EDITOR: The fateful day at the UN is here at last!

A letter asking the UN to recognise Palestine as a state will be handed in today, Friday September the 23rd, 2011, by Mahmud Abbas to the Secretary General of the UN, Ban Ki Moon. This letter will not bring about the recognition of a Palestinian state, as we all know, because the US, with its first “Jewish  President”, Barack Hussein Obama, will stop this in its tracks.

But, as we were told by Lacan, ‘the letter always finds its address’. This letter has found its address in millions of people around the globe, all supporting the Palestinians in their struggle, like they have supported South African blacks some decades ago, in their struggle to end apartheid. The letter shall be delivered, and the message shall be heard, and understood.

Even for people like myself, who support a more egalitarian solution in Palestine – that of the single, secular democratic state for all Jews and Arabs living there, as well as the refugees of the many wars and expulsions since 1948 – this day is symbolically unique; here starts the slide-down of the racist state of Israel, with its tanks, jet fighters, walls, and even its nuclear weapons – nothing will protect it from the wave of history, the tsunami of political change.

It may yet take a long time, indeed, but the countdown has now started on the Zionist project, and nothing will stop it. Let them turn and twist, it will come to haunt them. They may well kill many more Palestinians and other Arabs before it is all done and dusted – I wish we could somehow stop them from doing that, but the US and the west will allow them to continue with their brutalities. But even the US cannot save Israel from history.

In one of her poems, the American Palestinian poet and activist Suheir Hammad says: “Do not fear what has blown up…. if you must, fear the unexploded”. Israel and the west should heed these words.

BREAKING NEWS! BREAKING NEWS! BREAKING NEWS!

Clashes break out between Palestinians and Israel security forces in East Jerusalem: Haaretz

Masked youths throw rocks at Israeli police and border guards, but massive protests have still not materialized ahead of Palestinian statehood bid at United Nations.

Violence broke out in and around the East Jerusalem area on Friday when Palestinian youths hurled rocks at security forces in the neighborhood of Ras Al-Amud.

Although the IDF has no indication that massive violence will erupt, it worries that events in New York – where PA President Mahmoud Abbas will address the UN General Assembly today and formally apply for UN recognition as a state – could inflame tempers. So far, fears that massive violence would break out in the lead-up to the Palestinian bid for statehood at the United Nations have not materialized.

A group of Palestinians wearing masks threw rocks at Israeli police officers and border guards Friday in East Jerusalem. Police officers gave chase as the rock-throwers fled the scene, apprehending one of them and taking him in for questioning.

Residents of the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Ras Al-Amud reported that two people were wounded in the leg, but police reported that those wounds were caused when at least one of the wounded jumped over a fence and apparently broke his leg from the fall. He was taken away for medical treatment.

Residents of Beit Hanina scuffled with border guards on the scene. Three Arab youths were arrested on suspicion of burning tires and throwing rocks at the security forces. No wounded were reported. Two young Palestinians were arrested soon after on suspicion of forcefully trying to enter the Temple Mount.

Conflict broke out as early as Thursday night in East Jerusalem, when a Molotov cocktail was thrown at Beit Yehonatan in Silwan and rioting broke out in another of locations in the area. IDF soldiers held a 15-year-old resident of the area for questioning over the incidents.

Thousands of Muslims arrived for Friday prayers at the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, though the police limited their participation in order to prevent public disturbances. The prayers ended and participants dispersed peacefully.

Police Chief Yohanan Danino and Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch visited the Western Wall police station, in light of the heightened state of security. “The coming hours are the most tense and the police officers are ready for every possible scenario,” Aharonovitch.

“The police has not received any special warnings of plans to disturb the peace,” added Aharonovitch. Danino and Aharonovitch then surveyed the Jerusalem area in order to evaluate the readiness of the forces stationed there and to meet officers in the field.

An attack by settlers on Palestinians could also spark wider disturbances, and this possibility is currently one of the IDF’s chief concerns.

The Islamist Hamas organization has declared today a “day of rage,” but the IDF believes Hamas lacks the infrastructure to foment widespread disturbances in the West Bank.

Palestinian statehood goes to UN in key moment for peace process: Guardian

Mahmoud Abbas will postpone security council vote but has broken US hegemony over peace talks, diplomats say
Chris McGreal in New York and Harriet Sherwood in Jerusalem
Palestinians fly a kite of their flag in Gaza to celebrate Mahmoud Abbas taking Palestinian statehood to the UN security council. Photograph: Majdi Fathi/Corbis
Mahmoud Abbas submits his bid for recognition of Palestine as a state to the UN on Friday. The submission comes at the end of a week that has seen a dramatic diplomatic shift in the Palestinians’ favour, even though the request, to the security council, is likely to fail.

The Palestinian leader is expected to hand over a letter asking for Palestine to join the UN as a state shortly before he addresses the general assembly to plead the case for admission.

The Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, is scheduled to speak shortly afterwards. He is likely to denounce the Palestinian move as destabilising and a threat to the peace process – even though that is largely dormant.

A heavier than usual Israeli security presence will be deployed in the West Bank and East Jerusalem at the end of Friday prayers and around the time of Abbas’s speech.

Thousands of Palestinians are expected to gather before open-air screens in West Bank cities to watch their president’s address, and the Israeli military is concerned that hardline settlers may try to provoke confrontations.

“We have heightened the security alert to one level below the highest,” Israeli police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said.

“Twenty-two thousand police officers have been mobilised, with emphasis on Judaea and Samaria [the West Bank] and East Jerusalem. We hope that any demonstrations will be peaceful.”

Expectation among Palestinians has risen over the past week as Abbas has stood firm in the face of strong US opposition to his bid for statehood. It is matched by fury in the West Bank at a speech by Barack Obama to the UN on Wednesday, which was seen by both Palestinians and Israelis as overtly sympathetic to the Jewish state.

Abbas’s determination to press ahead has prompted the most serious attempt to revive the peace process in years as Washington, London and Paris seek to avoid a showdown in the security council that could severely damage their standing in a rapidly changing Middle East.

The US said it would veto statehood, while Britain and France were likely to abstain.

The days of diplomatic wrangling – much behind the scenes but some on the open stage of the UN general assembly – have resulted in a compromise. Abbas will submit his application, but any vote will be put on hold to allow for fresh attempts to revive peace talks.

While Abbas has climbed down from an immediate confrontation, some senior Palestinian officials and European diplomats believe he may have won a significant victory because the US grip on the oversight of the peace process – which has been decidedly in Israel’s favour – has been weakened, and other countries now want to force the pace of peace negotiations.

Washington’s claim to dominate mediation has not only been damaged by its unwavering threat to veto a Palestinian state in the security council, setting up a confrontation that alarmed Britain and France, but also by Obama’s speech, which offered no new initiatives.

That has opened the way for Europe to press for a greater role. In a speech to the UN, the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, questioned the US leadership, describing it as “years of failure”.

Diana Buttu, a former Palestinian negotiator who has since been critical of Abbas’s leadership, said his insistence on going to the security council had delivered a diplomatic victory of sorts. “Is this a coup for Abbas? Yes, absolutely,” she said. “This is the first time since 1974 that Palestine has been able to capture international attention at the United Nations in this way.

“He’s managed to get people discussing whether Palestine should be recognised as a state, whether it should get its independence immediately, how we get there. It’s been a brilliant move.”

A European diplomat said Abbas had changed the diplomatic equation, adding: “The ground has shifted. There’s been no peace process to speak of for years. Obama has tried and failed to push Netanyahu in to taking negotiations seriously. There’s a feeling that this crisis has created a moment to try a different way.

“It’s still negotiations. It’s still up to the Israelis and Palestinians, who have to do the deal. But we are all aware that the Arab Spring is changing everything and, while the Americans are always going to play a major role, we may be moving towards a place where they are not the only ones in the game.”

Nevertheless, Abbas has been reminded of the blunt force of US power – power no other country is likely to be able to wield.

The Palestinian leader privately retreated from his pledge to seek an immediate security council vote in part because he is no longer sure of winning the necessary majority, which would have given the Palestinians a moral victory even if, as threatened, the US used its veto.

Palestinian sources say they believe Washington has bullied several security council members, including Portugal, into withdrawing their support for the Palestinian move by threatening to withhold support in financial institutions for its stricken economy, and Bosnia, over its opposition to Kosovo being admitted to the UN.

Palestinian officials believe Nigeria is no longer certain to vote in their favour, while there are also questions about the position of Gabon and Colombia.

One senior Palestinian official said the US was “playing a really nasty game”.

Abbas was also under pressure from European leaders keen to avoid abstaining in a security council vote on the issue. Abstention would be widely interpreted in the Arab world as implicit support for Israel, although the leaders recognise the need for Abbas to submit the statehood request in order to retain his political credibility at home.

Britain urged the Palestinian leader to back away from a showdown, while Sarkozy met Abbas and pleaded with him to accept a delay in the vote in return for a promise that the French would work to revive peace talks.

Sarkozy, in his UN speech, said the US leadership on the peace process had failed and pressed for greater involvement of European and Arab states in negotiations. “Let us stop believing that a single country or small group of countries can resolve so complex a problem,” he said.

“Too many crucial players have been sidelined. After so many failures, who still believes that the peace process can succeed without Europe? Who still believes that it can succeed without the involvement of the Arab states that have already chosen peace?”

Sarkozy proposed negotiations that would adhere to a strict timetable intended to strike an agreement ending occupation and creating an independent Palestine within a year.

The French president’s position is in line with proposals put forward by Tony Blair as envoy of the Middle East quartet of the UN, EU, US and Russia to allow Abbas to fulfil his pledge to go to the security council but defer a vote.

Abbas could then claim a victory for the Palestinians by saying he has achieved his principal goal at the UN of breaking the stalemate around the peace process.

Buttu said the challenge for Abbas now was to ensure that the momentum created this week continued in the Palestinians’ favour.

“I think the old negotiations process has completely run its tired course. You’ve got countries around the world recognising that you can’t just have this process of endless negotiations with the so-called honest broker who’s not so honest at all. This has put the final nail in the coffin of the United States being the honest broker,” she said.

“Now it’s being seen for what it actually is, which is Israel’s lawyer. The next step depends on what Abbas does.

“Is he going to continue to pander to the Americans? Or is he really going to try to build up an international coalition that will deal with this in a very different way to how it’s been dealt with in the past?”

Bill Clinton: Netanyahu isn’t interested in Mideast peace deal: Haaretz

Former U.S. President says a cynical perspective of Prime Minister’s calls for negotiations ‘means that he’s just not going to give up the West Bank’.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is responsible for the inability to reach a peace deal that would end the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, former U.S. President Bill Clinton said on Thursday.

Speaking on the sidelines of the Clinton Global Initiative conference in New York, the former U.S. president was quoted by Foreign Policy magazine as claiming that Netanyahu lost interest in the peace process as soon as two basic Israelis demands seemed to come into reach: a viable Palestinian leadership and the possibility of normalizing ties with the Arab world.

“The Israelis always wanted two things that once it turned out they had, it didn’t seem so appealing to Mr. Netanyahu,” Clinton said, adding that Israel wanted “to believe they had a partner for peace in a Palestinian government, and there’s no question — and the Netanyahu government has said — that this is the finest Palestinian government they’ve ever had in the West Bank.”

Furthermore, the former U.S. president is quoted by Foreign Policy as saying that Israel was also on the verge of being recognized by Arab nations adding that the “king of Saudi Arabia started lining up all the Arab countries to say to the Israelis, ‘if you work it out with the Palestinians … we will give you immediately not only recognition but a political, economic, and security partnership.”

“This is huge…. It’s a heck of a deal,” Clinton said, adding: “That’s what happened. Every American needs to know this. That’s how we got to where we are.”

“The real cynics believe that the Netanyahu’s government’s continued call for negotiations over borders and such means that he’s just not going to give up the West Bank,” he added.

Clinton also said he felt the Palestinians would accept the deal rejected by former PA President Yasser Arafat in 2000 negotiations with then Prime Minister Ehud Barak, saying that Palestinian leaders “have explicitly said on more than one occasion that if [Netanyahu] put up the deal that was offered to them before — my deal — that they would take it.”

“For reasons that even after all these years I still don’t know for sure, Arafat turned down the deal I put together that Barak accepted,” he was quoted by Foreign Policy as saying. “But they also had an Israeli government that was willing to give them East Jerusalem as the capital of the new state of Palestine.”

Clinton also added, as to the chances of Mideast peace being achievable in the foreseeable future, in light of past failures, saying that the “two great tragedies in modern Middle Eastern politics, which make you wonder if God wants Middle East peace or not, were [Yitzhak] Rabin’s assassination and [Ariel] Sharon’s stroke.”

Clinton’s comments come as a Palestinian delegation headed by Abbas is planned to officially submit its statehood bid to the United Nations later Friday, with both Palestinian President Abbas and Prime Minister Netanyahu scheduled to address the General Assembly.

Despite heavy pressure from the West, Abbas remained determined to formally apply for UN recognition of a Palestinian state Friday.

U.S. President Barack Obama met with Abbas Thursday night in an effort to convince him not to seek Security Council recognition, warning that the U.S. would use its veto power to block it. Lower-level American officials also met with Abbas several times, but to no avail.

Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, reiterated on Thursdays that Abbas’ statehood bid will not contribute to the peace process and will merely delay the start of negotiations – which, she added, are the only way the Palestinians can actually achieve independence.

American officials also continued their effort to mobilize enough Security Council votes to defeat the statehood bid without a U.S. veto. Germany has already announced it won’t vote yes, and Rice said she is convinced other countries will do the same. America, she said, is not the only country to realize that the UN gambit is unproductive.

 

Palestine’s UN bid boosts support for Mahmoud Abbas: Guardian

President goes to UN general assembly backed by popular spirit of flag-waving optimism
Harriet Sherwood in Nablus
Nizam Kartullah makes Palestinian flags. The Nablus factory where he works has seen a flood of orders before the UN vote. Photograph: Gali Tibbon for the Guardian
At the top of a steep staircase in a backstreet of Nablus, Nizam Kartullah was stitching together swaths of white, green, black and red fabric to create a brand new emblem of the hoped-for state of Palestine.

Demand for flags from the Nablus Company’s small workshop has increased by 2,000% in the past 10 days and Kartullah’s working day has stretched to 15 or 16 hours to ensure sufficient supplies.

Surrounded by heaps of fabric and reels of thread on lopsided shelves, he and his six co-workers were feeling the pressure – but also their nation’s pride. “I am happy to make Palestinian flags,” he said, head bent over his sewing machine. “This is for our country.”

The buildup to this momentous week had undoubtedly been good for business, said workshop owner Bilal Abu Ahmed. But that was irrelevant compared to the symbolic moment on Friday when the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, steps on to the stage of the United Nations general assembly to demand the world body recognises the independent sovereign state of Palestine.

“If Abu Mazen [Abbas] succeeds, we will be very happy,” said Abu Ahmed. “We have had enough of occupation, enough of suffering. Let our children live in freedom.”

Abbas’s appeal to the UN, and his resistance – so far – to intense pressure to backtrack, has led to a surge in support and respect in the West Bank for a leader who hasn’t always enjoyed the devotion of his people. According to a poll this week, 83% of Palestinians are behind his stand.

“He did something no one expected him to do,” said Ahmad Rahal, a singer from Jenin who this week performed at a festive rally in support of the UN bid in a Nablus square draped with Palestinian flags and posters of Abbas. “He is standing up to the Israelis and the United States. For the first time he did something tangible.”

One of Rahal’s improvised songs hailed Abbas as “our guardian and our protector”. “Go to the UN without fear because all the people are behind you,” he sang. Among the cheering crowd was Sabrine Jarrarih, a 22 -year-old student. “Abu Mazen was never so popular as today,” she said.

The striking shift in public mood in the West Bank from political cynicism to enthusiastic endorsement of an uncharismatic leader was mirrored by a deepening disillusion with Barack Obama, who has pledged to use the US veto to block the Palestinian move at the security council.

“To tell you the truth, I’m not really trustful that we will succeed, because the US will veto it,” said Abu Ahmed. “We are already angry at the US because they use blind double standards when it comes to Israel.” Instead of exerting pressure on Israel to reach a peace deal, “the US covers up for Israeli crimes,” he said.

Obama’s speech to the UN this week hardened a sense of betrayal in the West Bank. He applauded the quest this year for self-determination and against oppression in the Middle East but said there could be “no shortcut” to Palestinian statehood and made no mention of 44 years of Israeli occupation.

Dozens of protesters burned pictures of Obama in Ramallah on Thursday and held signs saying “Obama the hypocrite”.

“We are not against the Americans, they are against us,” said Qaddura Fares, a former member of the Palestinian legislature. “When Obama made his Cairo speech [in June 2009], he spoke like a prophet. He has totally changed.”

Despite the flag-waving and cheering in the West Bank, Abbas is unlikely to travel back to Ramallah next week as the head of the world’s newest state. The Palestinian delegation said on Wednesday it would give the security council “some time” to study its application for full membership. The undefined period could stretch into months.

The double disappointment of a lack of progress on the world stage and the lack of change on the ground could lead not only to a political backlash against Abbas but an outpouring of frustration in Palestinian towns and villages.

“Abbas told his people that the policy of peace, not the path of resistance, would lead to a state,” said analyst Hani al-Masri. If he fails to secure results, people may feel there is no choice but to return to resistance. “The intifada [uprising] will come. Not fast, but eventually.”

Palestinians Declare Independence from U.S.: nationalinterest

Henry Siegman | September 22, 2011
The outpouring of commentary on the request that Palestinians intend to submit to the United Nations to affirm their right to statehood within the pre-1967 borders has fallen into two categories. The first supports the Israeli and American view that sees the Palestinian initiative as endangering the Oslo Accords and prospects for a two-state solution. As described by President Obama, it is a “distraction” from the serious business at hand. The second view supports the Palestinian right to apply for UN membership, or for non-member-state observer status, and rejects the notion that this would set back the peace process.

However, both approaches believe that UN action will not result in any practical changes on the ground and that Palestinians will have to return to the U.S.-orchestrated “peace process” to achieve a two-state solution. And both have in common a profound misreading of the significance of the Palestinian initiative, which is likely to be transformative, changing the rules of the game for Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking.

According to the prevailing rules, every aspect of the Palestinians’ existence depends on Israel. Whether Palestinians can travel from town to town within the areas to which they are restricted, open a new business venture, see their homes demolished by an Israeli bulldozer—indeed whether they will live or die—are Israeli decisions, often made by armed Israeli eighteen-year-olds just out of high school.

The Oslo Accords, requiring as they do that Israel withdraw its occupation in stages from the West Bank, were intended to change that reality. But Oslo was quickly undermined by Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who declared—“unilaterally”—that the dates established in the accords for the withdrawals are not “holy” and can be ignored by Israel. Furthermore, as noted by Uri Savir, who headed Israel’s Foreign Ministry at the time, Rabin had no intention of returning the Jordan Valley or of sharing Jerusalem. (He might well have changed his views on these issues, as he did on some others, had he not been assassinated by a settler.)

Although the Oslo Accords did not mention a Palestinian state, statehood was the goal implicit in the agreement’s terms and the permanent-status issues slated for negotiations between the parties. But the peace process overseen by the United States was based on an unstated principle that fatally undermined the achievement of a Palestinian state: that any change in the Palestinians’ status as a people under Israel’s occupation depended entirely on Israel’s consent. This effectively excluded everyone other than the occupiers from a role in deciding the Palestinians’ fate. The UN, which was established to assure compliance with international law and to facilitate the self-determination of peoples living under colonial domination, was shunted aside. Above all, this principle excluded the Palestinian people themselves.

To be sure, President Obama recently proposed that negotiations begin at the 1967 lines, with territorial swaps. What he failed to say is that if the parties cannot reach agreement on the swaps, the lines will be drawn by the Security Council. Indeed, he said the opposite—that peace terms cannot be imposed on Israel. His proposal therefore changed nothing. Netanyahu can continue to make demands he knows no Palestinian leader can accept, and the occupation persists.

The real meaning of the Palestinians’ decision to defy the United States is that they will no longer accept their occupier’s role in their quest for statehood. They demand national self-determination as a right—indeed, as a “peremptory norm” that in international law takes precedence over all other considerations—and not as an act of charity by their occupiers.

The American insistence on aborting the Palestinians’ initiative and returning them to a peace process in which their fate remains dependent on Israel is shameful. It stains America’s honor. It will not succeed, for the Palestinian decision to defy the American demand is itself a declaration of independence; that genie cannot be returned to the bottle.

On the ground, little will be changed by a UN affirmation of Palestinian statehood. But nothing will be the same again in the Palestinians’ dealings with Israel and the United States. The notion that Israel will decide where negotiations begin and what parts of Palestine it will keep is history. It is sad that America, of all nations, has failed to understand this simple truth, even in the wake of the Arab Spring. Sadder still is Israel’s continuing blindness not only to the injustice but also to the impossibility of its colonial dream. That dream may now turn into a nightmare as the international community increasingly sees Israel as a rogue state and treats it accordingly.

Henry Siegman is President of the U.S./Middle East Project. He is also a non-resident research professor at the Sir Joseph Hotung Middle East Program, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.

IDF braces for mass West Bank protests ahead of Palestinian statehood bid at UN: Haaretz

While the IDF has no indication that violence will erupt, it worries that PA President Mahmoud Abbas’ address at the UN General Assembly today could inflame tempers

The Israel Defense Forces have bolstered troop levels in the West Bank against the possibility of widespread disturbances today. But the Central Command’s assessment is that the Palestinian Authority security services will continue to prevent demonstrators from reaching areas under Israeli control.

While the IDF has no indication that violence will erupt, it worries that events in New York – where PA President Mahmoud Abbas will address the UN General Assembly today and formally apply for UN recognition as a state – could inflame tempers, as could Friday prayers in the mosques.

An attack by settlers on Palestinians could also spark wider disturbances, and this possibility is currently one of the IDF’s chief concerns.

“We’re in touch with rabbis and public leaders, but there’s no one to pick up the phone to,” explained a senior Central Command officer.

The Islamist Hamas organization has declared today a “day of rage,” but the IDF believes Hamas lacks the infrastructure to foment widespread disturbances in the West Bank.

“The PA leadership and its security forces have no interest in the protests getting out of control,” the Central Command officer said, and thus far, security coordination with the PA has been excellent. “But the question is whether they can control and contain a large outbreak.”

The IDF has stationed five additional regular army battalions in the West Bank to be available if needed. Early next week, it will decide whether to keep them there or return them to their regularly scheduled training. If violence does break out, the army has plans to rapidly bring in another 13 battalions, mostly from the reserves.

The IDF has been trying to monitor social networks like Facebook and Twitter in hopes of getting advance warning of plans for mass demonstrations that could turn violent, but has recently concluded that the information gleaned thereby is unreliable, as many demonstrations announced on these media either never take place or prove to attract far fewer people in reality than they did online.

The police will also be on high alert today, especially in Jerusalem and the north and along the “seam” between Israel and the West Bank. The peak alert times will be after Friday prayers and during Abbas’ speech, which is scheduled for 6 P.M. Israel time.

EDITOR: You have to laugh, but it is not funny

This item comes from the horse’s mouth, Avigdor Lieberman, the nightclub goon who poses as Israel’s foreign minister. The man is a fascist and racist, but when did this stop any Israeli politician?

Israel’s FM tells Canadians: Palestinians not ready for statehood: Haaretz

In West Coast leg of a three-day tour to Canada, Avigdor Lieberman says a Palestinian state would resemble Arab countries currently experiencing tumultuous changes and lack of security.

VANCOUVER, British Columbia – On the eve of the historic United Nations session on the declaration of a Palestinian state, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has said the Palestinians are not ready to establish their own country. “I recommend that they wait until we see there is a single security apparatus and not small armed groups,” he said.

If a Palestinian state is established, its future will be the same as those Muslim states now experiencing internal revolutions, said Lieberman. “The situation in the countries of the Arab world surrounding Israel is even worse than before. In Tunisia, Egypt and Syria there is no economy, no tourism and no security. This is what will also happen with the Palestinians.”

The foreign minister made the comments yesterday as he completed a three-day visit to Canada, which he concluded in Vancouver with a visit to the city’s Russian-Jewish community.

The Palestinian Authority is not stable economically, has no middle class, there are large numbers of poor and about 10% are rich – and it lacks political stability, said Lieberman. A single Palestinian entity is only virtual, he said. “The PA is divided between Hamasstan in Gaza and Fatah in Judea and Samaria. When we come to Abu Mazen [Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas] over complaints on the continued firing from Gaza, he says he is not in control there, he is not the ruler and does not represent them. But when he goes to the United Nations he says he represents all the Palestinians.”

Lieberman said he hopes Israel will have enough courage to change how it deals with the firing from Gaza. “There is no other country in the world that displays patience like Israel does,” he said.

As to where Israel will draw the line, Lieberman said, “Israel will not give up anything. In order to build political relationships, you need proper economics and security. Security and economics are a function of democracy. Democracy and Islam are two contradictory things.”

A few dozen people, Israelis and Canadians, demonstrated against Lieberman outside the hall where he spoke.

Israel’s militarism escaped social turmoil unscathed: Haaretz

If the IDF is still above everything, standing alone beyond the line of what is and isn’t allowed, then perhaps the “civic discourse” was not really renewed this summer, as we believed. Maybe it’s just the same old and distorted discourse, in uniform.

By Yossi Sarid
Does only one red line pass between two black points? Recently, at least two have been clearly identified.

The first line is drawn at the entrance to City Hall. There, 150 tent dwellers, protesting their removal from the boulevard, stormed the doors. Until then the protest had been conducted peacefully without shrieking or outbursts, and suddenly, well brought up Tel Aviv children began shouting like lunatics and even pushing a little. The district police commander announced “a thick red line that has been crossed today,” and his subordinates beat, dragged, handcuffed and threw rioters into the police van. Thus will be done to people who don’t know the limits.

On the same day, but not in the same country, another red line was drawn. “Extreme right-wing elements” broke into an Israel Defense Forces base and destroyed vehicles and military equipment. And if 40 demonstrators were arrested near City Hall, nobody was arrested near the settlement of Beit El. The police are still seeking in order not to find. The commanders described the event as “crossing a red line” or “an escalation.” Whenever the chariot of Israel and its horsemen are harmed, the shock is profound: Just don’t touch my messiahs.

Amidst this commotion, a local columnist published a strong article. “Anyone who harms the IDF is not a Zionist,” she wrote, expressing what many people feel: The IDF is sacred, and damaging its property is sacrilegious; the IDF is the last bastion of Zionism, and any slashed jeep tire is an ugly slash on its face.

Burning mosques and crops – that’s something that shouldn’t be done, but it still is not a denial of the Zionist principle: The land is ours, the sky is ours. The entire land, and the entire sky too. To train dogs to smell Arabs from a distance – like the white dog from Mississippi that was trained to identify blacks and to bite them – is still Zionism for beginners. To summon members of Rabbi Meir Kahane’s Jewish Defense League from all over the world to come to the aid of the settler nation is a necessity not to be condemned, in an illuminating article. An article that sets off a red light. Settlers, although they have erred at times, are good Zionists, as long as they know how to differentiate between IDF property and an Arab.

Building a mausoleum in honor of a murderer, bringing pupils on a pilgrimage to it – that’s Zionism. Cleansing half a city of its residents – evict and inherit – that’s also Zionism. Building a cultural center on the living ruins of a city that has become a prostitute – Zionism at its best. And why invite mercenaries from Tel Aviv if the comedy team of Ruby and Silvan is willing to perform there every evening free of charge – two famous participants from the game show “Who wants to be president, and who wants to be prime minister?”

Today there is no longer any need to demolish a building in Amona or Migrona, in Atzmona or Tzalmona, in Almona or Palmona to prompt the phalangists to leave at dawn to search for prey. Veteran reservists returning from operational activity in the territories are breaking their silence and reporting routine attacks by settlers, which have intensified in recent days and in anticipation of the coming days. The golem arises every day and wreaks destruction, although it’s not clear who is the golem and who is its creator. “Senior IDF and Shin Bet security services officials are more concerned about the Jews on the West Bank than about the Arabs,” wrote newspapers this week, citing defense sources.

If there is already a malicious “price tag” in place, then it’s preferable that the hilltop jugend “collect payment” from the army at its bases rather than from the farmer on his way to his olives, or from the pupil on his way to school. That way it will be more logical and less dangerous.

And if the IDF is still above everything, standing alone beyond the red line of what is and isn’t allowed, then perhaps the “civic discourse” was not really renewed this summer, as we believed. Maybe it’s just the same old and distorted discourse, in uniform.

Harper’s undermining of UN bid goes against Canadian public opinion: The Electronic Intifada

Yves Engler,  22 September 2011

Today the Palestinian Authority is pursuing a state on 22 percent of the Palestinians’ historic homeland. (Ryan Rodrick Beiler )
How pro-Israel is Stephen Harper’s government?

It is so pro-Israel that Canada will vote in the United Nations against recognizing a Palestinian state on only half the land that Canadian diplomats promised Palestine sixty years ago.

It is so pro-Israel that it will support illegal settlers and the extreme right in blocking this small step towards righting a historical wrong despite Canada spending tens of millions of dollars on training Palestinian police and other “state-building” measures.

It is so pro-Israel that it will do this despite a higher percentage of Canadians supporting the Palestinian Authority’s bid for UN membership than voted Conservative in the last election.

Two and a half months ago Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird criticized the PA’s statehood bid, labeling it a “public relations” exercise. On Friday Harper reiterated this position. “Canada views the action as very regrettable and we will be opposing it,” the Prime Minister said.

Canada is one of only a half dozen countries that has publicly come out against the Palestinian Authority’s UN bid and the Conservatives are lobbying “like-minded” countries to do the same (despite the PA sending high-profile emissary, Hanan Ashrawi, to Ottawa to blunt such a move).

On June 24, The New York Times reported, “Canada … has been lobbying smaller countries to tell the Palestinians that they will not vote with them in September.” Canada has been spending this country’s diminishing diplomatic currency trying to cobble together a group of countries that will vote against the PA to spare the US and Israel from complete isolation. Notwithstanding Canadian-Israeli-American efforts, the PA expects the backing of more than two-thirds of UN member states, with 120 to 140 countries already in favor.

Contradicting Canadian wishes
Isolated diplomatically, Harper is also contradicting the wishes of Canadians. A recent GlobeScan-BBC poll of 20,446 people in 19 countries found that 46 percent of Canadians support the PA statehood bid while only 25 percent oppose it. Apparently, there are more Canadians in favor of the Palestinians than voted for the Conservatives.

Whatever happens at the UN assembly in the coming days it will not bring about a viable Palestinian state in the near future. A Palestinian diplomatic victory will not end the blockade of Gaza, bring down the Israel’s wall or remove the 500,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem (let alone eliminate the institutional discrimination faced by Palestinian citizens of Israel).

While UN recognition may improve the PA’s ability to pursue Israeli officials through the International Criminal Court, taking the issue to the UN is a largely symbolic move pursued by a PA widely discredited for collaborating with Israel’s occupation. There are questions about whether the statehood bid might weaken Palestinian refugees’ (mostly expelled by Zionist forces in 1948) right of return and some have criticized the statehood bid for distracting attention from the growing international boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel.

Harper siding with Hamas?
For its part, the winner of the most recent Palestinian election, Hamas, has rejected the “tactical” UN bid. Oddly, on the statehood bid the Conservatives find themselves in agreement with Hamas, an organization they’ve worked feverishly to undermine since they won Palestinian legislative elections in 2006. In fact, on this issue the Conservatives are up against a regime they’ve helped maintain in power (despite the expiration of PA President Mahmoud Abbas’ mandate in January 2009).

The Harper government has spent upwards of $100 million to build a Palestinian security force to protect Abbas from his main rival, Hamas. For the past four years Canada has been heavily invested in training a Palestinian security force designed “to ensure that the PA maintains control of the West Bank against Hamas,” as Canadian ambassador to Israel Jon Allen was quoted as saying by the Canadian Jewish News.

Trained by Canada, Britain and the US, all the Palestinian security recruits are vetted by Israel’s internal intelligence agency, the Shin Bet. (“We don’t provide anything to the Palestinians,” noted former US mission head General Keith Dayton, “unless it has been thoroughly coordinated with the state of Israel and they agree to it.”) Abbas has used this Canadian-trained and funded force to pursue his political adversaries in the West Bank.

The Harper government has chosen to line up against domestic opinion, most of the world and their PA allies on recognizing a Palestinian state half the size of the one Canadian diplomats endorsed sixty years ago. When Britain turned its control over Palestine to the UN after the Second World War, Canadian officials played an important role in the move to divide the territory into Jewish and Palestinian states. Some consider Canada’s representative on the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine, Supreme Court Justice Ivan C. Rand, the lead author of the majority report in support of partitioning the area into ethnically segregated states. Additionally, External Affairs Undersecretary Lester Pearson pushed partition in two different UN committees dealing with the issue.

Despite making up only a third of the population, under the UN partition plan Jews received most of the territory. Canadian diplomats pushed a plan that gave the Zionist state 55 percent of Palestine, even though the Jewish population owned less than seven percent of the land. The Palestinian state was supposed to be on the remaining 45 percent of the territory (Israel grabbed 24 percent more land during the 1948 war).

Today the PA is pursuing a state on 22 percent of the Palestinians’ historic homeland. The least we can ask of our government is to support this move.

Yves Engler is the author of the 2010 book Canada and Israel: Building Apartheid. His most recent (with Bianca Mugyenyi) is Stop Signs: Cars and Capitalism on the road to Economic, Social and Ecological Decay. For more information, see yvesengler.com

Netanyahu doesn’t miss an opportunity to avoid peace: Haaretz

Even Bibi’s most brilliant speech won’t change the bitter fact that he is trying to fool everyone, yet the country he rules is still on the ropes.
By Yoel Marcus
The comment by Israeli statesman Abba Eban, that the Palestinians never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity, was so popular – and not only in Israel – that even U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger quoted it often. Now the joke is on us. Israel is the one that doesn’t miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity for an agreement. About two years ago, in the Bar-Ilan speech, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared two states for two peoples. But since then he has not lifted a finger to make it come true. No trick, no speech, no maneuver can change the facts: that he is the prime minister with the greatest parliamentary support, and there is no decision for compromise that he could not have passed in the Knesset.

Had he wanted to reach an agreement he could have done so in spite of the difficulties and the obstacles. But he has a 100-year-old father who wouldn’t forgive him for giving up Greater Israel, a wife who doesn’t make the road to an agreement easy for him, and a political milieu that opposes decisions that involve giving up territories.

Bibi Netanyahu speaks brilliant American English, but what difference does that make when he is facing a rival whose English is not as good, but who works correctly. Under the noses of our many ambassadors in South America, for example, most Latin countries have promised their support for the Palestinian bid to be recognized as a state by the United Nations. How did Israel wind up in a situation in which it depends on Gabon to rescue Obama from casting a veto in the UN Security Council?

The Palestinian maneuver didn’t fall from the sky. It could have been handled before it was too late. Is it possible that we didn’t see the revolution against us taking place in the world? Is it possible that we didn’t see that Palestinian Authority Chairman Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas ) was pushing us to the wall, and now in Washington he still has half a bullet in his barrel? While we are busy distributing gas masks and preparing for the possibility that missiles will fall on Tel Aviv too, in Ramallah they are preparing for a normal civic life.

And what will be our reaction if Abu Mazen’s move in the United Nations succeeds? Will we impose sanctions on him? Will we refuse to transfer the taxes that we collect for the Palestinian Authority? Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman denies reports that he proposed sanctions if the PA joins the UN as a state. But there is no need for him to open his mouth in order for us to know what he is aiming at and what he really wants. He has a deputy minister named Danny Ayalon who makes us break out in a sweat every time he speaks. This is the man who humiliated the Turkish ambassador and seated him on a low sofa. Lieberman can continue to deny it, but the thoughts about sanctions are etched between his beard and his mustache.

During Netanyahu’s term we lost the ability to propose smart solutions, to weigh the problems facing us with a long view. Instead of Jewish wisdom and moderation we have gained a reputation for being the regional bully, and that’s what is leading us to international isolation. While Israel has never really rejected Ben-Gurion’s disdainful attitude toward the United Nations, which he called “Um-Shmum” (Um is the Hebrew acronym for the UN ), the leaders of the PA are the ones who have gained international empathy for their case, and even use that empathy as a diplomatic tool to promote it.

Because the initiative to allow the State of Palestine to join the United Nations is supported by most of the member nations, Bibi is in a panic. As is his custom in such situations, he decided, in his role as Superman, to fly to Washington in order to argue that only countries can be UN members. He torpedoed President Shimon Peres’ idea of representing Israel in the General Assembly, and even made sure that Defense Minister Ehud Barak, who in such situations “happens” to find himself in Washington, returned to Israel. Bibi likes to be a soloist in such situations. What did Prime Minister Menahem Begin used to say to Chief of Staff Rafael Eitan when he would fly to Washington? “Take care of the country until I get back.”

The UN General Assembly is not the U.S. Congress. Bibi won’t get a standing ovation there. A large percentage of the representatives are Muslim, but even the Christians aren’t exactly crazy about us. U.S. President Barack Obama – who recently discovered that in several important election districts Republican candidates are defeating Democratic ones among the Jewish electorate – is fighting tooth and nail for a second term. He will try until the last moment to refrain from casting a veto, and he may succeed. The Security Council without a veto may open a time slot for beginning negotiations in the region.

Even Bibi’s most brilliant speech won’t change the bitter fact that he is trying to fool everyone, yet the country he rules is still on the ropes.

Mid-East media critical of Obama UN speech: BBC

The Middle East media have little sympathy for US President Barack Obama’s speech at the UN General Assembly on Wednesday, in which he said that a Palestinian state could be achieved only through talks with Israel, not through a UN vote.

The speech received less attention on the pan-Arab satellite television channels, which focused on Syria, but most press commentators suggest Mr Obama spoke with an eye to the Jewish vote in the next US presidential election.

The prevailing sentiment in the Palestinian press is one of anger and in Israel of resignation at the president’s speech, with the exception of one pro-government Israeli paper which gives a conditional welcome to Mr Obama’s “warm words”.

Other Arab papers accuse Mr Obama of reneging on his past pledges to support Palestinian statehood, and even accuse him of declaring “open war on all Arabs”.

HEADLINE IN PALESTINIAN-AUTHORITY OWNED AL-HAYAT AL-JADIDAH

Obama opposes the Palestinian quest and completely endorses the Israeli position – this was worst ever speech by a US president on the Palestinian cause.

ADIL ABD-AL-RAHMAN IN AL-HAYAT AL-JADIDAH

Obama has politically fallen to the lowest ebb. He is no longer respected even if he is leading the US Empire. He also wittingly and unwittingly undermined the US role as the sponsor of the peace process… Obama’s interest lies with the Jews, Aipac [Israeli lobby group], and Israeli occupation and aggression.

TALAL AWKAL IN PRO-FATAH PALESTINIAN AL-AYYAM

Obama … was wooing the American Jews who have to reward him for his unprecedented loyalty to the Israeli policies and narrative.

DR YUSUF AL-LIDDAWI IN HAMAS-AFFILIATED FILASTIN

The speech completely exposes the US and Western positions on Palestinian state, and their false vows and guarantees. They are not with us but with Israel.

NAHUM BARNEA AND SHIMON SCHIFFER IN ISRAEL’S MASS CIRCULATION YEDIOT AHARONOT

Obama not only adopted the Israeli arguments against recognition of a Palestinian state by the UN, but also adopted the basic Israeli narrative: Israel is a small country, surrounded by enemies… Obama is a politician who wants to be re-elected… Palestine out, the Jewish voters in America in.

NADAV EYAL IN ISRAEL’s CENTRIST MA’ARIV

And at the end of the day not much was left. The American line has become the Israeli line and vice versa, but nothing was really clarified: the vote at the Security Council still hangs on the generosity of Gabon and Bosnia. The casting of a US veto against the Palestinian proposal will still be considered a failure of US diplomacy and the Israeli position. The Palestinians can still go to the General Assembly and get a resolution recognising them as an observer state with European support… Yesterday we discovered what we already knew: America is with us, but this is regrettably not everything.

AKIVA ELDAR IN ISRAEL’S LIBERAL HA’ARETZ

To realise the extent to which the lame-duck candidate has regressed from the positions of the new and promising President Obama, the speech should be compared to the one he gave in Cairo in 2009. At that time he pledged “personally to pursue this outcome with all the patience that the task requires”, and said “it is time for all of us to live up to our responsibilities”. Yesterday he sent the occupied and the occupier, the strong and the weak, to solve the core issues on their own.

EITAN HABER IN ISRAEL’S YEDIOT AHARONOT

We saw before us a Barack Obama who seemed to want to send the Israelis, the Palestinians and the rest of the world packing with a juicy curse like: “all of you go to hell!”… a desperate US president.

AVRAHAM BEN-ZVI IN PRO-NETANYAHU YISRAEL HAYOM

The America of September 2011 is sunk deep in the turmoil of the elections when Republican candidates miss no chance to attack the White House for its chilly attitude to Israel… The fact that Congress recently adopted legislation initiatives intended to punish both the Palestinian Authority and the UN for the unilateral move also contributed to the warm words of the US captain toward the Israeli ally… Add to this the fact that the polls point to significant erosion in US Jewish support for Obama… The question is of course whether this current approach will not sink into the abyss of oblivion if Obama wins a renewed mandate in November 2012.

BASIM AL-JISR IN LONDON-BASED AL-SHARQ AL-AWSAT

Why is it that the USA is opposed to a request by the Palestinian Authority to join the UN when the US president himself has recognised a bid for Palestinian state in principle…?! How and why is he delaying the Palestinians’ efforts to join the UN?

MUHAMMAD BARAKAT IN EGYPT’S AL-AKHBAR

Obama enters this battle with a total bias towards Israel and with his eyes set on the forthcoming US presidential elections. The elections have now become his primary concern and will remain so during the coming period.

ABD-AL-AL AL-BAQURI IN EGYPT’S AL-JUMHURIYAH

Obama came with promises and pledges which Arab ears were yearning to hear… This month betrayal was manifest when Obama asked Palestinians to backtrack and return to negotiations.

AL-SAYYID ZAHRAH IN BAHRAIN’S AKHBAR-AL-KHALEEJ

The speech was Zionist-Israeli par excellence to the extent that he did not leave anything new for the prime minister of the Zionist enemy to add when he speaks at the General Assembly… Obama’s speech is an open and direct declaration of that war; a declaration of war not only against the Palestinian people but against all Arabs.

BBC Monitoring selects and translates news from radio, television, press, news agencies and the internet from 150 countries in more than 70 languages. It is based in Caversham, UK, and has several bureaux abroad.