How the US and Israeli justice systems whitewash state crimes: Guardian CiF

Courts are supposed to check the abuse of executive power, not cravenly serve it. But in the US and Israel, that is now the case

• 
• • Glenn Greenwald

What’s happening here? All the signs show that the “international community,” meaning the western powers and the U.S. in the lead, seem to have reconciled themselves with Israel’s talk of a military strike – and now they are pushing Netanyahu to stand by his rhetoric and send his bombers to their targets in Iran. In general terms, the market has already accounted for the Israeli strike in its assessment of the risk of the undertaking, and it is now waiting for the expectation to be realized.

The international community created the ideological grounds for an Israeli operation against Iran. It has ceased to bother Netanyahu about issues related to the occupation, the settlements and the Palestinian state, which has made it possible for Netanyahu to focus on preparing the Israel Defense Forces and Israeli public opinion for a war with Iran. The “nuclear talks” between the powers and Iran were the epitome of diplomatic impotence. Economic sanctions on Iran did not stop the nuclear project, and maybe even caused its acceleration, but they are likely to limit Iran in a long-term war against Israel.

U.S. President Barack Obama is considered a sharp opponent to the idea of an Israeli strike against Iran. But his actions say the opposite. Obama once again is leading from behind, as he did in Libya and Syria. This is his doctrine: Instead of complicating America with a new Mideast war, he is outsourcing the fighting to an external agent. In Libya, it was the French, the British and the anti-Gadhafi rebels. In Syria, it is the Free Syrian Army. In Iran, it is the IDF.

If Israel does strike, the planes and the arms will be made in the U.S.A. The Home Front Command will receive early warnings of missile landings from the American radar in the Negev in southern Israel. The financial aid and state support for the day after the strike will probably also come from Washington.

The public position of the U.S. regime is vague. Officials talk about the “unity of the international community,” “tough sanctions” and say things that they will use all available options to stop Iran developing nuclear weapons (as Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta did on his recent visit to Israel). There is no warning here against an Israeli strike. No one is saying, “If you strike, you will put Israel-U.S. relations at risk, and you will remain isolated.”

Obama was much more aggressive when he asked Netanyahu to freeze settlement construction – something that has no effect whatsoever on the well-being of Americans. And now, when regional stability and the fate of the world economy are at stake, the Obama administration makes do with a feeble request that Israel wait.

There is logic behind this apparent American weakness: Obama needs the support of America’s Jews in the upcoming presidential elections, hence his reluctance to enter into a diplomatic confrontation with the Israeli Prime Minister. According to this explanation, Obama must catch up with Republican rival Mitt Romney, who came to be photographed next to Netanyahu in Jerusalem. Obama despises Netanyahu, but he has put aside his feelings at least until the elections are over in November. This is one of the reasons that Netanyahu and Barak want to attack in the coming weeks, when Obama will be forced to support Israel, because of his political needs at home.

But even if Obama is held back by the campaign, his restraints do not put his European peers under any kind of obligation. Angel Merkel, David Cameron, and Francoise Hollande dislike Netanyahu as much as Obama does, but in Germany, Britain and France there is no strong lobby for Israel. And even so, the Europeans are silent. During Netanyahu’s first term as Prime Minister, European leaders visited Israel often in order to protest the stalemate in the peace process and settlement expansion. And now? The two most important guests that have visited Jerusalem in the last two weeks were the Australian foreign minister and the prime minister of Tonga. Friendly nations, but ones that lack influence in matters of war and peace. European leaders and foreign ministers are busy with the Economic crisis and vacance.

For Americans and Europeans who are leading a hard line against Iran, it is difficult to present a position that will be interpreted as a defense of the Iranian nuclear program in the face of an Israeli strike. But they can demonstrate diplomatic activity, flood Israel and Iran with visits, brief the press, and maybe even posit creative solutions to calm the crisis. Their reluctance and their silence imply their support for an attack by Netanyahu. If a war breaks out, they will do everything to minimize any ensuing damage, to reach a cease-fire, and to calm the oil market.

And maybe they just think that Netanyahu is bluffing. Maybe, much as they did not believe his pronouncements over a future Palestinian state, they think that his talk of a strike is nothing more than empty words.

Rights groups: IDF catching African migrants inside Egyptian territory: Haaretz

According to a report released by Israeli human-rights organizations, IDF soldiers have been intercepting migrants before they reach the border, then turning them over to Egyptian forces.
By The Associated Press     and Gili Cohen, Aug.10, 2012

Israel has been sending soldiers into Egypt’s Sinai desert to stop African migrants before they reach the border, handing them over to Egyptian forces, human rights groups charged in a report released Friday.

The report, published by Amnesty International and several Israeli groups, including Hotline for Migrant Workers and the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, said that Israeli soldiers have entered several hundred meters into Egyptian territory to catch migrants and hand them over to Egyptian police.

The report cited an Israeli soldier and several migrants whose relatives were seized by Israeli soldiers inside Egyptian territory.

In an affidavit included in the report, the Israeli reserve soldier said his unit was posted in June several hundred meters inside Egypt to stop African migrants. The soldier described three incidents in which his unit dealt with African migrants on the Egyptian side. On two occasions Israeli soldiers marched the groups several kilometers along the border on the Egyptian side and handed them over to Egyptian police.

In the other, he wrote that soldiers guarded a group of about 40 migrants, including women and a baby, for two days before the migrants “dispersed,” and most of them crossed into Israel.

The soldier’s name is blacked out. A Tel Aviv attorney countersigned the statement.

The report also cites migrants who succeeded in making it to Israel but say their relatives were in groups that were intercepted and handed over by force to Egyptian authorities.

The three rights group called on Israel to stop the practice, saying it was aimed at preventing migrants from entering Israel, where the government would then have to consider their claims of asylum. The groups said repatriating asylum seekers who might be in danger in their home countries is a violation of international law.

“Israel is responsible for the action or omissions of its soldiers, whether they are located in Israeli or Egyptian territory,” the report said. It added that they fear that “victims of physical and sexual abuse by traffickers in the Sinai desert may be among those returned.”

Asked about the report, the IDF Spokesman’s Office confirmed that it was detaining Africans attempting to enter the country, but did not specify on which side of the border its activities took place.

“The IDF operates in the area of the border in a place where the fence’s construction has not been completed, in order to prevent penetration of hostile terrorist activity, as well as criminal smuggling and illegal border infiltration,” the IDF Spokesman’s Office said.

“In recent weeks IDF forces have been forced, a number of times, to prevent entrance of infiltrators, during attempts to illegally enter the State of Israel’s territory, until the arrival of Egyptian forces which took the infiltrators. IDF forces’ activities are conducted according to the law,” it added.

A senior Egyptian military official in Sinai denied that any Israeli soldiers had entered Egypt to chase migrants. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the press.

The use of Israeli soldiers just inside Egyptian territory, with apparent Egyptian consent, would be a startling move, given widespread anti-Israeli sentiment among Egyptians and the strong sensitivities over Sinai, which Israel captured in the 1967 war and returned after the 1979 peace deal between the two countries.

The report came as tension rose over the security situation in the lawless desert, where Islamic militants recently killed 16 Egyptian soldiers, stole armored vehicles and drove into Israel, apparently to carry out a further attack until they were struck by Israeli forces. Egypt has deployed additional troops in the peninsula near the borders with Israel and Gaza in an operation to stamp out militant groups.

Israel believes that most of the migrants are seeking work, not asylum, and has recently begun deporting migrants from South Sudan, giving financial incentives to those who agree to leave voluntarily. South Sudan, which gained independence a year ago, has friendly relations with Israel.

The rights groups’ report coincides with a sharp drop in the number of migrants crossing the border. In July, Israel said 248 migrants entered, less than half the average. The report quotes Egyptian newspapers saying that 514 migrants were caught in July, several hundred more than usual.

Most African migrants reaching Israel come from Sudan, South Sudan and Eritrea. About 60,000 migrants are already in Israel, and some Israelis have expressed concern that the influx could harm the Jewish character of the state.

President Barack Obama recently received a new National Intelligence Estimate report on the Iranian nuclear program, which shares Israel’s view that Iran has made surprising, significant progress toward military nuclear capability, Western diplomats and Israeli officials have informed Haaretz.

This NIE report on Iran was supposed to have been submitted to Obama a few weeks ago, but it was revised to include new and alarming intelligence information about military components of Iran’s nuclear program. Haaretz has learned that the report’s conclusions are quite similar to those drawn by Israel’s intelligence community.

The NIE report contends that Iran has made surprising, notable progress in the research and development of key components of its military nuclear program.

The NIE reports are the most important assessments compiled by the U.S. intelligence community and are submitted to the president and other top governmental officials. This NIE report was compiled by an inter-departmental team headed by director of National Intelligence James Clapper. Its contents articulate the views of American intelligence agencies.

In 2007, the NIE report on the Iranian issue included a non-classified abstract, but this time the White House decided to keep the new report’s contents under wraps. There has been no clear disclosure of the very existence of the report and its submission to Obama.

The 2007 NIE report on Iran stunned Israel, many Western countries and even some White House officials. The report maintained that Iran suspended its military nuclear program in 2003, and that there was no conclusive proof of its revival.

Serious blow

The report’s conclusions delivered a serious blow to the international campaign waged by Israel against the Iranian nuclear program. Israeli officials reasoned at the time that the NIE report’s conclusions were influenced by the failure of the U.S. intelligence community with regard to rumors of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq’s arsenal. Prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, American intelligence analysts concluded that Saddam Hussein had continued his efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction; that assessment spurred President George W. Bush’s war plans.

But after American forces occupied Iraq, it became clear that Saddam had suspended his nuclear program, as well as his chemical weapons program. This intelligence failure sparked public criticism in the U.S.

Israeli officials reasoned in 2007 that American intelligence and defense officials were concerned that Bush would launch a war against Iran, concurrent to U.S. military efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, and so these U.S. intelligence experts concluded in the 2007 document that a drive by Tehran to develop nuclear weapons could not be conclusively demonstrated.

In response to inquiries, Tommy Vietor, the Spokesman for the National Security Council at the White House said that he “is not going to comment on intelligence matters like this.”

Israel Defense Forces officials recently told the Knesset that roughly 300 Israelis would die as a the result of a concentrated Iranian missile attack. The number is lower than Defense Minister Ehud Barak’s estimation of 500. It was high, however, enough to spark a Facebook campaign.

The new campaign, launched by the strategic communication firm Blue Collar, is aimed at reminding people that 300 is not only a number.

“We have decided on a daily post which exemplifies exactly how much is 300 dead,” Shahar Cotani, a campaigner and designer at Blue Collar wrote. “No matter which way you turn it, we are left with too many,” he added. “300 killed are 150 couples. 300 killed are 9 kindergartens.”

The image they have posted on Wednesday illustrates the calculation that 300 people killed are 2.5 people per member of Knesset, or nine people for every member of the Israeli cabinet.

The objection to an Israeli strike on Iran is considered almost ancient in the history of the World Wide Web. The webpage armagadon.org.il was founded in 2008, demanding that such a strike be avoided.

In 2012, Roni Edry and Michal Tamir’s Facebook campaign under the slogan “Iranians, we love you,” created a stir across the world, and even Iranians responded to the initiative, which inspired numerous other Facebook pages.

One of the largest groups on Facebook against striking Iran, “The people say no to striking Iran,” has over 2,600 members.

The idea, Cotani told Haaretz, was going around in his head for a few days after hearing the Defense Ministry’s estimate. “The numbers seem imaginary, but they are real. So I sat down and started investigating what three hundred is in terms my friends and I can grasp.”

Cotani said that this is not a commercial campaign, but a private initiative which the company has decided to endorse.

When asked about the alternative and whether the possibility of war should be considered when faced with a much greater potential damage in case a nuclear bomb would hit Israel, Cotani said that he and his friends feel that this estimation is unrealistic and baseless.

“I don’t have much to say. It’s true that in a nuclear strike there will be more [people killed]. The thing is that I don’t believe that any country today, and North Korea is an example, has any interest in starting a nuclear war. I don’t believe that even the madman from Tehran had any desire to go into such a place… It’s clear to all of the sides that a war is the worst option.”

Asked if the attempt to give the numbers a face might make it hard to have a rational discussion, Cotani answered those 300, or even thousands of victims of nuclear wars have names and faces. “They are human beings, flesh and blood, so the rational thing is to take it under consideration. The main reason for the campaign is the feeling today that the current leadership has forgotten that,” Cotani explained.

There is still a bruise under Ibrahim Bani Jaber’s left eye. The blows his brother Jawdat received to his right ear didn’t leave any marks, but they still make his head feel heavy. During our meeting at their home in the West Bank village of Akraba last week, they did not spend much time describing the fear and pain they felt when they were attacked. Instead, they spoke about the family’s sheep, that they had rushed to try and save that day, July 7, when they heard that settlers were attacking them.

The violent confrontation – between settlers from Itamar and Giva 777, and Palestinian residents of Akraba – was the worst such incident last month. But it was, nevertheless, merely part of the daily routine of assaults, attacks and incursions. It is only on rare occasions that these incidents become news. In most cases, if there is an investigation there is no indictment.

The map presented here shows the various assaults from last month alone, but it is not complete because it does not include Jerusalem. It is based on reports that have been cross-checked, and eyewitness testimonies from the Ta’ayush Arab Jewish partnership, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, and the B’Tselem: The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories. Haaretz will continue to follow events on a regular basis and the way they are handled by the authorities.

On Saturday July 7, when the Bani Jaber brothers were working in a wheat field, their brother Jihad – who was tending the sheep – telephoned them in a panic. “Settlers have arrived at the spring and they are slaughtering the sheep,” he shouted. The two brothers were some three kilometers from the spring and orchard, east of the village of Yanun. Jawdat, 44, went to speak with the soldiers who had accompanied the Palestinian farmers to their fields.

About six months ago, the Israel Defense Forces began revisiting plans for its dormant firing range there – which contains farmers’ fields, orchards and a number of homes belonging to families from Akraba. When it was decided to use the firing range again, the IDF began forbidding the Palestinians from going to their lands there. Giva 777, an offshoot of the Itamar settlement, is in that same firing range (known as 904A ). Dror Etkes, who has been tracking the way the settlers are gaining control of lands in the West Bank, states that most of Giva 777’s tended fields are on private Palestinian lands and in the firing range.

In the past few months, Rashed Fahmi – the head of the Yanun local council; the Israeli-Palestinian group Lohamim Leshalom (Fighting for Peace ); and Rabbis for Human Rights have been waging an exhausting and prolonged campaign to get the authorities to uphold the Palestinians’ rights to work their lands. The efforts bore bitter fruit: the Palestinians were permitted to go to their fields accompanied by soldiers for one week, between July 3 and July 10. Most of the wheat had already dried up by then.

Awaiting his death

Two military jeeps joined around 40 farmers who went to their fields that Saturday. After Jihad telephoned, at around 2 P.M., Jawdat told a soldier who spoke Arabic that something bad was happening at the spring. His impression was that the soldier brushed him off contemptuously. Meanwhile, Ibrahim, 42, hurried down the hill toward the spring. He was carrying a walking stick that he uses when tending the sheep. Jihad had already fled from the scene. Some of the sheep had wandered off. The settlers were standing among the sheep that remained and, according to Ibrahim, were hitting them. There were perhaps 10 or 20 settlers. “What have the sheep done to you?” Ibrahim shouted to them in Arabic.

At this point, other family members joined him. In the meantime, three or four soldiers arrived at the scene and prevented them from approaching the sheep. The number of settlers increased. Most of them were wearing white shirts. Two of them were, apparently, armed.

Ibrahim says he waved his stick to chase a settler away from a sheep. A soldier grabbed him, he says, and hit him with the butt of his rifle, below the eye. He fell and got up, bleeding. He saw the soldier taking out plastic handcuffs to detain him. Ibrahim ran away, “out of fear they would leave me to the settlers, who would beat me” – as had happened the previous month in Orif. There were shots, he says, as he began walking toward the south, bleeding.

The soldiers who prevented Jawdat from going to his brother handcuffed him and sat him forcibly on the ground. One soldier hit him with a baton on his ear, he says. Another soldier kicked him in the same place. As he was sitting with his hands secured behind his back, he saw some of the settlers approaching him and had the impression that one was holding an ax. At that point, he says, he shut his eyes and awaited his death.

Jawdat believes he was hit with the blunt edge of the ax and lost consciousness. Eyewitnesses say that some two hours elapsed before the soldiers would allow the residents to rescue him. He remembers waking when he was transferred from an Israeli ambulance to a Palestinian one, on his way to a hospital in Nablus.

The confrontation took place in a number of spaces. No one saw the entire picture. The Akraba residents who were being attacked had the feeling that the number of settlers was constantly growing, and that there were many dozens of them. The two sides began throwing stones at each other. The soldiers fired into the air, and stun grenades and tear gas were employed against the villagers who wanted to help their fellow residents. A fire broke out in the fields, either through arson or because of the stun and tear-gas grenades. One of the villagers was wounded by a tear-gas canister. Another was hit in the arm by a rubber-coated bullet, which left a deep wound and required hospitalization.

Another relative, Adwan Bani Jaber, 58, was also in the fields. “At a distance of some 800 meters from the orchard, I came across soldiers and a settler,” he says. “A soldier began shooting and I asked him, ‘Why are you shooting? This is my home.’ And he shouted, ‘Go back!’ I asked him: ‘Where should I go? This is my home.’ The soldier then told me there was no problem, and that there were no injured.”

Adwan says he suddenly felt a blow to his head. It was a stone which, he says, was thrown by a settler, in the presence of the soldiers.

The IDF spokesman said that the army had no reports about the injuries to the three family members. He says that on July 7, “a confrontation developed between a number of settlers and a number of Palestinians. A large number of Palestinians continued to arrive at the scene of the confrontation and there was stone throwing from both sides. The Palestinians started some conflagrations. The security forces began acting to disperse the confrontation and used means for the dispersal of demonstrations. During the incident, one settler and two Palestinians were lightly injured. The injured were treated by army medical personnel at the scene, and they then evacuated the Palestinians to hospital for further treatment. The event was investigated by senior officers and the required lessons were learned.”

Jihad reported that 14 sheep were killed – four died that day and the remainder in the next few days. He no longer takes the sheep to drink at the spring.

The entire agricultural area was once again closed to residents of Akraba and Yanun. From afar, they can see the settlers who live in firing range 904A, tending their fields.

Israel delays entry of foreign dignitaries to West Bank, puts PA meeting in peril: Haaretz

Palestinian leaders due to meet ministers representing states of the Non-Aligned Movement, discuss renewed attempts to gain Palestinian statehood.

Egypt’s President Mohamed Mursi (R) meets with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Malki. Photo by Reuters

A meeting in Ramallah between Palestinian leaders and ministers representing states of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) that was scheduled for Sunday evening may not take place since Israel has yet authorized the foreign delegates’ entry into the West Bank.

The meeting was announced on Saturday by Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Malki, who said that the purpose of the session was to introduce NAM members to the Palestinian situation and to ask for their support, should they ask to become a non-member state in the United Nations General Assembly.

“The meeting aims to stress the right of our people and leadership to hold conferences on our land and to support our struggle to end the occupation and settlements and establish our independent state with East Jerusalem as its capital,” said al-Malki.

However, Haaretz has learned that preparations for the meeting have been halted, and that the session could ultimately be cancelled since Israel is delaying the required transit passes into the West Bank.

The report has not yet been confirmed by either Israeli or Palestinian officials.

The meeting in Ramallah was meant to be participated by the foreign ministers of 12 NAM members, including Egyptian Foreign Minister Kamel Amr, South African Labor Minister Mildred Oliphant, as well as ministers from states with which Israel does not have diplomatic relations, such as Indonesia, Malaysia and Cuba.

Some of the ministers were supposed to enter the West Bank through the Allenby Bridge in the Jordan Valley, while others were due to be carried into the territory using helicopters.

Israeli envoy: Palestinians have ‘guaranteed majority’ in bid for UN membership: Haaretz

Ron Prosor tells local radio stations that Palestinian Authority will likely receive non-member observer status, but says: ‘Nothing will change on the ground’.

By Reuters | Aug.05, 2012 | 10:03 AM |  8

Isreali Ambassador to the UN, Ron Prosor, in February 2011. Photo by David Bachar

By Amira Hass | Aug.05,2012 | 10:03 AM

The Palestinians’ bid to upgrade their status at the United Nations would find majority support there but would not bring them closer to statehood and peace with Israel, Israel’s UN envoy said on Sunday.

Citing stalled peacemaking and Israeli settlement-building on occupied West Bank land where they seek sovereign independence, the Palestinians said on Saturday they would renew a bid to win UN.recognition as a state.

Ron Prosor, the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, accused the Palestinians of trying to recapture international attention that has shifted to crises in Iran, Egypt and Syria.

“There is an attempt [by the Palestinians] to make unilateral moves in order to internationalize the conflict,” Prosor told Israel Radio in a telephone interview.

“But beyond what are perhaps the feelings of frustration, it is important to remember that the path to peace really is through the negotiating table with Israel.”

The Palestinians want to found a state in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, which Israel captured in the 1967 Six-Day War. Though Israel quit Gaza in 2005, it claims East Jerusalem as its capital – a move not recognized abroad – and says it would keep swathes of West Bank settlements under any peace deal. The United Nations deems the settlements illegal.

Full UN membership for Palestine would require approval by the Security Council, where Israel’s ally, the United States, would likely wield its veto given its demand the Palestinians set up their state in agreement with the Jewish state.

So the Palestinians, in what they describe as an interim move, plan to ask the UN General Assembly next month to accord them non-member observer status, which would allow them to join a number of UN agencies and the International Criminal Court.

The Palestinians are currently a UN observer “entity” with no voting rights. A similar statehood upgrade drive last year proved short-lived amid financial sanctions and diplomatic counter-lobbying by Israel and the United States.

Prosor said the Palestinians have a “guaranteed majority” in the 193-member General Assembly – enough to bestow non-member observer status, which the envoy predicted would be used “to hurt us (Israel)” in various international forums.

Israel has accused Western-backed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas of going to the United Nations to evade negotiations that would entail both territorial compromise and that he reassert control over Gaza, which he lost in a 2007 civil war to Hamas Islamists hostile to Israel.

“In essence, Abu Mazen [Abbas] today has zero control in Gaza,” Prosor said in separate remarks to Israel’s Army Radio, adding that the Palestinians’ UN campaign “will change nothing on the ground”.

Palestinians have made a freeze on Israeli settlement in the West Bank and East Jerusalem a condition for returning to peace talks. Israel cites biblical and historical ties to the areas and says the settlement issue should be decided in negotiations.

Documents: Israel used Waqf land to build settlements, separation fence: Haaretz

Palestinian Authority and Waqf are trying to back get lands that were transferred over the decades to settlements and the separation fence, a PA official tells Haaretz.

By Akiva Eldar | Aug.05, 2012 | 1:25 AM |  7

A date field at the edge of Jericho. Photo by Daniel Bar-On

Land belonging to the Waqf, the Muslim religious trust, has been transferred over the decades to settlements and the separation fence, according to Waqf documents and maps compiled by the Israel Defense Forces’ Civil Administration.

The Palestinian Authority and Waqf are trying to get these lands back, an official from the PA’s Interior Ministry has told Haaretz. The plots in question were transferred between 1967 and 2008 and are located mostly in the Jericho area.

The Civil Administration’s maps have been obtained by settlements researcher Dror Etkes following a long legal battle. They show that the Waqf area within land under full Israeli control near Jericho totals 37,000 dunams.

Jewish homes and public facilities have been built on some of this land. The land was registered under proper land-registry procedures before the Six-Day War.

55,000 dunams in question

The Waqf says the land in the Jericho area that Israel appropriated for settlement and military purposes actually totals 55,000 dunams. The largest area, north of a village 10 kilometers north of Jericho, contains the entire area of the Na’aran and Yitav settlements, and most of the area claimed by the Nativ Hagdud settlement.

In this area, there is also a quarry used by Jewish settlements. The Good Samaritan Archaeological Museum, run by the Israel Nature and Parks Authority east of Ma’aleh Adumim, is also located on Waqf lands.

A document obtained by Haaretz reveals that months before the Six-Day War, Jordanian authorities ordered that one tract of land in the region be removed from the state registry and registered in the Waqf’s name. Ibrahim Za’atra, a Waqf official in Jerusalem, told Haaretz that he has documents proving that lands were registered with the Waqf as early as 1955.

Responding to the Waqf’s appeals, officials responsible for abandoned property in the West Bank have said the state has no definite intention at this stage to use the property. The officials promised that if the state puts together a plan to use the land, it will properly notify the Waqf.

“There is a reasonable chance that land in this area does not belong to the state,” Uri Mendes, head of the Civil Administration’s infrastructure department, wrote to the secretary of Kibbutz Na’aran.

“This clarification follows claims by Waqf representatives regarding Jordanian land registration shortly before the Six-Day War, and Jordanian directives that the land be registered in the Waqf’s name and not as belonging to Jordan. The implications of this fact are extensive, and ramifications for the kibbutz are clear and decisive. I am surprised you are not aware of this issue.”

The Civil Administration says the Waqf lands lie within private land in the West Bank, so information about them cannot be disclosed.

Etkes, the settlements researcher, called such explanations “another despicable attempt by the Civil Administration to conceal from the public another chapter in the story of land appropriation in the West Bank, and its transfer to settlers.”

Support for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has plunged to an all-time low due to the economic diktats the government announced this week.

For the first time since Netanyahu set up his second government in April 2009, the proportion of survey respondents satisfied with his performance has fallen to just 31 percent, while 60 percent expressed dissatisfaction.

Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz fared even worse in the Dialog survey, which was held in mid-week under the supervision of Professor Camil Fuchs. Over two-thirds of those interviewed – 67 percent – said they were not satisfied with his performance, compared to 19 percent who said the opposite.

The survey reflects a negative, angry state of mind toward the Netanyahu-Steinitz duo and leads to the conclusion that the government’s socioeconomic agenda is an electoral disaster for Likud. Netanyahu is still seen as a candidate without rivals, but his position has weakened considerably.

In this atmosphere it is clear that Netanyahu has no interest in holding an early election. On the contrary, he will strive to put an election off as much as possible and change the government’s agenda, so it focuses on strategic security-related issues ahead of an election.

The survey also implies that Netanyahu and Steinitz have failed miserably in marketing their economic policy. The public simply does not believe them and does not buy what they are selling regarding responsibility, leadership and balanced, necessary measures.

Until recently, the lowest grade of dissatisfaction with Netayahu registered in Haaretz-Dialog polls over the past three and a half years was 54 percent. The balance has been in Netanyahu’s favor most of the time, peaking after Gilad Shalit’s release and the Carmel fire.

Public support for Netanyahu started plummeting a few weeks ago, due to his treatment of the Tal Law issue and his siding with the ultra-Orthodox. A Haaretz survey conducted on July 8, less than a month ago, showed Netanyahu had lost 11 percent of the public support compared to the previous survey, and the satisfaction with his performance had plunged from 51 to 41 percent.

In this survey he continues to dive, losing 10 more percentage points in public support while the dissatisfaction with his performance rises steeply.

Netanyahu says US warnings not enough to stop Iran: BBC

US defence secretary Leon Panetta said the US and Israel were working to “preserve peace in the future”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said US assurances about military options are not enough to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

Mr Netanyahu said the Iranians believe the international community “does not have the will” to stop Iran.

He spoke after visiting US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta reiterated Washington’s line that military action was an option against Iran.

Iran maintains that its nuclear programme is for civilian energy uses.

“Right now the Iranian regime believes that the international community does not have the will to stop its nuclear programme,” Mr Netanyahu said at the prime minister’s residence in Jerusalem.

He told the Pentagon chief: “You yourself said a few months ago that when all else fails, America will act. But these declarations have also not yet convinced the Iranians to stop their programme.

“This must change, and it must change quickly because time to resolve this issue peacefully is running out.”

On Tuesday, US President Barack Obama ordered new economic sanctions against Iran’s energy sector and some financial firms.

Earlier on Wednesday, Mr Panetta toured Israel’s “Iron Dome” rocket defence shield south of Tel Aviv with Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak.

Mr Barak also said he thought there was an “extremely low” probability that international economic sanctions would prove enough to stop Iran.

Mr Panetta said repeatedly on Wednesday that “all options” including military force were on the table to stop Iran, should sanctions and diplomacy fail.

But he also said: “[Israel’s] effort to decide what is in their national security interest is something that must be left up to the Israelis.”

The US has cautioned Israel against taking unilateral action against Iran, and Israel’s current army chief has expressed reservations.

Speaking to an Israeli television station on Tuesday, Mr Netanyahu hinted that Israel might act alone despite American misgivings.

“With our very existence, we do not put our faith in the hands of others, even our best of friends,” he said.

The visit by Mr Panetta comes as the Obama administration announced $70m (£45m) in new military aid to help Israel expand its Iron Dome system.

Presidential challenger Mitt Romney visited Israeli at the weekend and met top officials. He has accused the Obama administration of not being supportive enough of Israel.

Former Mossad chief and national security adviser Ephraim Halevy was quoted by the New York Times on Thursday saying that if he were Iranian he “would be very fearful of the next 12 weeks”.

Halevy also told Israel Radio on Thursday that if the Iranians “continue to play their games” in nuclear talks with world powers, they would be underestimating Israel’s resolve.

“[The Iranians’] math is off if they think they have open-ended immunity” in these talks, he said.

His remarks came just after U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s visit to Israel, and amid circulating speculations of possible Israeli plans to strike Iran over its contentious nuclear program.

Panetta’s visit coincided with an executive order by U.S. President Barack Obama to increase sanctions against Iran, targeting foreign banks that help Tehran sell its oil.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said earlier this week that Israel had not yet decided whether to strike Iran.  After meeting with Panetta, he said Wednesday that U.S. statements of solidarity with Israel and its assurances that military strikes are still an option aren’t working to convince Iran that the West is “serious about stopping” the Islamic republic from developing nuclear weapons.

Standing with the U.S. defense secretary, Netanyahu said, “Neither sanctions nor diplomacy have yet had any impact on Iran’s nuclear weapons program.”

“America and Israel have also made clear that all options are on the table. You yourself said a few months ago that when all else fails, America will act. But these declarations have also not yet convinced the Iranians to stop their program,” he added.

“However forceful our statements, they have not convinced Iran that we are serious about stopping them. Right now the Iranian regime believes that the international community does not have the will to stop its nuclear program. This must change and it must change quickly, because time to resolve this issue peacefully is running out,” the prime minster said.

Defense Minister Ehud Barak also told Panetta that he sees an “extremely low” probability that sanctions will ever compel Iran to give up its nuclear activities.

Panetta, meanwhile, denied reports Tuesday  that he was to discuss with Israeli leaders plans for attacking the Islamic Republic: “I think it’s the wrong characterization to say we are going to be discussing potential attack plans. What we are discussing are various contingencies and how we would respond,” he said.

Asked whether these included military options, he said: “We obviously continue to work on a number of options in that area, but the discussions that I hope to have with Israel are going to be more about what is the threat that we’re confronting and to try to share both information and intelligence on that.”

Mitt Romney: It would be “foolish not to take Iranian threat seriously”