Our dear friend Bassem Ibrahim Abu Rahma, known to many of us as Pheel, was murdered by IOF soldiers during a non-violent protest in the Palestinian village of Bil’in on April 17th, 2009.
This film was made in his memory, which we so fondly remember and greatly miss.
Bassem’s friends
His name was Bassem, which means smile, and that is how he greeted everyone. But we all called him ‘Pheel’, which means elephant because he had the body the size of an elephant. But Bassem had the heart of a child.
He loved everyone, and because of his sweetness and ability to make us laugh, everyone loved him. Bassem was everyone’s friend: the children talk about how he would play with them, scare them and then make them laugh. He would tend the garden in the playground and bring toys and books to the kindergarten. The old ladies in the village talk about how he used to visit, to ask after them and see if they needed anything. In the village, he seemed to be everywhere at once. He would pop in to say hello, take one puff of the nargila (Shisha), and be off to his next spot. The morning he was killed he went to the house of Hamis, whose skull had been broken at a previous demonstration three months ago by a tear gas canister projectile – the same weapon that would kill Bassem.
Bassem woke Hamis and gave him his medicine, then off he went to visit another friend in the village who is ill with cancer. Then a little girl from the village wanted a pineapple but couldn’t find any in the local stores. So Bassem went to Ramallah to get a pineapple and was back before noon for the Friday prayers and the weekly demonstration against the theft of our land by the apartheid wall. Pheel never missed a demonstration; he participated in all the activities and creative actions in Bilin. He would always talk to the soldiers as human beings. Before he was hit he was calling for the soldiers to stop shooting because there were goats near the fence and he was worried for them. Then a woman in front of him was hit. He yelled to the commander to stop shooting because someone was wounded. He expected the soldiers to understand and stop shooting. Instead, they shot him too.
People came to his funeral from all the surrounding villages to show Bassem that they loved him as much as he had loved them. But those of us from Bil’in kept looking around for him, expecting him to be walking with us.
Pheel, you were everyone’s friend. We always knew we loved you, but didn’t realize how much we would miss you until we lost you. As Bil’in has become the symbol of Palestine’s popular resistance, you are the symbol of Bil’in. Sweet Pheel, Rest in Peace, we will continue in your footsteps.
— Mohammad Khatib, member of the Bil’in Popular Committee Against the Wall and Settlements
EDITOR: The more it changes, the more it stays the same….
Much is changing all the time in and around the Middle East; governments and leaders come and go (but not in Egypt…) as they do in Europe and the US. News peace plans, with ever-exciting names appear and wither away, new envoys come and go – some of bodies that do not even exist, such as the Quartet – and much money and energy are spent on all of this, and gives much work to journalists and experts in research institutes, and new tomes are launched.
One thing stays the same, though. Israel continues apace, clearing Palestine of its people, day-in, day-out, without ever stopping. Meanwhile, more are killed, maimed, robbed, humiliated, not to mention being starved. Thousands of homes are destroyed, families are spread across the globe, and slowly but surely, Palestine is evacuated, emptied, ethnically-cleansed. This fervent effort is supported by the western democracies – with political and diplomatic immunity awarded to Israel, with huge sums in aid, with special status in US and EU as well as other countries, and also by buying the fruits of the stolen land from the robbers and murderers.
How many peace plans have been drawn since 1967? How many UN resolutions, Security Council resolutions? Judgments by the International Criminal Court? Is there any doubt that the occupation and all the activities is spawned are not only illegal, but also immoral and inhumane? That the daily oppression, murder and brutalities are a shame on the international community, as Apartheid once was? That the apartheid wall is there to continue the land and water theft?
More than anything – is there any doubt that Israel has made any chance of a just peace settlement totally impossible through a calculated policy combining military brutality and control, legalised land theft, and total denial of human and political right to millions of Palestinians over many decades? Is it not yet clear that the so-called Two State solution was a mere fig-leaf, covering and enabling the continuation of the dispossession and ethnic cleansing of Palestine?
Israel seems set to see the latest of those efforts, started by Obama, to reach some settlement, and to continue the seemingly unstoppable cleansing of Palestine of its indigenous population. Though Obama would never even try to achieve a just solution, being as he is part of the US support system of Israel’s military occupation, and control of the Middle East, even his futile attempts would not be welcomed, and are likely to die like all before. Should anyone be waiting for Obama’s efforts to wither out? The international community did not wait for a US president before acting against apartheid in South Africa, so why does it wait now, with Israeli apartheid being so much worse?
The items before exemplify the movement towards emptying Palestine, taking part all over Palestine, every single day.
IDF using bereavement as fig leaf for settlers: Haaretz
By Gideon Levy
Who said Ehud Barak is insensitive? Who falsely accused Gabi Ashkenazi of being the silent type? And who suspects them of not being able to work together? The defense minister and chief of staff stood united at the end of last week to prevent the destruction of illegal homes in the illegal outpost of Givat Hayovel. Some of the houses were built on private Palestinian land; in other words, stolen land, and others were built on “state lands” and “survey lands” – more misleading terms to emerge from Israel’s endless supply of tricks.
The Israel Defense Forces even pulled out from storage a particularly ridiculous reason we haven’t heard for a while: These houses are “important for security” because they are “controlling points” where the IDF’s presence is “important.” As if the IDF can’t be in a place without such homes.
Barak and Ashkenazi got together for the task because bereaved families live in two of these homes: the family of Maj. Ro’i Klein, who was killed in the Second Lebanon War, and the family of Maj. Eliraz Peretz, who was killed three weeks ago on the Gaza border. It’s unclear whether this united front at the top was meant to prevent only the demolition of these two families’ homes or the demolition of all 18 homes ordered by the High Court of Justice. Both possibilities raise serious questions. Does the blood of those who die in combat wash away their culpability? How can we discriminate between one illegal settler and another? Why should the Palestinian whose land was taken over care if one of those settlers gets killed in action? Here’s the devilish thing: Of all days, on the day Barak and Ashkenazi published an emotional letter to High Court President Dorit Beinisch asking for “consideration and sensitivity,” the IDF destroyed other houses. Civil Administration bulldozers crushed a two-story house and two shops in Kafr Hares, while demolishing a home and a factory in Beit Sahur and another home in Al-Khader. Sixteen people are now homeless, among them children and a 1-year-old baby. The people from the Civil Administration took the trouble to stress that this was just the beginning of the demolition operation.
Advertisement
It didn’t occur to anyone in the IDF to check whether maybe the Sultan family in Hares or the Musa family in Al-Khader could cite extenuating circumstances justifying “consideration and sensitivity.” Might they also have lost a son? And if so, would anyone have thought to stop the demolition because of it? Don’t make the IDF, the Civil Administration, Barak, Ashkenazi and all of us laugh. Those are Palestinians, not humans.
The demolition of the homes in Givat Hayovel was decided on in 2001, when everyone in the families was still alive. They built their homes recklessly, without permits, and knew they were stealing land. There are many other settlers like them.
That is the original sin that has been followed by the sin of authorities’ foot-dragging, which in this case has gone on for around nine years in terms of implementing the ruling on Peace Now’s petition. Peace Now Secretary-General Yariv Oppenheimer now says he is giving in on the demolition of the Klein and Peretz homes. One can understand him. It’s hard to destroy a home whose inhabitants have just ended their week of mourning.
Indeed, it’s not humane. But as usual, we deal with the marginal instead of the important. While the evacuation of the outposts has never been an operative term, while the Sasson report has become a worthless archaeological artifact, why are we bothering with Givat Hayovel, of all places? Do we lack other outposts to evacuate, those without mourning families? Moreover, the whole matter of “illegal” outposts – as if even one settlement is legal – has never been the heart of the problem. It’s very convenient for everyone to turn the Givat Hayovel affair into another self-righteous and misleading fig leaf.
The settlers are waving these houses around for their own needs to squeeze out even more public sympathy and increase opposition to any evacuation at all. Barak and Ashkenazi are waving these houses around to show how much they want to enforce the law in the territories but can’t. Even the justice system occasionally seeks to prove that it is careful to uphold the law and not discriminate when it comes to the settlers. All this is nothing less than ridiculous.
Those two homes should be left alone – even the entire outpost. As long as the main settlement, Eli, remains, what difference does its offshoot make?
Clinton presses Israel do more to start peace talks: BBC
Clinton argued that peace talks would counter extremism
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has again called on Israel to do more to pursue peace with the Palestinians.
She urged Israel to support efforts by the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank to strengthen institutions.
Mrs Clinton also called on the Palestinians to promote peace by ending incitement and fighting corruption.
Jewish settlement construction has caused deep strain in relations between the US and Israel and has hampered efforts to revive peace talks.
The secretary of state said supporting the Palestinian Authority led by Mahmoud Abbas was the best weapon to counter Hamas and other extremists.
The US has been trying to launch proximity talks between the two sides.
These were knocked off course by an announcement that Israel had approved plans for 1,600 new homes in the East Jerusalem settlement of Ramat Shlomo during a visit to Israel by US Vice-President Joe Biden.
‘Bold leadership’
The secretary of state called for “bold leadership” on all sides when she spoke at a dinner attended by the ambassadors of Israel and several Arab states.
“Prime Minister Netanyahu has embraced the vision of the two-state solution,” Mrs Clinton said.
“But easing up on access and movement in the West Bank, in response to credible Palestinian security performance, is not sufficient to prove to the Palestinians that this embrace is sincere.”
“We encourage Israel to continue building momentum toward a comprehensive peace by demonstrating respect for the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinians, stopping settlement activity and addressing the humanitarian needs in Gaza, and to refrain from unilateral statements and actions that could undermine trust or risk prejudicing the outcome of talks,” she added.
Israel has occupied the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, since 1967. It insists Jerusalem will remain its undivided capital, while Palestinians want to establish the capital of their state in the East Jerusalem.
Nearly half a million Jews live in more than 100 settlements in the West Bank, among a Palestinian population of about 2.5 million.
The settlements are illegal under international law, although Israel disputes this.
The Middle East quartet – the US, EU, UN and Russia – has called for a halt in settlement building and immediate final status negotiations to reach a comprehensive peace deal within two years.
EDITOR: H&M Protest Spreads Across Europe
After the successful action in Paris, a new action against H&M in Brusseles
Israel ‘using Facebook to recruit Gaza collaborators’: BBC
Social networking websites are becoming increasingly popular in Gaza
In a busy internet cafe in the centre of Gaza City, lots of people, mostly young, are typing and clicking away.
Some of them are engrossed in the world of Facebook. “I use it 10 hours a day,” says Mohammed who owns the shop. “I have over 200 Facebook friends.”
But Hamas, the Islamist movement that controls the Gaza Strip, believes the population’s love of social networking websites is making it easier for Israel to recruit spies.
Israel has long maintained networks of informers in the West Bank and Gaza in its effort to derail the activities of militant groups.
Historically, collaborators have often been killed if discovered, and this week Hamas announced it would execute anyone caught acting as an agent for Israel.
Personal problems
Facebook “is a big, big thing that the Israelis use”, says Ehab al-Hussein, a spokesman for the Hamas-run interior ministry.
“Many people don’t have security sense. They go on the internet and talk about all their personal problems such as with their wives or girlfriends,” he says.
Israel’s intelligence services can then contact people by telephone, e-mail or using existing Israeli agents in Gaza, and use the information to pressure people to become spies.
If in 50 years they open up the secret files of the Israeli secret services, the sophistication of electronics that is being used by Israel now in the Gaza Strip would put even the legendary Q from the James Bond movies to shame
Ronen Bergman
Expert on Israeli intelligence
The internet “allows them to make people feel Israel knows everything about them”, says Mr Hussein.
Ronen Bergman, an Israeli expert on intelligence and author of Israel’s Secret War with Iran, says monitoring social networking sites is the very minimum you would expect from his country’s intelligence services.
“Israel is using the personal information that is put in massive amounts on the internet to identify the people who can maybe help Israel,” he says.
“If in 50 years they open up the secret files of the Israeli secret service, the Shin Bet, and military intelligence, the sophistication of electronics that is being used by Israel now in the Gaza Strip would put even the legendary Q from the James Bond movies to shame.”
But Mr Bergman says that the intelligence community’s current thinking is that using personal information gleaned from the internet to pressure or even blackmail potential informants is not considered effective in recruiting long-term informants.
He says such threats are not often enough to get people to commit such a serious offence as collaborating.
But online detail, he says, can help intelligence services identify people who might be useful – such as those with good access to Hamas or to criminal networks.
When asked to comment, the Israeli government said it was not its practice to talk about its security services’ modes of operation.
Phone fears
Even Mr Hussein admits he has a Facebook page, “but I’m careful about the information I put on,” he says. “I only say I am a Hamas spokesman.”
He is probably not the only member of Hamas communicating on Facebook and the internet.
This is partly because other forms of communication, particularly mobile phones, are easily bugged and can be used to track movements, Mr Bergman says, so the internet has become a more preferable option.
Virtually all Palestinians leaving Gaza now do so for medical reasons
One reason Israeli intelligence is watching the social networking websites to try to identify potential informants is because a historical source of collaborators no longer exists, according to Mr Bergman.
Up until the second intifada, or Palestinian uprising, started in 2000, thousands of Gazans had permits to enter Israel each day to work.
These people had direct contact with Israelis and were sometimes approached by Israeli intelligence officers and asked to collaborate.
But these days the border is virtually sealed.
Virtually the only Palestinians allowed through are often in wheelchairs or bandaged up, seeking medical treatment in Israel.
Some of those say they’ve been asked for information about Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
“They asked if I knew any people in my neighbourhood who were members,” says Khaled, a young man from Gaza City, who will give only his first name.
‘Not safe’
He had to go to Israel to seek medical treatment after being injured in last year’s conflict with Israel.
He says he did not pass on any information that the Israelis would not already have known.
But he gives an insight into how intelligence officers pressure people to become informants.
“They say that they know everything about you, but actually it’s information you have already published on Facebook,” he says.
“It’s not safe to publish such information – I believe it allows Israel to keep watching our movements.”
Last year, Israel dismissed as “simply ludicrous” allegations that its security forces had told Palestinians seeking permits to exit Gaza for medical treatment that they would only be allowed to leave if they supplied information on militant groups.
Ahmadinejad extolls Iran’s military might: The Independent
Sunday, 18 April 2010SHARE PRINTEMAILTEXT SIZE NORMALLARGEEXTRA LARGE
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says Iran’s military is so powerful today no one would dare attack the country.
The remarks came as Ahmadinejad reviewed a military parade marking National Army Day. The parade and Ahmadinejad’s speech were broadcast live on state TV today.
Ahmadinejad told the nation that “our armed forces have so much power that no enemy will harbor evil thoughts about laying its hands on Iranian territory.”
The parade showcased Iran’s surface-to-surface Ghadr, Sajjil and Shahab-3 missiles. Their range of up to 1,250 miles (2,000 kilometers) puts Israel and U.S. bases in the region within Iran’s reach.
Ahmadinejad also urged the US to stop supporting Israel and dismantle its military presence in the Middle East and Afghanistan.
An immaculate conception?: The Electronic Intifada
Joseph Massad, 14 April 2010
The Palestinian Authority is pregnant! Indeed, it is the unelected and American-imposed Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad who is pregnant. He told the Israeli newspaper Haaretz in a recent interview that “the time for this baby to be born will come … and we estimate it will come around 2011.” Unlike females of the human species but like female whales, the gestation period for male Palestinian collaborators with the Israeli occupation extends at least to two years. Fayyad, “the Palestinian Ben-Gurion,” as Israeli President Shimon Peres recently dubbed him, had declared his pregnancy in a document he issued on 25 August 2009 titled “Palestine: Ending the Occupation and Establishing the State,” and more recently to Haaretz: “the birth of a Palestinian state will be celebrated as a day of joy by the entire community of nations.”
We seem to already know the name, weight, ideological color and the physical make-up of this “baby;” nay we even know the political structure, and the foreign policy of the fruit of Fayyad’s womb: a tiny Palestinian “state” that recognizes Israel as a “biblical” Jewish state. The time of birth will be determined by Fayyad as both mother and midwife. While the last immaculate conception that took place in Palestine was in Nazareth, it remains unclear if what is unfolding in Ramallah is a second immaculate conception, as no paternity tests have been scheduled as of yet for this illegitimate baby.
Given the longstanding affairs that Fayyad has had with the Americans since his stint at the International Monetary Fund from 1995 to 2002, some heretics reject the theory of immaculate conception and claim to know the identity of the father and point to Fayyad’s words as evidence. According to Haaretz, Fayyad is planning to induce labor in August 2011 in order “for the state to be born during the first term of [US President] Barack Obama,” the most likely father according to the heretics. Non-Cuban cigars will be on hand for immediate distribution to the friends and family of the happy couple. It should be noted that while Fayyad’s declaration of his two-year pregnancy was made in August 2009, belated congratulations finally arrived from the European Union and the Quartet in December 2009. But as many previous pregnancies by other Palestinian male collaborators turned out, to the chagrin of many, to be hysterical pregnancies, or, in case they were real pregnancies were terminated prematurely, before Fayyad’s baby is born, several steps will have to be taken in order to ensure that this “real” pregnancy be carried full term:
Firstly, recognizing Israel as a Jewish “biblical country,” thus granting Israel legitimacy to be a racist colonial-settler state. Fayyad obliged: “Related to the Zionist ethos, fine, Israel is a biblical country, there are lots of hilltops, lots of vacant space, why don’t [the settlers] use that, and let us get on with it?” Secondly, committing to repress all forms of resistance to Israel, dubbed “incitement,” including freedom of speech and freedom of political action. Fayyad obliged: “Incitement can take the form of many things — things said, things done, provocations — but there are ways for dealing with this. We are dealing with this.” And thirdly, surrendering the Palestinian people’s right of return to their homes and lands from which they were expelled in 1948 by European Jewish colonists: “Of course, Palestinians would have the right to reside within the State of Palestine.”
But lest we think Fayyad only satisfies Israel’s demands, he assures us that he stands up to the Americans. In a recent interview with the Arabic Majallat al-Dirasat al-Filastiniyyah (the sister publication of the English-language Journal of Palestine Studies) he is careful to present himself as no pushover when it comes to the United States. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez should learn a lesson or two from the independent and non-aligned Fayyad of the “Third Way” — the name of the list under which he ran in the elections of 2006 and which was accused by Fatah of being financed by the CIA. The “Third Way” received a whopping 2.41 percent of the vote. Mind you, Fayyad is the only witness to his heroic stances with the Americans, which is why he relishes narrating them to his interviewers.
He tells us that he stood up to the Americans when he first became finance minister in 2002 and was asked to visit the US. He declined and told them he was too busy with his new job and will visit them when his schedule permits; Later, he apparently, though no one seems to know it yet, stood up to General Keith Dayton, chief American trainer of the Palestinian thuggish mafia, when Fayyad instructed him not to speak to the press and that he was a mere trainer of the Palestinian Authority (PA) security forces and not a consultant to the PA. Dayton, we are told, readily apologized to him and promised not to do it again; and finally, and most importantly, when the US asked him not to participate in the National Unity government in 2007, he refused the Americans’ request and insisted on participating in the Hamas-led government which the European Union immediately boycotted. Of course, no mention is made that Fayyad was appointed prime minister of the PA in June 2007 at the behest of the Americans after the PA and Keith Dayton staged their failed coup in Gaza, something his interviewers failed to remind him of. At any rate, if it were not for these revelations, Fayyad’s anti-imperialist credentials would have remained unrecognized by the masses.
In his interview with Majallat al-Dirasat al-Filastiniyyah, Fayyad is so concerned about the ongoing Israeli colonial theft of Jerusalem that he soberly recommends full Arab normalization with Israel to put a stop to it: “The Arab identity of the city will be strengthened when the Arabs come to visit it not when they boycott it under the pretext that visiting it would be normalization with the occupier. I believe that it is the duty of Arabs to visit Jerusalem and I encourage this strongly, for in doing so, they would be supporting and strengthening the Arab dimension of Jerusalem’s identity.” It is curious that in the English version of the interview (which appeared in the latest issue of the Journal of Palestinian Studies), this part of the interview was dropped!
Fayyad has been a pioneer in normalization of course. Not only is he lavished with praise by his American and Israeli patrons for his statesmanship, he is also rewarded for it generously, so much so that he was invited, attended and delivered a speech at the annual Israeli conference at Herzliya last February, where Israeli politicians and academics discuss strategies of how to defuse the Palestinian “demographic bomb” and where Martin Kramer (an extremist in the American context but a mainstream strategist in Israel) made his infamous genocidal recommendations to restrict Palestinian births and get rid of “superfluous young [Palestinian] men.” Perhaps it was at Herzliya that Fayyad was inspired to recognize Israel’s “biblical” claims to Palestine.
Not only is Fayyad a democrat who is above partisan politics and the conflict between Fatah and Hamas, he insists that he applies the Dayton-trained thuggish security apparatus at his disposal to repress only those who violate the law from either side. In his interview in The Journal of Palestine Studies, he insists that he opposes violation of human rights, use of torture, or the arrest of people for their political opinion, despite the huge record amassed by local and international human rights groups about the ongoing abuses on all these fronts by his and Dayton’s security thugs which target especially anyone associated with Hamas.
Perhaps the recent small example of student elections at Birzeit University suffices. As Islah Jad, a professor at Birzeit and director of its Women Studies Institute, has argued in a recently-published article, the very democratic nature of the elections are now at stake in a university that always respected and promoted them. Since the PA came to power, and increasingly since the election of Hamas, Islamist candidates for local student elections are arrested by Dayton’s thugs soon after they declare their candidacy or after they win. In this atmosphere of terror, all Islamist groups did not run candidates for the recent Birzeit student elections for fear of reprisals. So while free elections are held, terrorizing and intimidating candidates ensures the final outcome, which is nonetheless declared “democratic.” That less than 50 percent of the Birzeit student electorate ended up participating in the elections testifies to the American-style democracy that Fayyad and Dayton’s thugs aim to institute in the Palestinian state at large after Fayyad gives birth to it.
Fayyad’s plan to establish a Palestinian state in August 2011 is in effect an acceptance of the Camp David proposals offered to and rejected by the late Palestine Liberation Organization Chairman Yasser Arafat in 2000. The Americans understand that if Palestinians, or at least American agents among them, propose such an arrangement and that such a proposal is presented as in defiance of Israeli and even American diktat, it will have a better chance of being accepted by gullible Palestinians than if the Americans and the Israelis were to impose it outright.
In 1999, the administration of US President Bill Clinton helped by its local allies, including the Jordanian government, did their utmost to defeat Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Israeli elections and succeeded in bringing Ehud Barak to power in order to carry out Clinton’s now infamous Camp David negotiations. As Arafat was given an offer that he had no choice but to refuse, as it would have fully delegitimized him in the eyes of his people, Obama has a new partner who is not concerned or interested at all in issues of popular legitimacy, as he has none.
After all, besides being the historic leader of the Palestinians since the mid-1960s, Arafat was elected with a majority vote in 1996 in a gerrymandered and manipulated elections. The previously unknown Fayyad, by contrast, who has had no role in the Palestinian national movement and who lacks an electoral mandate of any sort was imposed as the supreme leader of the PA. As the King of Jordan has joined the anti-Netanyahu chorus in a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal, Obama seems to be coordinating efforts with the Israeli Labor Party which is part of Netanyahu’s coalition government to bring down Netanyahu after the latter’s refusal to abide by Obama’s orders. For this purpose, prominent members of the Labor Party have been meeting with some unofficial and official Palestinians in the United States and in the West Bank to coordinate efforts and join in with Obama’s plan for a new Camp David.
Obama’s baby can only be born if a new Palestinian leader accepts the terms of Camp David, now even further reduced than when Ehud Barak offered them to Arafat in 2000. With tens of thousands more settlers, more Palestinian lands taken by the apartheid wall, and more confiscations of land across the West Bank and East Jerusalem, the 65 percent of the West Bank (marketed by US and Israeli propaganda as more than 95 percent of the West Bank) rejected by Arafat will be reduced further and re-offered to the Palestinian people by Fayyad himself. Indeed word has it in Washington, or at least in The Washington Post, that the peace plan being considered by Obama is based on Camp David except that “90 percent of the map would look the same” as the map offered by Ehud Barak in 2000, i.e. the Palestinians will now be offered 58 percent of the West Bank. This will be the size of Fayyad’s newborn.
After these preparations are finalized, Fayyad will give birth to his illegitimate American baby, christened “Palestine.” Unlike the Nazarene baby, Fayyad’s baby will be the harbinger not of salvation but of more misery for the Palestinian people. Gifts to mother and child should be sent care of Salam Fayyad’s office in Ramallah.
Joseph Massad teaches modern Arab politics and intellectual history at Columbia University in New York. He is the author of The Persistence of the Palestinian Question (Routledge, 2006)
Will sanctions against Iran really serve the West’s interests?: Haaretz
By Zvi Bar’el
The nuclear security summit convened last week by U.S. President Barack Obama, though intended to recruit 47 heads of state to join the plan to impose sanctions on Iran, was a long way from offering an appropriate response to Tehran’s initiatives to go nuclear. China, specifically, despite a declared softening in its stance, is still not ready to sign off on the proposed sanctions.
Proponents of sanctions against Iran should keep a particular statistic in mind: According to a survey by an Iranian consumer organization, Iran ranks seventh in the world in the purchase of cosmetics. Every year, Iranians spend approximately $2.1 billion on creams, lipstick, shampoo, makeup and so on, with most of these items imported from abroad. The Islamic Republic accounts for nearly a third of the cosmetics consumption in the Middle East.
The example of cosmetics illustrates a larger dilemma faced by the United States as it seeks to impose sanctions. More than half of Iran’s 74 million inhabitants are under the age of 30, making it a target population for both the marketers of cosmetics and for the opposition activists seeking to recruit young people to their ranks. What effect would applied sanctions have on the political leanings of this younger generation, the same one the United States hopes to instill with Western values? Finding a way to avoid harming Iranian citizens, while at the same time conveying a sharp message to Iran and other countries, has proved difficult.
According to statements made by Obama, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Iran’s aspiration to obtain nuclear arms is a recognized fact. Obama’s promise – that the United States will not use nuclear weapons against countries that do not possess such weapons themselves, apart from Iran and North Korea – clearly implies that Washington has not ruled out the use of nuclear or conventional weapons against Iran and North Korea. This seems to attest to the fact that the reaction of the Iranian population is of secondary interest to the U.S. administration, which believes there is little prospect of fomenting a revolution from within in light of how the opposition has been silenced.
Iranian opposition intellectuals, for their part, have made statements effectively saying there is no choice but to impose sanctions on Iran. Last week, for example, Saeed Ghasemzadeh wrote in the opposition newspaper Rooz that, although he is not convinced that sanctions will deter Iran from developing nuclear arms, as “the Islamic Republic views the possession of nuclear weapons [as] a guarantee for its security against foreign threats,” nevertheless “from a global perspective, Iran is a rogue state that has ignored repeated UN Security Council resolutions… Ignoring Iran means giving the green light to other countries that may have similar aspirations.” Ghasemzadeh explained that Iran’s self-confidence stems from its leaders’ assessment that “because of [the United States’] current entanglements in Iraq and Afghanistan, including its war against Islamic terrorism in the Middle East, it does not have the capability to get involved in another war.”
However, Ghasemzadeh maintains, in terms of the public’s reaction, and more particularly that of the opposition, sanctions are a double-edged sword. The opposition may well foment riots against the regime, which will be blamed for the economic distress caused by the sanctions, he explains, but at the same time such disturbances will give the regime an excuse to crush the opposition by force.
The absence of a response and of criticism on the part of the opposition to the sharp tone of the official discourse emanating from Washington may also show that the opposition itself does not know what will serve it best. Greater pressure from outside provides it with new reasons to criticize the regime, but as the pressure intensifies, every voice raised against the regime could be accused of betraying the homeland. The witch hunt of opposition activists, which continues unabated, and the harsh sentences delivered by the courts against the accused, are part of the regime’s message – aimed not only at the dissidents, but also intended to make it clear to Washington that it cannot rely on its “allies” inside Iran.
Several developments attest to a diplomatic campaign to which Iran attaches no less importance than it does to its technological capabilities. Among them: the pomposity with which Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadenijad conducted the dedication ceremony of the centrifuges, and the technical specifications he broadcast to the world – to the effect that they represent a new generation, five times as fast as the previous generation; the announcement that Iran will develop a plant to produce nuclear fuel and thus free itself of its dependence on the West; the frequent announcements about the development of another 10 sites to enrich uranium, and the counter-threats to the American threats; and now the nuclear conference in Iran, as a response to the nuclear summit in Washington.
It’s hard to find a country with nuclear capability that is bent on making its capabilities public. Even countries that do not maintain a policy of nuclear ambiguity, such as India and Pakistan, do not go about telling everyone how they enrich uranium or what their future plans are in this realm. Iran has two main reasons for showing its cards. First, Tehran insists that it is not violating either international law – the rules of the International Atomic Energy Agency or the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty – to which it is a signatory. There were a few hitches but they were corrected, Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, said this week in an interview. He was referring to Iran’s failure to report on the activity at the Qom nuclear site and about other activity in the realm of nuclear research. But in his opinion, every country that is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty has made similar breaches. Besides, he said, “The agency inspectors are residing in Iran [and] have their cameras taking pictures 24 hours per day.”
The second reason for the relatively large number of details being provided is that the Iranian regime views the development of nuclear technology as a demonstration of strength, able to compete with the might of the West and thus settle an historic account dating from the colonial era – when Iran was a “captive” of the Western powers. This does not mean that Iran is not aspiring to develop nuclear arms and will make do merely with a demonstration of its technological capability. The assumption must be that Iran will obtain nuclear arms, with sanctions or without them. However, the technological achievement stems from a national as well as a military outlook.
This is also the pretext for the counter-conference organized by Iran. Sixty countries were invited to attend the two-day summit, which began Saturday, under the slogan “Nuclear energy for all, nuclear weapons for no one.” Few heads of state were expected to attend, and even Turkey, under heavy American pressure, decided to send a low-ranking official rather than its foreign minister. For Iran, though, the conference is an important demonstration of its international standing, as honor plays a central role in the Iranian nuclear project, something the West would do well to take into account.
A Bailout For Arms Dealers: US Aid and the Israeli Budget: The Only Democracy?
April 15th, 2010, by Rela Mazali
By Rela Mazali and Jesse Bacon
The US Congress has shamefully abdicated its oversight role in US foreign policy and has become an apologist for the worst policies of the Israeli Government, all the while sending Israel billions of dollars in aid. Fortunately activists are not waiting for the US Congress to act. They are staging their own investigation, a first of its kind event.
The Chicago Hearing is modeled after a Congressional hearing and will be webcast live from a link on the home page. The Chicago Hearing will bring together witnesses to tell seldom-heard stories from Israel-Palestine that raise critical questions about the effects of U.S. policies in the region. Does Israel’s explanation of security legitimize its violations of international law? Does the U.S. government condone Israeli policies and practices that would not be tolerated if replicated in America by the U.S. government?
The Hearing highlights voices of those on the other end of the pipeline of U.S. aid to Israel. Israeli, Palestinian and American witnesses will testify to lives lost, freedoms denied and property destroyed by Israeli policies buttressed by U.S. aid and support. The witnesses will testify to the collateral effects of U.S. policies toward Israel: military and financial aid that totaled over $3 billion in 2009 as well as unconditional diplomatic support for Israel in the United Nations”.
Yotam Amit, one of the organizers, asked New Profile, a feminist, anti-militarist movement in Israel, to provide background information about the link between US aid and undemocratic aspects of Israeli society. The following piece is based on an ensuing exchange of emails between Amit, Rela Mazali, a founding and active New Profile member (and frequent contributor to The Only Democracy?) and co-editor Jesse Bacon, incorporating excerpts from a seminal study by Israeli sociologist Shlomo Swirsky, “The Burden of Occupation,” which can be downloaded in full here.
For years now, groups such as the US Campaign to End the Occupation have been trying to show how US aid reduces US social spending, New Profile works in Israel to make a somewhat analogous argument. While the $3 Billion in official US Aid is vastly more then we give any other country, the impact on Israeli’s spending is obviously much greater.
Based on various studies and, in particular, Shlomo Swirsky’s “The Cost of Occupation,” we suggest that the direct effect is not the repeated slashes in Israeli social spending, but rather a camouflaging of the fact that these slashes are the neoliberal policy of choice benefiting the economic and security elite, under the guise of necessary “security spending.” According to Swirsky,
It can be said that the American administration allowed Israel to conduct its military operations against the Palestinian Authority under highly favorable domestic political conditions. The government was not forced to strain the local capital market or to raise taxes, steps that would have distressed Israel’s more affluent stratum. This is the very stratum that, if faced with the threat of carrying a heavier financial burden, might have been able to press the government to consider changing its policy regarding the occupied Palestinian territories. As early as the first Intifada, the business community was reportedly ‘fed up with the devaluation of the benefits it derived from the occupation and with the increasing burden the occupation imposed on it’(Levy, 2003: 172). Notably, this is the same stratum whose children had evinced a ‘motivational crisis’ regarding their service in the I.D.F. during the first Intifada (see Chapter 6).” p.119
So Israeli’s elites are not being inconvenienced by the Occupation. How can we change that?
The 2003 request for loan guarantees was not the first time Israel had turned to the U.S. for this type of assistance. About a decade earlier, in 1992, during the Rabin administration, Israel asked for American guarantees to fund the absorption of thousands of new immigrants from CIS countries. Then, the American government stipulated that it would grant the request only if Israel froze its settlement activity in the Palestinian territories. In contrast, the guarantees requested in 2003 were not used to promote Israel’s society or economy; they were utilized to fund continuation of the occupation, and they enabled the Israeli government to exempt affluent citizens from picking up the tab.” p. 119.
The 1992 Loan Guarantees are infamous as a source of tension between the US and Israel, with then-president George Bush the Elder threatening to cut them off. Obviously no such threat was made in 2003.
Until the second Intifada … no Israeli government had taken such extreme measures as the Sharon governments, and under normal conditions, it is highly unlikely that any government would have considered recommending such measures, wrapped as packages to be delivered in a flurry to the Knesset for hasty approval. It is hard to imagine such far-reaching steps being taken without the prevailing atmosphere of the Intifada, particularly following the suicide bombings on buses and in restaurants and banquet halls. The combination of ‘military emergency’ and ‘danger of fiscal and financial collapse’ set the stage for the administration to take these drastic steps. … ‘even if we consider this military policy as a given, there were still other routes the government could have taken, such as increasing the capital gains tax; raising income tax for the upper income brackets – or at least not reducing it; imposing a war loan; cutting the salaries of senior government officials, local government officials, and high-ranking military officers; cutting the ‘fat’ in the military budget; or reducing government benefits to well-to-do sectors of the population, among them residents of the Israeli settlements in the Palestinian territories. The option chosen was to make cuts whose main effect was to lower the standard of living of Israel’s middle and lower classes.” p.122
Indeed, a June 2003 article by Akiva Eldar suggested that the US directly interfered with Israeli elections through its loan guarantees supporting the incumbent government which went on to a big victory.
Less then three months ago the Israeli government fell apart over a dispute between Likud and Labor over how the budget pie should be divided on both sides of the Green Line.
(Past Labor Party Prime Minister) Shimon Peres said last week during a campaign speech in Ramat Gan that Israel spent no less than $60 billion on the settlements, which he called ‘fanning the flames of the conflict’ – the equivalent of 20 years American aid. Amram Miztna (Labor Party candidate) is trying to persuade the voters that the key to their physical and economic security is to be found in disengagement from the territories and the return of most of the settlers to the state of Israel.
And now, less than three weeks before the decision is made on Election Day, the U.S. is telling the Israeli voter that the Likud can preserve security, deepen the occupation and get funding from Uncle Sam.
Before the first word has been spoken in the discussions scheduled for today in Washington about the special aid and loan guarantees, the Israeli public is getting the message that the leader of the free world is pleased with the policies of the Sharon-Eitam (Likud Party) government:”
To conclude, the ’security threat’ actively perpetuated by successive Israeli governments–through their choices of continued occupation and repeated warfare–has provided an effective smoke screen allowing the extremely swift implementation of radically neoliberal economic policies. Recurring severe slashes in social budgets result from these policies rather than the needs of ‘national security’. But the official, as well as media, focus on national fear and ‘national security’ has successfully stemmed social unrest and potential protest. Meanwhile, these budget cuts actually feed directly into tax breaks for the highest salaried employees and richest property owners in the market. And the oversize, well heeled ’security’ apparatus stoking conflict while deflecting social resistance is bolstered annually both by a disproportionate slice of Israel’s own budget and by billions in US aid. These same billions also directly benefit a related interest group within the US, because 75 percent of the funds are earmarked for purchases from US industry. Consequently, it’s no wonder that the aid agreement between the U.S. and Israel has for some years now been changing the ratio of military to civilian aid, increasing the former while incrementally canceling the latter. As journalist Moti Bassok wrote in 2007,”Each year throughout the present agreement civilian aid was reduced by $120 million, while military aid grew $60 million. As of next year, annual U.S. aid will [… be] all military,” forming an integrated enabling component of Israel’s continuing and destructive militarization. It would seem that the economic and political elites of both the US and Israel have vested interests in continuing Israel’s militarization, occupation and choice of warfare. Personally, we believe that it’s left to us as citizens of both these countries to make maintaining those policies too costly for both regimes.
Here is the amazing Hedy Epstein speaking at the teach-in at UC Berkeley
For Jerusalem, a response to Elie Wiesel: Haaretz
By Yossi Sarid
For Jerusalem’s sake I, like you, will not rest.
With great interest I read the beautiful open letter you penned to the U.S. president that appeared in the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal and International Herald Tribune on Friday, and which will appear in the New York Times today. From it I learned that you know much about heavenly Jerusalem, but less so about its counterpart here on earth.
An outsider reading your letter would probably have concluded that peace has already taken root in the City of Peace. He would learn that in Jerusalem, Jews, Christians and Muslims worship their gods unimpeded, that “all are allowed to build their homes anywhere in the city.”
Someone has deceived you, my dear friend. Not only may an Arab not build “anywhere,” but he may thank his god if he is not evicted from his home and thrown out onto the street with his family and property. Perhaps you’ve heard about Arab residents in Sheikh Jarrah, having lived there since 1948, who are again being uprooted and made refugees because certain Jews are chafing from Jerusalem’s space constraints.
Those same zealous Jews insist on inserting themselves like so many bones in the throats of Arab neighborhoods, purifying and Judaizing them with the help of rich American benefactors, several of whom you may know personally. Behind the scenes our prime minister and Jerusalem’s mayor are pulling the strings of this puppet show while in public deflecting responsibility for this lawlessness and greed. That is the real reason for the “new and old tensions surfacing at a disturbing pace” of which your warn in your letter.
For some reason your historical survey missed an event of the utmost importance, namely the destruction of the Temple. If we are already citing events that happened here 2,000 years ago, let us recall the Sicarii, who blinded by religious zeal murdered opponents within the Jewish community and brought on us the disaster of our 2,000-year exile. We have no choice, you and I, but to ask whether history is now repeating itself.
You, my dear friend, evoke the Jews’ biblical deed to Jerusalem, thereby imbuing our current conflict with messianic hues. As if our diplomatic quarrels weren’t enough, the worst of our enemies would be glad to dress this epic conflict in the garb of a holy war. We had better not join ranks with them, even if unintentionally.
The fact is and always will be that this city is holy to everyone – such is its blessing and its curse. That’s why the solution to the Jerusalem problem can’t wait for the end of the Middle East conflict as you suggest, because it will have no end if its resolution is postponed until “the Israeli and Palestinian communities find ways to live together in an atmosphere of security.”
“Jerusalem is above politics,” you write. It is unfortunate that a man of your standing must confuse fundamental issues and confound the reader. Is it not politics that deals with mankind’s weightiest issues, with matters of war and peace, life and death? And is life itself not holier than historical rights, than national and personal memory – holier even than Jerusalem? The living always take precedence over the dead, as must the present and future over the past.
There is nothing in our world “above politics.” Yes, politics creates problems, but only through it can those same problems be resolved.
Barack Obama appears well aware of his obligations to try to resolve the world’s ills, particularly ours here. Why then undercut him and tie his hands? On the contrary, let’s allow him to use his clout to save us from ourselves, to help both bruised and battered nations and free them from their prison. Then he can push both sides to divide the city into two capitals – to give Jewish areas to the Jews and Arab areas to the Arabs – and assign the Holy Basin to an agreed-on international authority.
Only then can Jerusalem be maintained as “the world’s Jewish spiritual capital,” as you write. The Jewish spirit does not need Sheikh Jarrah, Silwan, Abu Dis and Shoafat to fulfill God’s command to Abraham to “Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it.”
EDITOR: The London Zionist Federation 62 Years to the Nakba Celebrations
As you must by now know, this has become a running joke. First They billed Achnoam Nini and Mira Awad. We all wrote to Awad, who then pulled out from this event. She was then replaced seemlessly by Stacey Solomon, who was also written to, and then pulled out. Once that happened, Achinoam Nini also pulled out… so now no singers! Maybe they can get a magician? Details below:
Achinoam is not coming [protest STILL ON as planned]
The shambolic Zionist Federation celebration is now confirmed to have no artists performing AT ALL, but that they would still have a party.
In a bizzare move, the ZF chose to phone each ticket holder [sounds like they didn’t sell many] to say there would be no artists performing at its annual flagship celebration.
The ZF did not explain why Stacey Solomon is no longer performing. In fact, the ZF did not even mention Stacey Solomon. Only on Friday the ZF wrote to its supporters:
Israel 62 – With new artist Stacey Solomon confirmed to appear in Yom Ha’atzmaut, our final tickets are selling fast. Stacey Solomon’s performance is in addition to Achinoam Nini, who will still be performing live for Yom Ha’atzmaut, at this year’s Israel 62 celebrations.
On the other hand, the ZF confirmed that Achinoam is not coming, stating the volcanic ash as the reason.
While Achinoam Noa Nini should personally boycotted for her warmongering incitement to slughter Gaza [see below her own words on 6 Jan 09], our protest was always mainly against the celebration of the Nakba. “Yom Ha’atzmaut” is celebrating the 1948 Israel’s ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, leaving millions of them refugees.
We will protest on Moday 19 April 7pm against the 1948 Nakba, the catastrophe orchestrated by Zionist forces, driving out entire Palestinian towns and villegaes out of their homes. We will also remind them of the current ethnic cleansing of occupied Jerusalem, besieged Gaza, the intensification of transfer out of the West Bank [under the new military orders], and so on.
Venue: Institute of Education www.ioe.ac.uk
Address: 20 Bedford Way, London WC1H 0AL
Day: Monday 19 April
Time: from 7pm till late
See how the ZF completely erased Mira Awad, even from the fact that she was half the Israeli Eurovision 2009 duo:
“Achinoam (Noa) is one of Israel’s most famous singers. Having stunned the world at the 2009 Eurovision song contest by representing Israel, Noa is joining the Jewish community of London on the 19th April 2010 for the celebrations of Yom Ha’atzmaut 62”.
Self proclaimed “peacenik” Achinoam Nini wrote while Israel was burning women and children in Gaza with phosphorous a year ago, on 6 January 2009 that her wish for the people of Gaza was “that Israel will do the job we all know needs to be done”.
“Now I see the ugly head of fanaticism, I see it large and horrid, I see it’s black eyes and spine-chilling smile, I see blood on its hands and I know one of its many names: Hamas.
You know this too, my brothers. You know this ugly monster. You know it is raping your women and raping the minds of your children. You know it is educating to hatred and death. You know it is chauvinistic and violent, greedy and selfish, it feeds on your blood and screams out Allah’s name on vain, it hides like a thief, uses the innocent as human shields, uses your mosques as arsenals, lies and cheats, uses YOU, tortures you, holds you hostage!!”
“I can only wish for you that Israel will do the job we all know needs to be done, and finally RID YOU of this cancer, this virus, this monster called fantacism, today, called Hamas.”
See Achinoam Nini’s blog: http://www.ipeace.me/profiles/blogs/a-letter-to-my-palestinian
Stacey Solomon and Achinoam photos are still on the ZF website [see at: https://zionist.org.uk/index.php?id=39&event=264 – latest checked at 2pm 18 Apr], but new advert on the ZF homepage as of 2pm with no singers at all.
Legitimizing a crime: Haaretz
By Zvi Bar’el
The hilltop on which the illegal outpost Givat Hayovel sits will be a busy place in the coming days, and not because you can see the Jordan Valley from there. Its height is expected to be the next excuse for legitimizing an illegal act carried out there. The Israel Defense Forces will tell the High Court of Justice that the hill is a “commanding height” where the IDF’s presence is essential. So it’s important to set up a community there.
This is a kind of magic act – the IDF has discovered that it needs these sites just when it has to raze the homes of two officers killed in battle – majors Eliraz Peretz and Ro’i Klein. There is no better combination than “commanding heights” and bereavement to legitimize a crime. Not only did the chief of staff promise to do everything to gain the necessary authorization to prevent the razing of the homes, but even Peace Now, in a humanitarian gesture, withdrew its petition on demolishing the officers’ homes.
Indeed, there is a price for foot-dragging. Givat Hayovel was set up in 1998 and declared illegal in 2001. Nonetheless, in 2003 more homes were built there, and Peace Now filed its petition in court only two years later. The state responded that it was preparing a list of priorities on razing the homes, but these preparations have apparently become a drawn-out historical phenomenon.
In 2009 the High Court’s patience ran out and it ordered the government to tell the court by May 1 when it planned to raze the outpost. But how can the homes be razed during a time of mourning? And what about the statute of limitations? After all, 12 years have passed since the law was broken. Even U.S. President Barack Obama certainly understands that some things you can’t do to bereaved families.
The homes of Peretz and Klein should not be destroyed. In fact, no illegal outpost should be razed, no pathetic little prefab home sneaked in during the night, or a porch in a settlement closed off without the proper permits. The battle for the illegal outposts has no point in the absence of a defined and approved political plan that will determine the final borders of the State of Israel.
Without such a policy, any declarations or actions on destroying the outposts, in their entirety or isolated homes, are acts of make-believe by the authorities. Such demolitions only deepen the distinction being made between the legal and illegal settlements; this distinction is unacceptable as long as there is no agreement on where Israeli law may be applied and where the country’s borders are.
The dispute over the legality of the construction is a trick, just like the excuse over the essence of the “commanding heights.” You can’t fight terrorist cells from commanding heights, just as Jewish settlements don’t provide security but are a security burden. “Legality” and “security needs” were the original sin that created yet another Israeli state in the territories – a lawless state that is dressing up as a legal entity under cover of Israeli law, which sneaked in cloaked by military orders.
The humanitarian gestures – honoring the dead, pity for the families – are part of the same tricks. No one prevented the IDF from razing structures in 2001 and no one is preventing them from razing illegal structures in other outposts where no officers were killed. The difference now is that ignoring the High Court – something that has been part of government policy for the past nine years – has suddenly been boosted by compassion.
It would be best if the defense minister told the High Court that he has never intended to raze structures – whether of the bereaved families or anyone else, Jew or Arab – until a map of the state’s borders is drawn. The freeze on settlement construction should also be immediately canceled. It has become an alternative to the political process, which has been replaced by negotiations between Israel and the United States over the construction freeze. It has been turned into a test of “national pride.”
The legal debate has no place in this and is no more than a weak barrier that every clever security excuse can bring down. As long as the defense minister and his colleagues in the Labor Party continue to offer cover to the sloppy minuet that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is dancing – and which is pushing Israel off a cliff – and continue to legitimize the settlements, they are part of this trickery. They are allies in the contempt of the High Court and groundbreakers for the strategic confrontation with the United States.
Unemployment: Israel’s other existential threat: Haaretz
Israel’s 62nd Independence Day is just a couple of days away, but the War of Independence is not yet over. We have neither security, nor peace, nor quiet, we are entirely dependent on a single superpower, and we are the only country in the world facing a looming existential threat.
But these are only the visible dangers, the ones that are always being talked about. Away from the spotlight, an internal threat is brewing that is no less dangerous, one slowly wearing the country down and placing it in danger of collapse. As summed up last week in a study led by Dan Ben-David of the Taub Center, the Zionist dream is itself under threat of extinction.
Taub’s report on employment found that a considerable portion of the Israeli population doesn’t see itself as part of the workforce. These are people who have removed themselves from the collective body and decided to live at the expense of the public, as well as those who have left the job market due to lack of education or professional training. The unfortunate result is that only 56 percent of Israel’s potential workforce is employed, a figure that stands at 66 percent among Western countries, and that gap is only growing wider.
The unemployed are concentrated in two communities: ultra-Orthodox and Arabs. Thirty years ago, only 21 percent of ultra-Orthodox said they didn’t see themselves as part of the job market. Today that figure stands at 65 percent. Among Arab men, unemployment has risen to 27 percent.
This state of affairs was brought on by the cynical, shortsighted policy Israel has taken since the 1970s – when public pressure (much of it driven by the so-called Black Panthers) demanded the government take measures to address poverty. But instead of creating a long-term plan for improving education, professional training and infrastructure, the government took the easy route of simply increasing outlays to the unemployed. Over the past four decades, unemployment benefits have ballooned five times over (!) per capita. The additional funding did not help the situation. As these budgets grew, more and more people chose to leave the workforce because it simply paid off.
Another major reason for poverty is the phenomenon of large families, most prevalent among the Haredi and Arab communities. In 1960, children from these two communities made up a total of only 15 percent of all elementary students. That figure stands at no less than 50 percent today, and in 30 years will reach 78 percent (!).
And that will be the breaking point: The body of working Israelis will be so small, it will no longer be able to carry these parasites on its back. After all, even the strongest donkey buckles under too heavy a load. The working minority will not agree to pay all of its income in tax, the Zionist dream will collapse, entrepreneurs and the wealthy will leave and those remaining will continue living off of donations from abroad, as did members of the pre-state Yishuv in the 19th century.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is apparently unperturbed, more concerned about the stability of his government coalition than anything else. He knows that to stop these dangerous processes he will have to take unprecedented measures that will not be popular.
First, the money flow must be stemmed to the independent schools systems run by the Shas and Agudat Yisrael parties and the Islamic Movement. Every child in Israel should be taught from the same curriculum based on core subjects like science, mathematics, English and history. Later on in the school day, each sector can teach its students what it likes.
Budgetary support for yeshivas must also be cut, and every ultra-Orthodox individual drafted to the military. They too should put their lives at risk; perhaps their worldview would change as a result. Military service would connect them to Israeli society and its problems, and raise the likelihood that they will turn into citizens who earn their own livelihoods.
Family allowances ought to be cut as well, starting with the fifth child. In most families with many children, each new birth automatically perpetuates the cycle of poverty. If parents want eight children, let them support their brood themselves. Of course, entering the workforce should also be encouraged by subsidizing public transportation, building day care centers, augmenting the Wisconsin welfare-to-work program and instituting a negative income tax.
Should all of these reforms be undertaken, we will have good reason to celebrate our 63rd Independence Day with a twinkle of hope in our eyes.