EDITOR: The Tent protesters of Israel suffer from a black spot…
The tent cities in Israel are growing everywhere, and the tremor they have forced in the political system may endure, and may, in the end, be the end of Netanyahu. However, it is quite clear that the protest is held within the Jewish-Israeli national consensus. There is not a single word about the occupation and its iniquities, and hardly a word about the Palestinians, either within Israel or beyond its non-existing borders.
But much worse is the reaction to the protest by the political elite. AS most of the anger in the streets is about the lack of cheap social housing, the Israeli leadership saw its chance to score an important goal, and riding the wave of protests, they announced huge amounts of new flat building in – yes, you worked it out – in Palestine! So more building in the OPT, in East and South Jerusalem, ONLY on Palestine stolen land.
From the tents of protest there was no real reaction to this disgusting move, and none is likely either – as they see them selves not only as part of the consensus, but more accurately, as the consensus itself, the leaders of the movement are oblivious to this cynical move and continue with their agenda of not looking where they prefer no to see. The potential for an important political move towards Palestine by this new movement died before it could be born.
The US is of course “deeply concerned”, as it always is when Israel continues to build illegally. This concern is so seep, that to sate, not a single pressure has been put on Israel to stop this building. Instead, the US supplies Israel with funds which enable it. Deep concern indeed!
Israel approves 227 new homes in West Bank settlement of Ariel: Haaretz
Defense Minister Ehud Barak okays largest housing project in single settlement since establishment of the Netanyahu government.
Defense Minister Ehud Barak has approved the building of 277 apartments the West Bank settlement of Ariel, defying U.S. criticism of continued settlement construction.
Barak authorized the construction in Ariel, the core of the settlement bloc deepest inside the West Bank. One hundred of the apartments will house Israelis evacuated in 2005 from a Gaza Strip settlement.
The new housing units are set to be built in Ariel’s Noyman neighborhood. 100 homes are intended for evacuees of the Gaza settlement of Netzarim, while the rest of the housing units are set to be sold freely.
The building permits for the homes were handed out a while ago, but marketing the lands to contractors was delayed due to diplomatic considerations until now. The construction is expected to conclude in about three years.
This marks the largest construction project in a single settlement since the establishment of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government.
A spokesman for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had no immediate comment Monday on the diplomatically charged move.
Since the establishment of Netanyahu’s government, very few building permits were handed out. In 2009, 492 housing units were approved in various West Bank settlements. In March of 2011, following the murder of a family in the settlement of Itamar, Netanyahu announced his intention to construct 500 homes in the area, but the land has yet to be marketed to contractors.
In recent weeks, Israel has also moved ahead on two other construction projects in east Jerusalem, the Palestinians’ hoped-for capital. The U.S. was critical of those plans.
Report: US threatens to halt humanitarian aid to Gaza: IOA
12 AUGUST 2011
State Department announcement comes in light of Hamas demands to audit the books of US charities, New York Times reports, which would violate U.S. policy against direct contacts with Hamas.
The United States threatened Thursday to halt humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip, after Hamas demanded to audit the books of U.S.-financed NGOs in Gaza, the New York Times reported.
According to the report, the U.S. State Department said it would stop delivering to Gaza some $100 million in aid for health care, agriculture, and water infrastructure if Hamas does not stop insisting on auditing the books of U.S. charities in the Gaza Strip.
The threat comes after Hamas officials took over the offices of the International Medical Corps on Sunday after the NGO refused to be audited by Hamas.
Hamas has been trying to tighten their grip on the NGOs in Gaza, first demanding they register with the central government, pay a fee and submit financial reports, the New York Times reported, but when they demanded in June that the groups must allow officials to audit their books, the charities began objecting.
Moreover, the report said that while Hamas did not explain the reason for its demand to audit the charities’ books, there are fears that money could be diverted for political or intelligence-gathering purposes.
The United States forbids American organizations from having direct contact with Hamas, who it labels as a terrorist group, and therefore on-site audits by Hamas officials would lead to the suspension of aid, the NYT quoted the U.S. State Department as saying.
U.S. ‘deeply concerned’ by Israel’s approval of East Jerusalem construction plans: Haaretz
Foreign Ministry source: U.S. Embassy in Israel contacted Prime Minister’s Bureau, Foreign Ministry to stress the seriousness of the American concern regarding the negative implications of the decision.
The United States said Tuesday it is “deeply concerned” by Israel’s approval of new housing in East Jerusalem. In its condemnation of Israel’s action, the U.S. is joining the EU, the UN, Russia and Turkey, who made similar statements in recent days.
A Foreign Ministry source in Jerusalem said that the U.S. Embassy in Israel contacted the Prime Minister’s Bureau and the Foreign Ministry and stressed the seriousness of the American concern regarding the negative implications of the decision, which may make it impossible to block unilateral Palestinian efforts for recognition of statehood at the United Nations in September.
The State Department said in a statement that such “unilateral actions work against efforts to resume direct negotiations and contradict the logic of a reasonable and necessary agreement between the parties.”
The State Department also said it raised its objections with the Israeli government.
Alongside its rare rebuke of a close ally, Washington said Israelis and Palestinians should settle their differences on Jerusalem through negotiation, adding that the United States “will continue to press ahead with the parties to resolve the core issues in the context of a peace agreement.”
Before Tuesday’s statement, the U.S. had been mostly silent on East Jerusalem construction over the last few months, which had seemingly become peripheral to U.S. concerns. The subject had been nearly completely absent from talks between the White House and the Prime Minister’s Bureau.
Interior Minister Eli Yishai approved the construction of more than 900 housing units in Har Homa last Thursday, confirming a plan that was approved two years ago by the District Planning Committee, and only now is in the process being finalized.
The decision will free the Housing and Construction Ministry to begin marketing land to developers for construction.
Four days earlier, EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton condemned Israel’s approval of the new housing units.
“The European Union has repeatedly urged the government of Israel to immediately end all settlement activities in the West Bank, including in East Jerusalem. All settlement activities are illegal under international law,” Ashton was quoted as saying in a statement.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s forum of eight ministers will meet Wednesday to discuss political assessments on the UN vote for recognition of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders in September. Netanyahu has stepped up the rate at which deliberations are held and they are expected to continue at least once a week until September.
During the discussions, Israeli responses will be considered as well as the possibility that there may be a violent confrontation in the West Bank the day after the UN vote.
This follows a statement by Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman Sunday charging that the Palestinian Authority is planning “unprecedented bloodletting” for September and claimed that he will demand from the Netanyahu and forum that Israel should cut off all contacts with the Palestinians, including security coordination.
For their part, other ministers in the senior forum, including Vice Premier Moshe Ya’alon, believe that the Palestinians have no intention of violence following the UN vote.
Israel’s social protesters mustn’t forget the occupation: Haaretz
The highly polarized sentiments contained in this word turn the occupation into an invaluable electoral asset.
By Alon Idan
Why does the protest movement ban the word “occupation”? Because using that word would dramatically reduce the number of protesters; it would stir disagreement and splinter the movement. Such factionalism would turn the protest into a “political” entity and expunge its populist character.
So we have to ask questions about the occupation’s other function, the one that complements “security needs” and “ideological fulfillment.” It appears that the “no” implies a “yes” – that is, if it is forbidden to say “occupation” to avoid dividing the public into factions and disuniting the protest movement, it follows that the occupation’s role is to divide the public and eliminate all possibility of protest against it.
The occupation is the means by which division and factionalism gain strength and preserve political power. The automatic way the public splits the moment the word is mentioned lets the heads of one of the two camps perpetuate their power with relative ease. After one faction gains the ability to forge a government, it gathers together sectors with narrow partisan interests and sends its leader to serve as prime minister. The occupation enables the government to have its way with matters that have nothing to do with events in the territories; any complaint about socioeconomic matters that might turn into a popular protest, as in the current case, threatens to fade away when it confronts the word that can’t be said.
The highly polarized sentiments contained in this word turn the occupation into an invaluable electoral asset. The use of appropriate ideological and biblical trappings conjure up a historical-ideological ambience; this transforms the occupation into a political asset that can never be forfeited, even if conceding it would improve the lives of the people who suffer under it. A built-in conflict of interests has been created between the government’s interest in perpetuating it and the humanitarian arguments seeking its end.
It’s no accident that the outlines of extreme capitalism, a policy based on the continual splintering of society due to competition among people, is inherent within the occupation. Anyone who travels around the West Bank and the Jordan Valley can witness capitalism’s geographic manifestations. Cantonization, the proliferation of checkpoints and the bureaucratic control of traffic are all components of separation designed to make survival difficult and perpetuate control by the central authority.
Also, the “free market,” one of the main topics addressed by the protest movement, is linked to the process of division and splintering. Alongside the chaos inherent in the concept “market,” there is the ironic use of the word “free” – the worker is forced to compete against his peers at any given moment knowing that the victory of one means the defeat of the other. Can the term “free” really be applied to principles that advocate constant competition and struggle for survival between individuals?
During his first term, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu used phrases that exposed his tendency to divide parts of the population to bolster his authority. (“Leftists have forgotten what it means to be Jews,” “They are afraid,” and so on ). Since then, he has learned an important Machiavellian lesson: Do what you think, but say whatever the public wants to hear. This has made his current term far more destructive. Instead of whispering words of disunity and polarization into the ears of Shas’ aged religious leaders, he has, with the help of people such as MKs David Rotem and Zeev Elkin, devoted himself to acts that divide the population.
The current protests stem from feelings of isolation that are based on the splintering of Israeli society. The occupation, the symbol of that disunity, is not mentioned in the tent camps because it threatens to eclipse the protest. This ongoing paradox spells its ultimate demise.
Palestinians to present statehood bid to UN general assembly: Guardian
Palestinians to push ahead with bid next month despite US opposition and warnings move will endanger future peace talks
Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas is to travel to Lebanon, which will hold the rotating presidency of the UN security council next month, to discuss the statehood bid. Photograph: Thaer Ganaim/EPA
Palestinian leaders have said that they will formally request recognition of their state and full membership of the UN next month, despite strong US opposition amid warnings that such a move would jeopardise future peace talks.
Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, will personally present the application to the UN secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon, before the UN general assembly opens on 20 September.
The UN has the moral, legal, political and historical responsibility to recognise Palestine and “to put an end to the Israeli occupation”, said Ryad Malki, the Palestinian foreign minister.
Abbas is to travel to Lebanon on Tuesday to discuss the plan. Lebanon will hold the rotating presidency of the UN security council next month and is expected to be sympathetic to the Palestinian campaign.
The Israeli prime minister’s office said the Palestinian move was “expected and regrettable”. “Binyamin Netanyahu [the Israeli prime minister] still believes that only through direct and honest negotiations – not through unilateral decisions – will it be possible to advance the peace process,” the statement said.
The Palestinian decision to adopt the UN approach is borne of frustration over stalled negotiations. Direct talks broke down last September when Israel refused to extend a temporary freeze on settlement expansion. The Palestinians also hope that UN recognition of their state will increase international pressure on Israel to end its 44-year occupation.
Full membership of the UN requires the backing of the 15-member security council before approval by the general assembly. The US has already stated its intention to veto such a move. The UK, also a permanent member of the security council, has not declared its position. If the bid for full membership fails, the Palestinians are expected to request “non-member state” status – a step short of full recognition – at the general assembly, which requires a two-thirds majority of the 193 countries. At the moment, the Palestinians believe they have the support of about 120.
Both the Palestinians and the Israelis have launched global diplomatic offensives in recent weeks to win support for their respective positions. According to Malki, the Palestinians’ “weakest point” was Latin America and the Caribbean, whose countries are meeting on Friday to try to establish a common position.
The Israeli diplomatic campaign has focused on Europe. The 27 EU countries are presently split on whether to back the Palestinian bid, with Germany and Italy opposed, Ireland and Portugal in favour, and France and the UK undeclared. EU officials have pushed for a compromise in an attempt to keep the EU bloc together.
The US has also sought to avoid a vote at the UN by attempting to reopen direct talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians on the basis of the pre-1967 borders with agreed land swaps to allow the big settlement blocs to remain in Israeli hands. Despite Netanyahu’s oft-repeated statements that there is no alternative to negotiations, many in the international community are sceptical about his willingness to make concessions to allow the establishment of a Palestinian state.
Last week, the Israeli authorities confirmed plans for 1,600 homes in settlements in East Jerusalem, with another 2,700 expected to be approved in the coming days. The Palestinians want East Jerusalem, which was annexed by Israel after the 1967 war, to be their capital.
“The settlements are the real obstacle to the resumption of negotiations,” Abbas was quoted as telling the US consul general in Jerusalem on Saturday.
Israeli media reported this month that President Shimon Peres at the last minute cancelled a meeting with Abbas,that had been scheduled to try to revive negotiations, after Netanyahu failed to provide him with anything new to put on the table. Israel has repeatedly raised the spectre of renewed violence in the autumn, regardless of the outcome of the UN bid. The Palestinian Authority has called for peaceful demonstrations to coincide with the expected vote in New York.
Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s rightwing foreign minister, has said the Palestinians are preparing for “bloodshed the likes of which we’ve never seen before”.
“The more they talk about nonviolent activity, the more preparations there are for bloodshed. When you prepare a march of tens of thousands of people who will storm checkpoints and pass through without being checked, everyone can imagine what would happen … the Palestinians are planning this in great detail,” he said.
The Israeli security forces are preparing for a number of scenarios, according to reports in the local media. Special training of thousands of police officers is under way, and 200,000 litres of foul-smelling water canon has been stockpiled.
The defence minister, Ehud Barak, told Army Radio on Sunday that millions of dollars had been spent on riot gear. However, he added, he expected and hoped September would pass quietly.
Palestinian spokesman Ghassan Khatib denied there would be violence. “These Israeli predictions of violence aren’t true,” he told Associated Press. “Israel is trying to fuel a fake picture of what will happen in September.”
Road to statehood?
1918-48 The British governed Palestine after the end of the first world war and the defeat of the Ottoman Empire, which had ruled the region. The British promised self-rule to the Arabs but also backed the creation of a Jewish homeland in the region.
1948-67 After the war that followed Israel’s declaration of its state in May 1948, the West Bank and East Jerusalem was governed by Jordan, and Gaza was governed by Egypt.
1967-93 During the Six-Day War, Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza, and captured and later annexed East Jerusalem. It imposed military rule over the Palestinian territories.
1993 The Oslo accords were signed between Israel and Palestine, leading to the creation of the Palestinian Authority. The PA was given control over some West Bank cities, but Israel military control was maintained over 60% of the West Bank.
Israel will use Palestinian UN bid to restore status quo: Haaretz
To be honest, what’s the difference between the potential UN declaration in September 2011 and the Palestinian declaration of independence in Tunis 22 years ago?
By Akiva Eldar
Even MK Aryeh Eldad (National Union ), the professor of the extreme right, is not particularly upset by the fact that the United Nations General Assembly may recognize a Palestinian state. He sees no legal difference between the decision that is expected next month and the decision that was made there – with a huge majority of 104 to 2 – following the Palestinian declaration of independence in Tunis 22 years ago.
And to be honest, what is the difference?
This time, too, Israel will accuse the Arabs of unilateral steps, ignore the United Nations, expand settlements in the West Bank, and build more neighborhoods for Jews in East Jerusalem.
So what then is the purpose of this scare campaign ahead of the vote at the General Assembly? What is the basis for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s declaration that the move at the UN clearly indicates that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is not interested in a negotiated settlement? Why does the foreign minister go to the trouble of telling the public that Abbas, on the day after the UN vote, is planning “violence and bloodletting of the sort not yet seen before?”
In order to comprehend the two, it helps to go back 11 years, to July-September 2000. As is the case today, then Prime Minister Ehud Barak lay all the blame for the failure of the diplomatic process on Yasser Arafat. Like today, then U.S. President Bill Clinton abandoned the Palestinian leadership. Like today, they told us that the Palestinian president was not really interested in a two-state solution. Like today, they told us that he had planned in advance the outbreak of violence. Like then, they are telling us now that we have no partner for peace. They believe that the “nation” will buy that fib – just as it did then.
In an article from a new journal published by the Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace Research, Dr. Ephraim Lavie argues that there is no basis to the claim that Arafat went to war in 2000 as part of a plan of strategic deception. Lavie, who headed the Palestinian Desk at the Research Department of Military Intelligence at the time, says that this assessment, which was made public by the military echelon, had no intelligence foundation. He says that this view suited the leadership’s outlook and constituted a basis for the policy of the government and the Israel Defense Forces for a number of years.
The next Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, who inherited this narrative from Barak, rode it all the way to the disengagement from Gaza. His successor, Ehud Olmert, failed to correct Barak’s damage, but left behind for Netanyahu the photographs of Abbas entering and leaving the Prime Minister’s Residence on Balfour Street, with the Palestinian flag flying in the background.
Netanyahu was forced to deal with a Palestinian president wearing a coat and tie, and with a Palestinian prime minister who showed absolutely no tolerance for violence.
U.S. President Barack Obama’s speech in Cairo, at the beginning of his White House tenure, made things more difficult for Netanyahu with its two-state solution formula and with international pressure to freeze settlements.
The Palestinian move at the United Nations, along with the demonstrations that are expected the day after the recognition of Palestinian statehood in the 1967 borders, are a great opportunity for the right-wing government to restore the old and effective status quo. As the vote approaches, they let it be known that even though Netanyahu had agreed to renew the negotiations on the basis of the 1967 borders, the Palestinians were intent on moving forward with a “unilateral step” at the United Nations – hence, proof that there is no partner.
In response to a Haaretz question on whether Netanyahu did indeed adopt the new Obama formula of May 2011, which includes mutually agreed land swaps, the Prime Minister’s Bureau made it clear that “there has been no change in the government’s policy.” As far as is known, the government has never discussed the new formula.
The prediction of Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman that the vote will be followed by unprecedented violence and bloodletting prepares public opinion for a harsh response on the part of Israeli security forces to popular protests in the territories. Vice-Premier Moshe Ya’alon will be glad to help Netanyahu “teach the Palestinians a lesson they will not forget” – namely, that they should forget about a state.
Once, when he was still in uniform, he sent the IDF to destroy the Palestinian Authority, remove the threat of peace and restore the right wing to power. With everyone busy with social justice, who will notice yet another national fissure?
UN calls on Israel not to build new settlements in East Jerusalem: Haaretz
Israel approves construction of 1,600 units in Ramat Shlomo in East Jerusalem after it lifted a 10-month freeze on settlement activities in September 2010.
The United Nations called Thursday for Israel not to build new settlements, saying such plans would amount to a “provocative action” to the peace process with the Palestinians.
Robert Serry, UN coordinator for the Middle East peace process, said the plan was strongly opposed by the international community when it was announced last year.
“If confirmed, this provocative action undermines ongoing efforts by the international community to bring the parties back to negotiations,” Serry said.
Israel had planned construction of 1,600 units in Ramat Shlomo in East Jerusalem after it lifted a 10-month freeze on settlement activities in September 2010 in occupied Palestinian territory.
Israel announced the intention to proceed with the construction in Ramat Shlomo, one week after it took a separate decision to erect 900 housing units in another part of East Jerusalem.
The UN, the European Union, the United States and Russia – known as the quartet in Middle East diplomacy – have opposed new Jewish settlements because they ran counter to efforts to settle the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.