Israel set to force all citizens to swear oath to Jewish state: The Independent
By Catrina Stewart In Jerusalem
Saturday, 17 July 2010
New Israeli citizens may soon be required to swear an oath of loyalty to a “Jewish and democratic” state, a step that has drawn harsh criticism from human rights groups.
Israel’s Cabinet, which meets tomorrow, is expected to approve this and extend a raft of existing measures that make it harder for Palestinians to achieve citizenship.
The wording of the oath, which would apply to new applicants for citizenship, was slammed by Arab advocacy groups, who accused Israel of “racist” policies that attempt to link citizenship to ideology.
“It’s another step in the direction of getting the Arabs out of Israel,” said Uri Avnery, a former MP and founder of the Israeli Gush Shalom peace movement. “Parliament has become a lynching mob.”
The move comes on the back on a series of strikes against Palestinians seeking citizenship and Israeli Arabs who already have it. The Knesset, Israel’s parliament, voted this week to strip Hanin Zuabi, an Israeli Arab politician, of her parliamentary privileges for taking part in the Gaza flotilla aimed at breaching Israel’s sea blockade.
The new oath of allegiance, which would replace an existing oath to the “State of Israel,” appears to represent a watered-down version of legislation enthusiastically promoted by Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s Foreign Minister. His law, which failed to clear parliament, was aimed at stripping Israeli Arabs of their citizenship if they failed to swear allegiance to the Jewish state.
Yisrael Beitenu, Lieberman’s ultra-nationalist party, vaulted to third place in last year’s elections on a platform that played on the electorate’s distrust of Israeli Arabs and their perceived disloyalty to Israel.
Israeli Arabs, who comprise 20 percent of the population and live in some of the country’s most under-privileged communities, have resisted such a loyalty oath on the grounds that only a state defined by all its different ethnic groups would make them feel equal.
Adalah, a prominent Israeli Arab advocacy group, said the new policy “requires all non-Jews to identify with Zionism and imposes a political ideology and loyalty to the principles of Judaism and Zionism”.
In recent months, the Knesset has introduced a number of bills that have drawn criticism from liberals, not least legislation that would ban anyone from promoting or even supporting boycotts against Israel.
“There’s a steady deterioration of Israeli democracy and a steady rise of right-wing ideologies in the Knesset,” said Avnery. “Parliament is turning into a danger for Israeli democracy.”
I am not declaring loyalty: Haaretz
The time has come that all of us, irrespective of whether we are Jews or Muslims, ultra-Orthodox or secular, declare our loyalty to the only Jewish democracy in the world. On one condition: the declaration ceremony would take place in the courtyard of the Tomb of the Patriarchs, following a tour of the center of Hebron.
By Akiva Eldar
HEBRON – Why is the government requiring only those seeking citizenship to have to declare their loyalty to a Jewish and democratic state? I want to do it too!
The time has come that all of us, irrespective of whether we are Jews or Muslims, ultra-Orthodox or secular, declare our loyalty to the only Jewish democracy in the world. On one condition: the declaration ceremony would take place in the courtyard of the Tomb of the Patriarchs, following a tour of the center of Hebron.
Every Israeli citizen will then know what his country is doing in his name in the city of the patriarchs. Every Hebrew mother will know “where the only democracy in the Middle East” is sending its sons. Those who like what they see will sign the declaration. Those who will not find in Hebron proof of Jewish values and principles of democracy will refuse.
Before embarking on an educational tour in the center of Hebron, we should take a refresher course: the Hebron Agreement, which was signed in 1997 between the Netanyahu government and the Palestinian Authority, divided Hebron into an Arab area controlled by the PA (H1 ), and a Jewish area controlled by the IDF (H2 ). In the Arab area live 120,000 Palestinians, and in the Jewish area, which includes the old city and the city’s commercial center, there are 500 Jews and 30,000 Arabs. In order to prevent friction, Israel has imposed tough rules of physical separation between the two populations and harsh limits on the movement of the Palestinian population in most of H2.
A pack of panting dogs met us at the beginning of Shuhada Street, which cuts through the old quarter of Hebron toward the Tomb of the Patriarchs. The doors of the shops were shut and the market was empty.
Someone covered racist graffiti with smiling faces on a pink background.
A survey of the area around Jewish settlement in the city conducted by B’Tselem and the Association for Civil Rights in Israel in late 2006 found that 1,829 Palestinian businesses (more than 75 percent of all businesses in the area surveyed ) had been closed in recent years. More than 1,000 housing units (42 percent ) in the area surveyed were abandoned.
Yehuda Shaul, founder of Breaking the Silence, says that more than 40 percent of the Palestinian residents have left the area.
Bored soldiers peered at the visitors, and once they were sure that they were “ours” they moved on (perhaps for dance practice ). Even though the IDF told the High Court of Justice two years ago that the ban on Palestinians movement in the streets was lifted, they do not dare come close to this area.
They know that at every street corner they will be asked to show their identity cards and they will be searched. Eran Efrati, who served at the Abu Snuneh post in 2007, says that instructions in the briefing room contained an order to make the residents “feel persecuted.”
In the Breaking the Silence database there are testimonies of soldiers who describe creative ways for creating such a feeling. For example, holding a population survey in the middle of the night (the IDF calls it “mapping” ), or banging on pots.
A skinny youth, fringes hanging from under his shirt, is galloping through a field on a white horse. At the bottom of Beit Hadassah, Shaul fixes his black kippa and points to the Palestinian girls’ school.
He says that he has a video clip in his office which shows the customary way the neighboring Jewish kids kill their boredom over Shabbat, by throwing stones at the girls.
In an alley leading to the wholesale market, closed following the massacre at the Tomb of the Patriarchs in early 1994, a group of young Jews pushes a cart loaded with building materials. Behind the barred doors of the shops, under the noses of the soldiers, another small settlement is staring.
At the entrance to the Tomb of the Patriarchs our path was blocked by six Border Policemen. Their commander, who was rushed to meet us says that we had been barred from entering the site with Yehuda Shaul, because he belongs to a group with a “political character.” The officer confirmed that one or two days earlier, Noam Arnon, the spokesman for the Jewish community in Hebron, accompanied a group of visitors into the Tomb of the Patriarchs on behalf of the Foreign Ministry. The settlers in Hebron, as is well known, are a group without “political character.”
The actions of the state in the city where the Patriarchs of the nation are buried, in Sheikh Jarrah, in the Jordan Valley and in the Gaza Strip, have nothing to do with Judaism or democracy. So long as this is the face of the Jewish democratic State, I refuse to declare my loyalty to it.
US voters can demand Palestine’s freedom: The Electronic Intifada
Cynthia McKinney, 19 July 2010
In response to Israel’s deadly attack on the Gaza-bound Freedom Flotilla, more than 800 labor and community activists picketed America’s sixth largest port in Oakland last month. The result was a historic blockade of a large Israeli cargo ship for 24 hours. Across the world, dockworkers and activists engaged in similar actions. In Sweden, the Dockworkers Union completed a week-long boycott of Israeli ships and containers, resulting in the blocking of 500 tons of goods to and from Israel.
Turkish dockworkers’ union Liman-Is also announced that their workers would refuse to handle Israeli ships. In South Africa, Durban dockworkers blocked Israeli ships in February 2009 in response to Israel’s 22-day war of aggression on the Gaza Strip. The Union of South African Municipal workers announced last month their intention to declare all South African municipalities as “Israeli Apartheid-Free Zones.” The message behind all these courageous actions worldwide was clear: Israel should no longer be allowed to act with impunity. Israel should be held accountable to universal principles of human rights.
The worldwide wave of protests against Israel’s assault in international waters and the killing of at least nine activists, including one Turkish American, is accompanied with a growing sense of revulsion at the double standards the US government and its allies apply to Israel. Its persistent lawless actions are jeopardizing America’s public image, where it is becoming more difficult than ever to justify Israeli crimes without harming our relationships with other ally countries. More importantly, this blind support for Israel’s policies is creating vigorous grassroots opposition, largely expressed through the global campaign for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel.
This movement is taking upon itself what governments have failed to do: to hold Israel accountable for its crimes. The dockworkers’ refusal to deal with Israeli ships is part of this vibrant movement and comes in response to the appeal in 2005 from Palestinian civil society. Other initiatives include campaigns for the boycott of Israeli products, divestment from companies aiding Israeli war crimes, and cultural isolation, so as to not entertain Israeli apartheid, demonstrated by the cancellation of concerts in Israel by renowned artists like Elvis Costello and Gil Scott-Heron.
Israel’s latest massacre, sadly, does not come as a surprise, but rather constitutes a progression of Israel’s continued abuse of power as the world turns a blind eye to its aggression. In 2003, and again in 2007, I was ejected from the US Congress after being targeted by the pro-Israel lobby in this country for daring to veer from standard political operating practice by actually believing that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights applies to all human beings, including Palestinians. It was this first experience that gave me a true picture of the ruthlessness of Israel’s supporters in this country and the silence of those in a position to object.
In December 2008, I joined activists aboard the pleasure boat, Dignity, in an attempt to break the siege of Gaza. We left Cyprus heading for Gaza, carrying with us badly needed medical supplies among other necessities. It was when we got to what Israel deemed a “closed military zone” that the Israeli navy attacked us. Our boat was rammed, disabled and forced to dock in Lebanon rather than deliver aid to those in need because of Israel’s violent onslaught against Gaza, the 22-day Operation Cast Lead. In late June 2009, I again attempted to deliver humanitarian supplies to Gaza by boat and the Israeli navy, in international waters, commandeered the boat, kidnapped 21 of us onboard and imprisoned us in an Israeli prison for seven days. Despite the parallels with the recent Freedom Flotilla attack, my own government completely disregarded these illegal actions, and the media deliberately misled the public, as is too often the case.
All of this has an undeniable historical parallel with the South African anti-apartheid struggle — one that we must all learn from. The apartheid regime enjoyed wide support from Western governments, and it was only in 2008 that the US begrudgingly removed travel restrictions on Nelson Mandela. He, too, had been vilified for standing up for the rights of black people. In 1963, just four years after the anti-apartheid movement was formed, Danish dockworkers refused to offload a ship with South African goods, and Swedish workers followed suit. Dockworkers in the San Francisco Bay Area and, later, in Liverpool also refused to offload South African goods.
The Palestinian BDS movement, which seeks to end discrimination in Palestine, is inspired by the South African anti-apartheid struggle. The Palestinian civil society call for BDS has been answered by thousands of people of conscience around the world. The Oakland dockworkers’ boycott brings back memories of a time when we dared not to be silent and refused to be complicit with US human rights crimes in Vietnam, the segregated US south, and in apartheid South Africa.
The struggle for freedom and justice for the Palestinian people has become the litmus test of our time (Gaza today has become the test of our universal morality and our common humanity). The US Congress in 1986 imposed a comprehensive boycott of apartheid South Africa, at a time when the citizen-led boycott movement deemed US government collaboration with the racist regime impossible to sustain. As Israel continues to commit massacres, and citizens of conscience respond vigorously to isolate what is now a pariah state, the US government will be forced into a similar position.
I was targeted and kicked out of the Congress because I believe in justice and peace. It is only a matter of time before voters of conscience turn what happened to me on its head by making it clear that elected policy-makers who collaborate in America’s unconditional partnership with Israel will be exposed as shameful; and by making it clear to policy-makers that such shameful behavior is unsustainable because collaborators in injustice will be ejected from office by the people. When this moment comes, Palestinians will finally see justice and be allowed to live freely in their homeland.
Cynthia McKinney is a former member of the United States House of Representatives, 2008 Green Party presidential nominee, and a human rights activist.
Palestinians in Gaza denied PA passports: he Electronic Intifada
Rami Almeghari, T19 July 2010
Nidal Abdo lives in Nuseirat refugee camp in the central Gaza Strip. Four years ago he was at a friend’s house in the nearby al-Bureij refugee camp when Israeli tanks moved in. When Abdo tried to escape the area, Israeli soldiers shot him in his left foot. Due to the injury, Abdo still can’t walk or stand for long periods of time. He needs a metal rod inserted into his foot and because the surgery can’t be performed in Gaza, his doctors have referred him abroad.
Amid all the obstacles preventing Palestinians in Gaza from traveling outside the besieged territory, Abdo faces an additional one. He needs a passport and despite five attempts to obtain one, he has so far failed.
“After three weeks, another travel agent phoned me and told me that officials refused to issue me a passport for security reasons,” Abdo told The Electronic Intifada after just returning from a visit to a doctor in Gaza City. “I am a member of the Nuseirat Camp handball club and, thank God, most of the team members are considered to be Fatah supporters.” This is significant for Abdo because many Palestinians believe that passports are now being issued based on political affiliation.
However, the Fatah-controlled Palestinian Authority (PA) in Ramallah says that it does not issue or restrict passports based on political affiliation.
Ghassan Khatib, director of the PA media center in Ramallah, explained the issue to EI by telephone: “The right to obtain a passport is a given right. Yet recently, the interior ministry has observed some cases in which the passports are used illegally, therefore, applications for passports from Gaza are scrutinized. So there could be some delay in releasing a passport, but absolutely there is no intention to refuse some passports on political or intellectual grounds.”
The Gaza Strip, home to 1.5 million Palestinians, has been under a tight Israeli blockade imposed after Hamas won Palestinian legislative elections in 2006. In 2007, PA leader Mahmoud Abbas summarily dismissed the Hamas-led national unity government of Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh after Hamas routed in bloody fighting militias loyal to Abbas which had been attempting to undermine the Hamas-led government.
Israel tightened the blockade even further. Abbas appointed his own “caretaker” prime minister in Ramallah who enjoys recognition from Western governments even though he has never been confirmed by the Palestinian Legislative Council as required by law. Despite this split, the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip wing and the Fatah-controlled West Bank wing of the PA must still cooperate on several matters, including issuance of passports. These are now issued in Ramallah and shipped to the interior ministry in Gaza for distribution to their recipients.
The interior ministry in Ramallah recently said that it is expediting the processing of applications and that it issues 500 to 800 passports for Gaza residents on a daily basis and expects to send 15,000 passports to Gaza by the end of this month.
But officials of the Hamas government in Gaza claim that the PA in Ramallah is withholding or denying passports to anyone affiliated with Hamas and that the Gaza Strip still needs tens of thousands more passports.
“Unfortunately, what is going on is a consequence of the current division between the Palestinians, and the Palestinian citizen seems to be the victim,” said Ihab al-Ghussein, spokesperson for the interior ministry in Gaza. “Most of those deprived of passports include students or patients. Monthly, we need in Gaza at least 10,000 passports and since August 2008, only 18,000 passports have been issued.”
Recently, the Gaza-based human rights group Al Mezan stated that the “general intelligence apparatus” of the PA in Ramallah “has confiscated passports of Gazans in the West Bank, even after issuing them, or has prevented Gazans from obtaining new passports for security reasons.” But A -Mezan also alleged that the Gaza government’s “internal security apparatus confiscated the passports from several Gazans.”
“The problem lies in two things,” Samir Zaqout, an Al Mezan researcher in Gaza, told The Electronic Intifada, “first the Ramallah-based government has turned down Gaza residents’ applications for renewal of passports or obtaining new ones. The Palestinian Intelligence Service in the West Bank turned out to be behind such refusals on alleged security considerations. Meanwhile, we were surprised that the Gaza-based Internal Security Service has confiscated passports of 45 Gaza residents, who have already submitted complaints to us.”
In response to these charges, the Gaza interior ministry’s al-Ghussein said, “If we wanted to deal with the Ramallah government in a reciprocal way, we would have taken a series of steps in Gaza. Supposedly, confiscation of passports has taken place. If it has, this surely would have taken place according to the Palestinian law.”
Al Mezan called on the authorities in both the West Bank and Gaza Strip to halt all such abuses and ensure “that every Palestinian enjoys his constitutional right to obtain a passport.”
After the PA was created during the 1993 Oslo accords signed by Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, it began to issue passports to Palestinian residents in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip. These passports are not recognized by all countries in the world, and any Palestinian traveling on one still usually requires Israeli permission to leave or return home since the PA does not control any external borders. Nevertheless, for many Palestinians they represent the only possibility of foreign travel.
Students, patients seeking medical treatment and those with residency permits in neighboring Arab countries can leave Gaza through the Egyptian-controlled Rafah crossing terminal when it is open, but only if they have a passport.
“Denying me my right to a passport is inconsistent with our Palestinian social or religious values,” said Nidal Abdo. But like thousands of other Palestinians, he is still waiting for one.
Rami Almeghari is a journalist and university lecturer based in the Gaza Strip.
Meridor: Loyalty oath will only make Israeli Arabs more extreme: Haaretz
Likud minister objects to proposed amendment which would require prospective citizens to swear allegiance to ‘Jewish democratic state.’
Cabinet minister Dan Meridor’s objection to an amendment to the Citizenship Law, which requires prospective Israeli citizens to declare allegiance to Israel as a “Jewish, democratic state” and commit to respecting the state’s laws, succeeded in delaying a scheduled vote on the matter.
Meridor (Likud) objected to the addition of the words “Jewish and democratic” to the oath, saying that this terminology would only make Israel’s Arab citizens more extreme.
The amendment to the citizenship oath was scheduled for a vote during the weekly cabinet meeting on Sunday, as part of a larger discussion on Israel’s immigration policy. Part of the discussion focused on the reunification of families comprised of West Bank Palestinians and Israeli Arabs.
The amendment to the Citizenship Law would symbolize another hurdle for Palestinians seeking Israeli citizenship or residency after marrying an Israeli Arab.
The explanation sent out to government ministers ahead of Sunday’s cabinet meeting states that the purpose of the amendment is to make it harder for Palestinian terrorist groups to recruit Palestinians who have acquired Israeli citizenship to carry out attacks.
Meridor sharply criticized the proposed amendment, saying it was an unnecessary provocation aimed at Israeli Arabs. The Likud minister quoted Ze’ev Jabotinsky in his testimony before a committee that examined the future of the British mandate in Palestine in 1973, and said that the constitution of the state that will be established needn’t explicitly spell out its national character – it is enough that there will be a Jewish majority.
“Why does every bill need the word ‘Jewish’ in it – to show the Arab citizens that it doesn’t belong to them?” Meridor said. “Then we’re all shocked when they radicalize their stance. There are people here, why escalate and make things worse all the time? The majority doesn’t need to remind the minority that it is in fact a minority all the time.”
One of the ultra-Orthodox ministers lashed out at Meridor asking why he had conjured Jabotinsky and not Abraham. Meridor adopted the suggestion and brought an example from the Bible, saying that “when Abraham went to Egypt, he told his wife Sarah to say that she was his sister, and not his wife, so that Pharaoh would let them live in Egypt. A hostile person who seeks Israeli citizenship will have no problem swearing allegiance to a Jewish state.”
Surprisingly, it was fellow Likud minister Benny Begin who defended Meridor’s position, saying that in light of the gravity of the issue, a separate discussion must be held on the matter at a later date. Several additional minister supported Begin’s call and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu decided to postpone the vote.
Despair takes over talks: Al Ahram Weekly
Dina Ezzat reads into the political signals intended by Egypt’s abrupt cancellation of consecutive visits by top Israeli and Palestinian officials
After Al-Ahram Weekly went to press, the initially Gaza-bound Libyan vessel Al-Amal headed to Al-Arish. On Wednesday afternoon, the humanitarian relief ship resumed sailing after two hours of alleged engine troubles that kept it in the international waters. Israeli missile boats trailed the ship in international waters to prevent it from reaching its destination. However, the Libyan group that launched the ship’s voyage said they were determined to reach Gaza. Israeli reports, on the other hand, declared that the vessel is heading to the Egyptian port of Arish
“It’s not getting anywhere. It really isn’t getting anywhere.” This was the flat assessment offered by one Egyptian diplomat on US facilitated Israeli-Palestinian indirect peace talks.
According to this and other diplomats — Palestinians and Americans especially — the chances of moving to direct talks, still to be supervised by George Mitchell, the US presidential Middle East envoy, are fast eroding. The general assessment is that indirect talks will continue, with no serious results expected, until September when the exercise will end, as anticipated by Arab foreign ministers.
According to every Arab and Western diplomat who spoke to Al-Ahram Weekly over the past few weeks, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is not ready to do the minimum required to launch direct talks on final status issues, much less to reach an agreement via these talks. Some say he is not ready because he does not want to give anything to the Palestinians. Others say “complex political balances within the [ruling] Israeli coalition” constrain him.
What is clear is that Netanyahu wants talks without substance. “After the meeting between Netanyahu and [US President Barack] Obama, the Americans told us there is a possibility that something could be worked out if the Palestinians are given support to move to the direct talks,” said the same Egyptian diplomat. “They promised a tight negotiation process with serious American intervention and we were willing to cooperate, but Netanyahu failed to even refrain from his provocative policies for just two days,” he added.
A scheduled July visit of Netanyahu to Egypt was originally delayed, from early to later this month. “We thought it would be better for us to listen to him after his meeting with Obama,” said the Egyptian diplomat. Then it was announced on Tuesday as being further delayed, only to be cancelled on the following day.
Similarly, a visit of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas — also announced at first to be delayed for 24 hours — has been cancelled.
While some sources have suggested that the two visits might take place early next week, Egyptian officials insist that they will only take place when there is potential for talks to produce results, and when the schedule of President Hosni Mubarak allows.
Meanwhile, the announcement of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the chances for direct talks between Israelis and Palestinians are not high at present is being seen as an implicit admission of failure on the American side, either to get Netanyahu to show flexibility or to get Abbas — and the rest of the Arabs — to further succumb to the former’s wishes.
“This announcement came after [some] Arab [capitals] had gone so far as to announce their willingness to cooperate on offering Abbas support for direct talks. It also comes after the Americans received the approval of these [capitals] despite ongoing settlement activities and plans,” noted a senior Egyptian official who asked for his name to be withheld. “This goes to show that in fact Obama has given up fully, or almost, to Israeli demands and that he cannot do more.”
The same official added that there is not much to be expected of a next round of talks that Mitchell is planning for early next week. “I am not sure he will be able to make any breakthrough, when and if he comes.”
According to this and other concerned peace process officials, Netanyahu has all but killed any prospect that Obama could announce a peace deal between the Israelis and Palestinians. Today, diplomats say it is increasingly likely that Obama will abandon the Middle East peace file for now and pick it up again some time next year, or perhaps not at all. The year after next year, they note, will be a campaigning year, and if Obama has any hope of being re-elected he will need to stay off Israel’s toes.
The plan that Palestinians, Egyptians and other Arab leaders are currently discussing is to go to the UN General Assembly in September, in the wake of the anticipated conclusion of proximity talks, and ask for international support for the right of Palestinians to have an independent state within the 1967 borders. Some Arab diplomats say there is a growing sympathy for such a move on the international scene. Western peace process diplomats disagree, insisting that they could not support any position that might be seen as overtly hostile to Israel.
IDF soldier who shot British peace activist to be released from jail: Haaretz
IDF committee cuts sentence of former soldier Taysir Heib who was found guilty of manslaughter in the 2003 death of British peace activist Thomas Hurndall in the Gaza Strip.
A former IDF soldier who was found guilty of manslaughter in the 2003 shooting death of British peace activist Thomas Hurndall in the Gaza Strip will be released early from prison next month.
Taysir Heib was sentenced in 2005 to eight years in prison for manslaughter as well as obstruction of justice and giving false testimony. The decision to shorten his sentence was made by an army committee, against the advice of Military Advocate General Brig. Gen. Avichai Mendelblit.
Hurndall, a 22-year-old student, was shot in the head in April 2003 as he was photographing the work of International Solidarity Movement activists. Witnesses said Hurndall had been helping Palestinian children avoid IDF tanks.
In his investigation, Heib initially claimed he had fired on an armed Palestinian, enlisting supporting testimony from another soldier in his unit. A few months later, however, the second soldier told Military Police investigators that he had not witnessed the incident.
In the verdict, the judges upheld all the arguments of the military prosecution, outlining and emphasizing the series of false and contradictory versions of the incident provided by Heib throughout the investigation.
The judges found that Heib had shot Hurndall with a sniper’s rifle, using a telescopic sight, and that Heib had given a “confused and pathetic” version of events to the court.
The court also referred to a confession by the defendant in which he said he had wanted to teach Hurndall a lesson for entering a forbidden zone. Heib admitted to aiming 10 centimeters to the left of Hurndall’s head to frighten him and inadvertently shooting the activist.
ISM members often place themselves between IDF troops and Palestinians in an effort to prevent military operations.
Sophie Hurndall, Tom’s older sister, said the family had not been informed by Israeli authorities about the early release, but rather found out about it when someone from the British foreign office called with the news.
“We have not had time to regroup or work out what is going on. We have barely had time to process the news and we all feel angry and shocked,” she said, adding that they had long feared such a thing would happen. “We have had to deal with cover ups and lies and a total lack of accountability throughout – and this is in line with that. It’s symptomatic.”
Hurndall said the family’s anger is not focused on Heib himself, but rather on the IDF and Israel as a whole.
“To be honest, it’s about the system. Not the man himself. This man who shot Tom was the same age as him. He is both the victim and the killer. He is part of a system that proactively encouraged soldier to target civilian,” she said.
As Hunrdall sees it, the early release sends a message from Israeli to its young soldiers, “telling them ‘do what you want. We have your back.’”
Israel, she concluded, simply does not care what people think of it in the international community: “So many innocent [people] killed in so many horrific ways. They just don’t seem to care about anyone.”
Hurndall also criticized her own government, which, under the leadership of then-prime minister Tony Blair, did not come out, she claims, strongly against the killing and now has had a muted response as well.
“It’s incredibly sad. One of the things that happened to me since my brother was killed is that I have lost faith in humanity. I cannot believe that people can do such things, and that my own government can sit by and keep quiet,” she said.
The British Foreign Office issued an official statement in response, saying “we note the court’s decision today to release Taysir Heib and recognize the grief this decision will cause to the Hurndall family. We have the deepest of sympathies for the Hurndall family. Tom’s death was a tragedy.”
Netanyahu admits on video he deceived US to destroy Oslo accord: Jonathan Cook
Jonathan Cook
The National
July 18. 2010
NAZARETH // There is one video Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, must be praying never gets posted on YouTube with English subtitles. To date, the 10-minute segment has been broadcast only in Hebrew on Israel’s Channel 10.
Its contents, however, threaten to gravely embarrass not only Mr Netanyahu but also the US administration of Barack Obama.
The film was shot, apparently without Mr Netanyahu’s knowledge, nine years ago, when the government of Ariel Sharon had started reinvading the main cities of the West Bank to crush Palestinian resistance in the early stages of the second intifada.
At the time Mr Netanyahu had taken a short break from politics but was soon to join Mr Sharon’s government as finance minister.
On a visit to a home in the settlement of Ofra in the West Bank to pay condolences to the family of a man killed in a Palestinian shooting attack, he makes a series of unguarded admissions about his first period as prime minister, from 1996 to 1999.
Seated on a sofa in the house, he tells the family that he deceived the US president of the time, Bill Clinton, into believing he was helping implement the Oslo accords, the US-sponsored peace process between Israel and the Palestinians, by making minor withdrawals from the West Bank while actually entrenching the occupation. He boasts that he thereby destroyed the Oslo process.
He dismisses the US as “easily moved to the right direction” and calls high levels of popular American support for Israel “absurd”.
He also suggests that, far from being defensive, Israel’s harsh military repression of the Palestinian uprising was designed chiefly to crush the Palestinian Authority led by Yasser Arafat so that it could be made more pliable for Israeli diktats.
All of these claims have obvious parallels with the current situation, when Mr Netanyahu is again Israel’s prime minister facing off with a White House trying to draw him into a peace process that runs counter to his political agenda.
As before, he has ostensibly made public concessions to the US administration – chiefly by agreeing in principle to the creation of a Palestinian state, consenting to indirect talks with the Palestinian leadership in Ramallah, and implementing a temporary freeze on settlement building.
But he has also enlisted the powerful pro-Israel lobby to exert pressure on the White House, which appears to have relented on its most important stipulations.
The contemptuous view of Washington Mr Netanyahu demonstrates in the film will confirm the suspicions of many observers – including Palestinian leaders – that his current professions of good faith should not be taken seriously.
Critics have already pointed out that his gestures have been extracted only after heavy arm-twisting from the US administration.
More significantly, he has so far avoided engaging meaningfully in the limited talks the White House is promoting with the Palestinians while the pace of settlement building in the West Bank has been barely affected by the 10-month freeze, due to end in September.
In the meantime, planning officials have repeatedly approved large new housing projects in East Jerusalem and the West Bank that have undercut the negotiations and will make the establishment of a Palestinian state – viable or otherwise – far less likely.
Writing in the liberal Haaretz newspaper, the columnist Gideon Levy called the video “outrageous”. He said it proved that Mr Netanyahu was a “con artist … who thinks that Washington is in his pocket and that he can pull the wool over its eyes”. He added that the prime minister had not reformed in the intervening period: “Such a crooked way of thinking does not change over the years.”
In the film, Mr Netanyahu says Israel must inflict “blows [on the Palestinians] that are so painful the price will be too heavy to be borne … A broad attack on the Palestinian Authority, to bring them to the point of being afraid that everything is collapsing”.
When asked if the US will object, he responds: “America is something that can be easily moved. Moved to the right direction … They won’t get in our way … Eighty per cent of the Americans support us. It’s absurd.”
He then recounts how he dealt with President Clinton, whom he refers to as “extremely pro-Palestinian”. “I wasn’t afraid to manoeuvre there. I was not afraid to clash with Clinton.”
His approach to White House demands to withdraw from Palestinian territory under the Oslo accords, he says, drew on his grandfather’s philosophy: “It would be better to give two per cent than to give 100 per cent.”
He therefore signed the 1997 agreement to pull the Israeli army back from much of Hebron, the last Palestinian city under direct occupation, as a way to avoid conceding more territory.
“The trick,” he says, “is not to be there [in the occupied territories] and be broken; the trick is to be there and pay a minimal price.”
The “trick” that stopped further withdrawals, Mr Netanyahu adds, was to redefine what parts of the occupied territories counted as a “specified military site” under the Oslo accords. He wanted the White House to approve in writing the classification of the Jordan Valley, a large area of the West Bank, as such a military site.
“Now, they did not want to give me that letter, so I did not give [them] the Hebron Agreement. I stopped the government meeting, I said: ‘I’m not signing.’ Only when the letter came … did I sign the Hebron Agreement. Why does this matter? Because at that moment I actually stopped the Oslo accord.”
Last week, after meeting Mr Obama in Washington, the Israeli prime minister gave an interview to Fox News in which he appeared to be in no hurry to make concessions: “Can we have a negotiated peace? Yes. Can it be implemented by 2012? I think it’s going to take longer than that,” he said.
Anywhere but Gaza: Al Ahram Weekly
From the Strip, Saleh Al-Naami reports on the determined course of a Libyan aid vessel
A Jewish Austrian businessman is said to be mediating between Libya and Israel over the aid ship the Libyans are sending to Gaza. The ship, rechristened “Hope” for this particular journey, is either heading slowly towards Gaza or docked off the Egyptian port of Arish at the time of writing.
The Gaddafi International Charity and Development Foundation, which organised the trip, claims that the ship is still heading for Gaza. But Israeli military sources say that the ship’s captain told the Israeli Navy that he was heading to Arish, an Egyptian port only miles away from Gaza.
Galal Al-Khodari, head of the Popular Committee to Confront the Blockade, said that Hope was suffering engine trouble and therefore proceeding “slowly” towards Gaza. Contesting the Israeli claim that the ship was heading to Arish, Al-Khodari said that “supporters aboard the ship are in high morale and determined to reach Gaza without confrontation with anyone… Unfortunately, the occupation [authorities] are making threats and seeking confrontation.”
Al-Khodari said that the Israeli occupation authorities must be held responsible for the lives of those aboard the Hope.
Calling for international protection for the relief ship, Al-Khodari said that the Hope was told to go to Gaza to deliver two messages: one is humanitarian and involves delivering aid, while the second is political and involves breaking the blockade on Gaza. The Hope, Al-Khodari stated, is a peaceful, civilian ship not seeking confrontation with anyone.
Youssef Sawan, executive director of the Gaddafi Foundation, said that, “the ship is still on the move but is surrounded by eight Israeli Navy pieces which are trying to divert it from its course.” He added that communication with the ship’s crew is sporadic because Israel is scrambling the signals.
The Gaddafi Foundation said that pressure was mounting on the Greek owner of the vessel to change course. A notice posted on the Gaddafi Foundation’s website said the foundation had received a message from the owner of the ship saying that he was under much pressure. The owner promised not to “bow to pressure” although he wished to avoid confrontation.
According to the Hebrew website of Yediot Aharonot, the Jewish Austrian businessman Martin Schlaff was mediating between the Libyan authorities and the Israelis. Schlaff is known for his close ties with both the Libyans and Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman. Schlaff is said to be trying to persuade the Libyans to unload the vessel in Arish.
The Israeli mini-cabinet met under Netanyahu last night and decided to prevent the Hope from approaching Gaza shores. Radio Israel said the mini-cabinet ordered the navy to intercept the vessel before reaching Gaza.
The Israeli army said it was ready to seize the Hope by force to prevent it from going to Gaza. Force 13 of the Israeli Navy has been ordered to intercept the Hope. According to Maariv, the navy was drilling interception methods to avoid a repeat of the carnage that marked the boarding of the Freedom Flotilla.
Maariv said that missile-bearing warships would take part in confronting the Libyan ship. As for the rules of engagement, the newspaper said that at first the captain would be told to discontinue his trip to Gaza and unload the cargo at Ashdod instead. Israel promised to deliver the shipment should the ship head to Ashdod.
Israeli sources said despite the military preparations made by the army to confront the Libyan ship, the Netanyahu government is exerting intensive diplomatic efforts to dissuade the Libyans from keeping the ship on its course to Gaza.
Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak has called Egyptian General Intelligence Chief Omar Suleiman to discuss the ship. Barak suggested that Egypt should have the ship unload in Arish, a request that the Egyptians granted. Egypt’s Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul-Gheit said Egypt wouldn’t mind the Libyan ship unloading in Arish if the captain so requested.
Bombshell Report: 550 IDF Officers And Soldiers Interrogated About Possible War Crimes In Gaza: Max Blumenthal
On 07.19.10, By Max Blumenthal
On July 18, a bombshell report appeared in the Israeli daily Yediot Aharanot. The article, which has only been published in Hebrew and was buried on page 8 as a small news item, stated that 550 officers and soldiers who participated in Israel’s assault on the Gaza Strip in late 2008 and early 2009 have been investigated by IDF military police for possible war crimes. Among them is the former commander of the Givati Brigade, Ilan Malka, who was interrogated for an air strike that resulted in the killing of 21 members of one family in Gaza City. At least one other soldier is accused of using human shields, or “use of neighbor” tactics. In fact, nearly all battalion commanders who participated in Cast Lead have been interrogated regarding their conduct. Maybe Judge Goldstone wasn’t so crazy after all.
A full translation of the article is below:
YEDIOT AHARONOT Sunday, July 18, 2010 page 8
Officers under interrogation
550 OFFICERS AND SOLDIERS OF “CAST LEAD” HAVE BEEN INTERROGATED.
By our military correspondent Yossi Yehoshua
Brigadier Ilan Malka is not alone. More than 550 officers and men of IDF who participated in the “Cast Lead” operation have been interrogated by the investigative military police of the IDF in the last 18 months.
Last Friday “Yediot Aharonot” wrote that former GIV’ATI brigade commander [Ilan Malka A.O.] will be interrogated about an aerial attack in “Cast Lead” that killed 21 members of one [Gaza A.O.] family. It now turns out that hundreds more were interrogated, some more than once. Among the interrogated are almost all battalion commanders who participated in the operation and dozens of soldiers in regular service and in the reserves. It is a number without precedent in any other [Israeli A.O.] operation or war. Senior officers expressed their worry that this will create a situation in future wars where commanders in the field will think twice before carrying out problematic operations, due to fear of legal steps taken against them later. Battalion and platoon commanders who participated in “Cast Lead” find it difficult to go through the interrogations. One battalion commander said he had to spend his few days of Leave in interrogation chambers instead of with his family. He said “Even if they try to deny it the damage caused to commanders is immense” adding “It is an unpleasant feeling to risk your life for your country and then be interrogated about it again and again”.
So far the interrogations gave rise to a considerable number of disciplinary – and legal – steps. The most serious one was taken last week when the Chief Military Prosecutor, Aloof Avihai Mandelblit, decided to charge a Giv’ati soldier for committing murder. On another occasion he decided to court-martial a Golani battalion commander for ignoring IDF instructions forbidding “use of neighbor” tactics.
(My note: “Use of neighbor” tactic is the act where soldiers preparing to enter a suspected house force the neighbors to walk in front of them as a human shield.)
Tricky Bibi: Haaretz
Israel has had many rightist leaders since Menachem Begin promised “many Elon Morehs,” but there has never been one like Netanyahu, who wants to do it by deceit.
By Gideon Levy
This video should have been banned for broadcast to minors. This video should have been shown in every home in Israel, then sent to Washington and Ramallah. Banned for viewing by children so as not to corrupt them, and distributed around the country and the world so that everyone will know who leads the government of Israel. Channel 10 presented: The real (and deceitful ) face of Binyamin Netanyahu. Broadcast on Friday night on “This Week with Miki Rosenthal,” it was filmed secretly in 2001, during a visit by Citizen Netanyahu to the home of a bereaved family in the settlement of Ofra, and astoundingly, it has not created a stir.
The scene was both pathetic and outrageous. The last of Netanyahu’s devoted followers, who believe he is the man who will bring peace, would have immediately changed their minds. Presidents Barack Obama and Shimon Peres, who continue to maintain that Netanyahu will bring peace, would be talking differently had they seen this secretly filmed video clip. Even the objection of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to conducting direct negotiations with the man from the video would be understandable. What is there to discuss with a huckster whose sole purpose is “to give 2 percent in order to prevent 100 percent,” as his father told him, quoting his grandfather.
Israel has had many rightist leaders since Menachem Begin promised “many Elon Morehs,” but there has never been one like Netanyahu, who wants to do it by deceit, to mock America, trick the Palestinians and lead us all astray. The man in the video betrays himself in his own words as a con artist, and now he is again prime minister of Israel. Don’t try to claim that he has changed since then. Such a crooked way of thinking does not change over the years.
Forget the Bar-Ilan University speech, forget the virtual achievements in his last visit to the United States; this is the real Netanyahu. No more claims that the Palestinians are to blame for the failure of the Oslo Accords. Netanyahu exposed the naked truth to his hosts at Ofra: he destroyed the Oslo accords with his own hands and deeds, and he’s even proud of it. After years in which we were told that the Palestinians are to blame, the truth has emerged from the horse’s mouth.
And how did he do it? He recalled how he conditioned his signing of the 1997 Hebron agreement on American consent that there be no withdrawals from “specified military locations,” and insisted he choose those same locations, such as the whole of the Jordan Valley, for example. “Why is that important? Because from that moment on I stopped the Oslo Accords,” he boasts. The real Netanyahu also brags about his knowledge of America: “I know what America is. America is something that can be moved easily.” For the White House’s information.
He calls then-U.S. President Bill Clinton “extremely pro-Palestinian,” and says the Palestinians want to throw us into the sea. With such retrograde beliefs, no one can convincingly argue that he wants an agreement.
These remarks are profoundly depressing. They bear out all of our fears and suspicions: that the government of Israel is led by a man who doesn’t believe the Palestinians and doesn’t believe in the chance of an agreement with them, who thinks that Washington is in his pocket and that he can pull the wool over its eyes. There’s no point in talking about Netanyahu’s impossible rightist coalition as an obstacle to progress. From now on, just say that Netanyahu doesn’t want it.
What if Kadima joins the government and Yisrael Beiteinu leaves? Nothing will change. What if Danny Danon goes leftist and Tzipi Hotovely joins Peace Now? Netanyahu doesn’t want it.
If he had said so honestly, as he did when he thought the camera in Ofra was turned off, then he could have been forgiven for his extreme positions. It’s his right to think that way and get elected for it. The people will have gotten what they chose. But when Netanyahu hides his real positions under camouflage netting and entangles them in webs of deceit, he not only reduces the chances of reaching an agreement, he also damages Israel’s political culture. Many people may want a right-wing, nationalist prime minister, but a prime minister who is a con artist? Is is too much to expect of Netanyahu that he speak to us precisely as he spoke in Ofra? Why do a handful of settlers deserve to know the truth, and not us? Tell us the truth, Netanyahu. Talk to us as if the cameras were off, just as you thought then, in 2001 in Ofra.
Destroying the Palestinian state: Al Ahram Weekly
Israeli settlement expansion continues to make a mockery of efforts to reach a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, writes Khaled Amayreh in occupied Jerusalem
Israeli police and border police officers prevent a Palestinian woman from entering the house of her relatives that is about to be demolished in East Jerusalem
While the rest of the world talks about a peace process, and while President Barack Obama raises false hopes of a resolution to the Israeli- Palestinian conflict, Israel is working frantically to create irreversible facts in occupied East Jerusalem as well as across the West Bank.
These facts, which take the form of tens of thousands of Jewish settler units built all over the occupied city and beyond, are changing the demographic features and overall panorama of East Jerusalem in particular.
Jerusalem is not just another town. It is extremely sacred to more than 1.5 billion Muslims around the world, being home to some of Islam’s holiest shrines. Hence, progressive Judaicisation of the town by Israel is likely to drastically complicate any future effort to find a peaceful settlement to the conflict.
One Palestinian intellectual related to the situation in Jerusalem by saying that “it is now open-ended conflict similar to the Muslim quest to rid the city of the Franks in the 11th and 12th centuries.” “This strife might take several decades, even a century or more, but it must end with the dismantling or destruction of something called Israel,” said one resident of Hebron in the southern West Bank.
In a far-reaching interview with Al-Ahram Weekly, cartographer and demographics expert Khalil Tufakji argued convincingly that the situation in East Jerusalem has already reached the point of no return. “If someone tells you that it is still possible to have a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, don’t believe him. This is more of a fantasy than a realistic vision. It is a mantra that is near totally detached from reality.”
Tufakji explained that Israel had already confiscated 87 per cent of East Jerusalem, leaving only the built-up area, which doesn’t exceed 13 per cent of the city seized in Israel in 1967. “Even this small area is the subject of unrelenting daily harassment by Israel for the purpose of forcing us to abandon our property for Jewish settler interests.”
Tufakji pointed out that Israel has adopted two plans aimed finalising the process of making Jerusalem Israel’s eternal and undivided capital. The first plan is called Jerusalem 2020, and envisages the construction of more than 58,000 settler units within the confines of East Jerusalem by the year 2020. The second plan is known as Jerusalem 30/A and envisages a growth in Jewish population by tens of thousands for the purpose of making Palestinians a small and shrinking minority in their own city.
“They plan to make Jerusalem a favoured city, a city that would attract Jews from everywhere. And in order to implement this vision, they are offering a lot of inducements, including hefty tax reductions, easy housing conditions, mortgage allowances as well as enhanced infrastructure and attractive employment opportunities.”
Tufakji said Israel was also planning to expand the borders of the city in all directions to the point where the Arab population wouldn’t exceed 12 per cent, whereas the Jewish population would reach an unprecedented 88 per cent. The realisation of this daring plan will take the form of a campaign of ethnic cleansing of Arab demography in Jerusalem.
“Their tactic is designed to confine as much as possible Arab inhabitants into the smallest amount of land. In addition, they will dramatically step up demolitions of Arab homes and withdraw residency rights from as many East Jerusalemites as possible in order to empty the city of its Arab residents and consequently obliterate its Arab-Muslim identity.”
Israel has already withdrawn residency rights from as many as 70,000 Arab residents, citing a host of concocted pretexts and justifications, such as travelling abroad or involvement in vague security violations. Since 1994, Israel has demolished nearly 1000 large buildings in East Jerusalem.
Tufakji pointed out that unmitigated Israeli pressure, coupled with Israeli policy of narrowing Arab horizons, has caused the size of the Arab population within the walled town to dwindle to 175,000 while the Jewish population skyrocketed to 200,000 plus. The Weekly asked Tufakji if he thought that the Palestinian Authority was playing on borrowed time as far as saving Jerusalem was concerned.
“Unfortunately, it is too late for Jerusalem for the time being. Others might say the same thing with regards to the West Bank as well. In the final analysis, we are talking about objective facts on the ground. To simplify things for your readers, I can say that Israel has killed the possibility of a true Palestinian state. And if anyone tells you that Jerusalem will become the capital of a prospective Palestinian state, don’t believe him.”
Tufakji added that Israel, under the rubric of disingenuous peace talks with a weak and demoralised Palestinian leadership, was changing the face of the occupied Palestinian territories so much that any Palestinian entity that might be established would be “severely deformed” and “looking very, very ugly.” “True, I am not a politician, but one doesn’t have to be a great politician to see the facts and the scandalous situation here.”
This week, Israeli sources reported that US President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu agreed that Israel would be able to keep up settlement expansion but without making public announcements to that effect. On 12 July, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported that the Jerusalem Municipal Planning Committee approved construction of 32 new settler units in East Jerusalem. The paper quoted a member of the committee as saying that “we will continue to build everywhere and in every neighbourhood in Jerusalem.”
Netanyahu, who has just wrapped up a “successful visit to Washington,” has assured pro-settler coalition partners that he won’t extend the half-hearted moratorium on settlement expansion construction due to expire on 27 September. The Israeli media quoted Netanyahu as saying that “a promise is a promise, a date is a date and a goal is a goal.”
Meanwhile, the Palestinian leadership in Ramallah continues to dither on whether to rejoin direct talks with Israel as insisted upon by Netanyahu and demanded by Obama. With peace talks having gone on for years with no result, one must wonder what now can convince the Palestinians to give negotiations one more chance.