice’s decision vindicates the call of the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for more transparent labeling of produce grown in the OPT. The UK authority stated on 10 December 2009 that EU law requires such labeling and recommended that products labeled as “Produce from the West Bank” should indicate whether it is “Israeli settlement produce” or “Palestinian produce.”
The UK agency and the EU court decisions are indicative of the fast-growing international boycott, divestment and sanctions movement — more consumers are choosing not to buy products from the Israeli settlements. Consumers want to be informed of the true origin of goods and this right is enshrined in EU law. Directive 2005/29/EC on unfair business-to-consumer practices in the internal European market clearly states that such practices are prohibited, including misleading consumers about a product’s origin.
The EU court’s ruling is a welcome contribution to holding Israel accountable to international law. However, EU member states must enforce this ruling and similar stipulations in their national laws — such as the Netherlands’ provisions for the labeling of food products (article 5 g and article 20 of the Warenwet Commodities Act) and provisions in Dutch Civil Code. Consumers in the EU and Switzerland have sufficient laws and protections to enable them to hold companies accountable for importing products from the illegal Israeli settlements in the OPT and the occupied Golan Heights under the false label “Made in Israel.”
Deputy FM tells U.S.: Israel won’t make any more concessions: Haaretz
Ayalon: U.S. anger over East Jerusalem building due to timing; PA: Peace talks off until plan shelved.
Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon on Thursday defended Israel’s decision to approve construction of 1,600 new housing units in East Jerusalem, saying sovereignty over the capital has never been negotiable and that Israel would not make any more concessions for peace.
“There is no doubt that the Palestinians will try to use this to either stop the upcoming indirect peace talks, or to extort more concessions from us, and I have explained to U.S. government officials that there will be no more concessions,” said the deputy minister.
According to Ayalon, the United States’ condemnation on the matter was due to the timing of the announcement and not the content of the issue.
Israel declared its approval of the construction just 24 hours after U.S. envoy George Mitchell announced that Israelis and Palestinians had agreed to begin indirect peace talks and in the midst of a visit to the region by U.S. Vice President Joe Biden.
“We were severely criticized by the State Department,” Ayalon told Haaretz during a visit to Washington. “I explained that Jerusalem has always been out of the question.”
“The criticism was mainly about the timing of the announcement, and I told them that it was poor timing, but it was not planned and it was a serious mistake which is currently being probed in Israel,” Ayalon told Haaretz.
Ayalon said that despite the uncomfortable diplomatic circumstances he has found himself in due to the issue, his visit to Washington has been “essentially good” and has allowed him to reach “concrete achievements.”
Biden issued his Israeli hosts with a sharp rebuke upon hearing that the East Jerusalem construction had been approved. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he was not informed in advance of the decision, announced by the interior ministry.
The prime minister summoned Interior Minister Eli Yishai Wednesday morning and reprimanded him for the decision’s “wretched, displaced, insensitive” timing.
The neighborhood lies within the municipal boundaries drawn up by Israel after it annexed East Jerusalem following its capture in the 1967 Six-Day War.
Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said earlier Thursday that Palestinians would not begin indirectpeace talks unless the Israeli government annuled the decision to build in East Jerusalem.
“We want to hear from [United States envoy George] Mitchell that Israel has canceled the decision to build housing units before we start the negotiations,” Erekat said.
His remarks follow comments by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who told Biden Wednesday that it was not enough for the Israeli decision to be condemned, it also had to be canceled.
H&M opens Israel store amid calls to boycott European branches: Haaretz
More than 24 European and Middle Eastern pro-Palestinian organizations on Thursday condemned the opening of H&M’s flagship store in Israel and called to boycott the clothing chain’s stores in Europe in response.
The various organizations, from Belgium, Sweden, Britain, Ireland, Denmark Palestine and even Israel, published a demand on the International Solidarity Movement Web site calling to boycott the European stores until H&M postpone the establishment of its stores Israel “until Israel respects international law in line with the UN resolutions.”
“H&M is thus investing in Israel at the same time as the UN Goldstone commission and international organizations that H&M is cooperating with, such as UNICEF and the UN, report about Israel?s crimes against international law and human rights, “the website wrote.
Chairperson of European Jews for a Just Peace, Dror Feiler, told the International Solidarity Movement that “H&M contributes to a shift of focus from Israel?s war crimes to that of fashion, investments and commerce.”
The call to boycott the European stores came as hundreds of Israelis stormed the new 2,000 square meters store on the third floor of the Azrieli shopping mall in Tel Aviv.
The Swedish clothing chain plans to open seven stores throughout the country, the first of which opened in Tel Aviv, and the second is due to open in Jerusalem, followed by Haifa, Petah Tikva, Netanya, and Rehovot.