Turkish PM says ‘Turkey’s problem is with Israel’s government, not its people,’ says the country will continue to fight Israel’s ‘piracy,’ seek solutions to fight Gaza flotilla raid within international law.
Tourism Minister Stas Misezhnikov slammed Turkish Prime Minister Recap Tayyip Erdogan on Saturday, saying that while Turkey isn’t Israel’s enemy, Erdogan is.
“The Turkish people aren’t the enemy, but Erdogan is Israel’s enemy,” said Misezhnikov in response to Erdogan’s earlier comments that Turkey’s problem is with the Israeli government, and not the Israeli people.
“This isn’t a healthy situation, and unless he leaves office there is no room for optimism,” Misezhnikov said during a cultural event in Bat Yam. He added that there are indications that Erdogan isn’t speaking as a representative of the Turkish people and that the country is divided in its support for him.
The tourism minister also called on Israelis to heed the government’s warnings and refrain from traveling to Turkey. The tourism ministry is due to meet on Sunday to discuss ways to draw travelers toward staying in Israel for their summer vacation.
Earlier on Saturday, Erdogan said that his country did not have a problem with Israel’s people but rather with its government’s policies, the Turkish news agency Andolu reported.
The Turkish PM stressed that his country would continue to investigate Israel’s attack on the Turkish-flagged aid flotilla the Mavi Marmara in which nine activists were killed.
“We have not remained silent against this piracy and injustice, and we will not do so, and we will seek solutions within the framework of international law,” Erdogan told reporters in Ankara.
Meanwhile United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged Israel to agree to an international investigation of its deadly commando raid on the Turkish ship trying to bring aid to Gaza and do “much more” to meet the needs of the Palestinians living there.
Ban said Friday that Israel’s investigation of the May 31 flotilla raid is important but won’t have “international credibility,” which is why he is continuing to urge the Israeli government to agree to an international panel with Israeli and Turkish participation.
Last week Israel, under mounting international pressure, formed an internal five-person panel – including two foreign observers – to investigate events surrounding its May 31 interception of a six ship convoy heading to the Gaza Strip.
‘Ajami’ reveals the brutality of life in Tel Aviv’s ethnically mixed Jaffa neighbourhood through the eyes of those who live there. As the film is released in Britain, Donald Macintyre meets its stars
Saturday, 19 June 2010
Dusk is falling rapidly as Esther Saba – Arab, Israeli citizen and Christian – sits in her yard dispensing lemonade and mint tea to her visitors and talking about her problems.
She mentions the eviction order hanging over her home, her husband’s heroin addiction, the wealthy new Jewish residents moving into her home town’s rapidly gentrifying neighbourhoods and the worry of bringing up three children safely in a district where there was yet another fatal drive-by shooting only a fortnight ago.
At an intersection a couple of blocks away, armed police use their two Jeeps as a temporary checkpoint to examine the IDs of passing local Arab youths. The checkpoint would seem entirely normal in the West Bank – but not here on Israel’s picturesque Mediterranean coast, less than five minutes’ drive from the heart of Tel Aviv.
For this is the Ajami district of Jaffa, the eponymous setting for the relentlessly gripping Jewish-Arab feature film of crime, poverty and violent feuding in an ethnically-mixed community. It took less than a month to shoot on a shoestring budget with local amateur actors, but has won a string of awards and was nominated for an Oscar. It went on release in Britain for the first time yesterday.
One of the film’s stars Shahir Kabaha is now back working in his father’s bakery, after a trip to Hollywood for the Oscar ceremony. He acknowledges that the film initially upset some of the city’s residents for unflinchingly “washing their laundry in public”. But Mrs Saba, in her yard, says emphatically: “This movie is my reality; the reality of each one of us.”
The film grew out of Jaffa’s streets as well as being filmed on them. Scandar Copti, the co-director with his Jewish colleague Yaron Shani, is from here. He is a Christian, Palestinian-Israeli son of a local school principal who trained as a civil engineer before becoming a film-maker.
The story captures with vivid authenticity what the producers describe as the “the tragic fragility of human existence in the enclosed community of Ajami, where enemies must live as neighbours”.
It is told first through the eyes of Nasri, a sensitive 13-year-old, whose family is at risk after his uncle killed a member of a Bedouin clan running a protection racket. A neighbour fixing his car is killed in a drive-by shooting when he is mistaken for the teenager’s older brother, Omar. There is a weave of other characters: Malek, the West Bank Palestinian with a desperately ill mother who sneaks into Israel to work; Dando, the hard-bitten Jewish Israeli cop, haunted by the disappearance of his own brother; Abu Elias, a well-off Christian restaurant owner whose daughter is in love with Omar but cannot marry him because he is a Muslim; Brinj – played by Copti himself – whose dreams of a future with his Jewish girlfriend are upset by a street brawl in which his brother is accused of involvement in the stabbing of a Jewish neighbour. But at the core of the film is Omar’s desperate struggle to raise a huge sum – agreed at a reconciliation meeting, a sulha – to end the feud.
If Ajami sounds over-plotted – and this is only the half of it – it doesn’t seem like it. It has been compared to City of God. While the Brazilian film is much more violent, the two share a willingness to confront the audience with an uncomfortable reality; one that has no neat, happy ending. While Ajami exposes the tensions within as well as between ethnic, religious and socio-economic groups, it never treats its main characters – Arab or Jewish – as cardboard cut-outs but as suffering, painfully understandable, individual human beings. The constant use of improvisation, albeit within a tightly scripted storyline, often gives it the spontaneous feel of a documentary. All but three of the actors in the riveting sulha sequence were told that it was for real, making the tension and anger all the more credible. Every Saturday for six months, Copti went to genuine sulhas to understand how they worked. “Then I brought a lot of people to Jaffa for what they thought was a real sulha and told them that there would be a crew filming it for a documentary. We filmed about an hour and twenty minutes, including the eating of the lamb [which ritually celebrates the reconciliation] and then cut it to about four or five.”
Yaron Shani had originally conceived an urban crime drama shot in this way when he was a student at Tel Aviv’s famous film school. But the idea only came alive years later when he met Copti, who had entered a short film in a contest Shani was helping to organize. Shani asked Copti if was interested on working on “something bigger” and the seven-year, intensely co-operative, mutually dependent process of bringing Ajami to the screen was born. Shani had thought a Jewish-Arab setting might be “very interesting” but until he met Copti he was, by his own admission, among the many Israeli Jews who know little about the country’s 1.5m Arab citizens, despite the fact that most speak Hebrew as well as Arabic (the reverse is only true for a minority of Israeli Jews) and vote in the same elections. A characteristically Israeli row erupted over the film hours before the Oscars, when Copti said he did not see himself as representing Israel “because I cannot represent a country that does not represent me.” Right wing politicians queued up to denounce what they saw as Copti’s ingratitude for state funding which had helped to finance the film. Yet Copti’s remark – and the film – highlights some of the underlying problems of the Arab minority in Jaffa and, by extension, that in Israel.
You don’t have to spend long in the real Ajami to have a glimpse of what a few of the grievances are: employment discrimination, municipal neglect; a hostile police force; poor schooling. Mrs Saba is convinced that the recent murder – a drive-by from a motorcycle just like in the film in a suspected gang hit – will remain unsolved, like dozens of others in the last decade. “I can take you to Kedem [a street in Ajami] and there’s a police patrol going by every five minutes,” she says. “Yet it took them half an hour to get to where the shooting happened.” Perhaps the murders are unsolved because witnesses won’t talk to the police? “That’s true,” says Mrs Saba’s friend Theodora Deeb. “If the people who did this found out you had talked, you would be the next one in the grave.” Mrs Saba agrees, but insists – an almost universal complaint by Palestinians in Jaffa – that there is a completely different standard of law enforcement between cases in which Arabs and Jews are the victims. “If the government really wanted to make Jaffa a better place they could. They know exactly who the killers are, but they think: ‘Let them [the Arabs] kill each other.'”
As with the police, so with education and employment, say the two women. The 49 per cent drop-out rate at Arab Jaffa state schools is much worse than in neighbouring, overwhelmingly Jewish Tel Aviv and Mrs Saba believes the municipality just doesn’t care. “I can take you to a park near here where you will see all the nine-year-olds hanging out instead of going to school. But nobody calls the parents.” Mrs Saba, a manicurist and the household’s only breadwinner, says there are few role models and incentives to suggest that education is worthwhile. “If a youngster goes for a job from high school what is the first question they ask? What he did in the Army? What is his ethnicity? They have left the Arabs the jobs like drug dealing, killing, shooting and stealing.” It’s a relief, against this bleak background, to meet Shahir Kabaha, who plays Omar in the film. Over a narghila in his local café, Mr Kabaha, 25, defends Copti’s remark. “If Tarantino made a film about the war in Iraq, does that mean his movie represents America or Iraq? No, it’s a Tarantino movie.” He says that a loss of traditional control by the sheikhs – or community leaders – in Jaffa has much to do with crime and schools that are “out of control”. But he agrees with Mrs Saba about the police. “About 15 years ago three Arab guys killed a Jewish guy in Jaffa and one of them ran away to Gaza. They got him even in Gaza. But if an Arab kills an Arab they don’t do anything.” Mr Kabaha, who wants to act full-time, is too intelligent to give up his day job for now. He works in Abu Shadi, the bakery run by his father, which is famous for its stuffed pastries, or bourekas. He admits to being “frustrated” by finding he cannot get Jewish roles – the large majority – in television drama. He could do it with consummate ease, as he was partly educated at a Jewish school, speaks faultless Hebrew and is physically indistinguishable from any other Israeli 25-year-old in his trainers, jeans and t-shirt. Mr Kabaha is proud of having “many” Jewish friends. Almost half the customers at Abu Shadi are Jewish. But he distinguishes between the many Jewish residents of Jaffa, who relish living in a mixed community, from two other groups. The most recent arrivals are ideologically-minded former settlers evacuated from Gaza in 2005 who have come to Ajami with the deliberate goal of helping to “Judaise” a mainly Arab neighbourhood. The others are wealthy Jewish incomers eager for a substantial home by the sea, sometimes in a gated complex, close to the historic Old City of Jaffa.
Every Palestinian in Jaffa believes that eviction orders have been served on around 500 houses, including Mrs Saba’s, to make way for such developments. In the 1948 war, Jaffa was bombarded relentlessly for three days by Jewish paramilitary forces. The fighting and the flight of refugees from Jaffa reduced the Palestinian population from more than 70,000 to around 4,000 (a number which has now more than quadrupled). Most of those that remained had to rent houses that had been confiscated by Israel after the war. From the early seventies, in exchange for paying “key money” to the public housing authority, most tenants in the Arab quarters like Ajami paid low rents, which were often not even collected. But from the nineties, the land developers moved in and the authorities began to issue eviction orders, for previously overlooked “offences” like rent arrears or, in as in Mrs Saba’s case, for adding extensions without a permit, something that is notoriously hard to come by. “They want to push out the people from Jaffa,” says Mr Kabaha. “This would be the most perfect country in the world if it was based on people who want to solve problems and not on people who want to make money on the back of those problems.” One of the several achievements of Ajami is not only that, as Copti puts it, it digs “deep into Palestinian society”, but also that it tells its compelling story without clunking exposition of all this political context. Instead it shows the consequences of it, leaving debate for after the film has ended. “We felt that dealing with the human side is the only way to address the big issues that are behind everything,” as the two directors, one a Jew the other an Arab, put it jointly in the promo notes for the film. “But all the social problems revealed in the stories of Ajami are governed and generated by politics.”
Dina Ezzat finds little evidence that Arab countries are poised to break the siege imposed on Gaza
While the severity of the siege of Gaza may be lessened in the coming weeks, a total lift of the Israeli imposed blockade is not on the cards. That, at least, is the assessment of Egyptian, Arab and Western diplomats in Cairo.
But any easing of the blockade, according to an Egyptian official, would not be through the exclusive use of the Rafah crossing. Crossings into Gaza under Israeli control would also help ease the siege.
Egypt, which closed its borders with Gaza in the wake of the Hamas takeover of the Strip, is still determined that crossings will only resume routine operations after Fatah, Hamas’s political rival, is “fully re-instated in Gaza”.
“There will be no operation of the borders before the Palestinian Authority [PA] is back in Gaza. We cannot afford otherwise,” insisted a high level Egyptian official.
In the past few months Egypt has strengthened security measures along its 14km border with Gaza, including installing underground steel plates to prevent smuggling via tunnels. “Of course we will continue with these measures,” the same official noted.
Egypt, say officials, has promised both the US and Israel that it will not tolerate the smuggling of any arms, or materials that could be used to develop primitive arms, into Gaza. It is a commitment that persists despite the increasing number of voices calling on Cairo to ease restrictive controls on its border with Gaza.
Egypt does, however, seem willing to display more flexibility in mediating the so-far elusive national reconciliation agreement between Hamas and Fatah. Cairo, according to Egyptian officials and Hamas sources, is showing new signs of acceptance of Hamas.
Hamas sources, who spoke to Al-Ahram Weekly in Gaza on Sunday, say the one-day visit Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa made to Gaza earlier this week is a clear sign of a new Egyptian — and maybe Arab — position on Hamas. Moussa, according to both Hamas and Egyptian sources, had been lobbying for months to gain Egyptian, and wider Arab, approval for the visit.
“This siege has to be broken. No country should accommodate, or show any respect to, this siege. This is not just about Arab countries but all the countries of the world. We shall break the siege,” Moussa said in Gaza on Sunday.
During his talks with Palestinian political factions, including a tête-a-tête with the Gaza-based Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, and in meetings with families who suffered from Israeli brutality during the three-week war on Gaza in late 2008 and early 2009, Moussa repeatedly promised he would work towards ending the siege. Moussa, the first Arab official to visit the Strip since July 2007, was shown endless examples of the destruction caused by the war and subsequent siege.
He spoke with families who had lost children during the war and who risk losing more members due to poor healthcare facilities, and received complaints from Palestinian medical staff and UN officials trying to provide humanitarian assistance to Gaza’s 1.5 million beleaguered residents. Moussa said that he was committed to ending the blockade. But while he mocked Israel’s announcement, on Sunday, that four items — mayonnaise, tomato sauce, sewing needles and shoe-laces — would henceforth be allowed entry to Gaza, he warned that any lifting of the siege would be gradual.
During talks with representatives of the squabbling Palestinian factions, Moussa stressed that reconciliation would speed up the chances of the siege being lifted. “He told us it would help Egypt to operate the Rafah crossing if the PA returned to Gaza,” said one Hamas source.
In Sharm El-Sheikh on Monday, a day after his meetings with Hamas leaders in Gaza, Moussa discussed with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas “some ideas” to find an exit out of the impasse that Egyptian mediation on national Palestinian reconciliation has hit. While sources suggested a breakthrough was not yet round the corner, they did not exclude some movement in the next few weeks.
“There will be meetings and talks and messages, and there might even be some goodwill gestures,” said one informed source. This, he added, could help in easing the siege since it would encourage Egypt to be more forthcoming in its own operation of the borders and allow Abbas and Cairo to pressure Israel to show more flexibility on the borders it controls.
“Israel should open all seven crossings [linking Gaza with the outside world],” Abbas said following talks in Sharm El-Sheikh on Tuesday with President Hosni Mubarak. European sources in Cairo say proposals that are currently being examined with both Egypt and Israel could allow for the easier transport of commodities, and maybe even individuals, in and out of Gaza. “We are still in the discussion phase. Nothing is concluded yet,” said one European source.
The current commotion, many Palestinians in Gaza believe, is a result of Israel’s bloody assault on the peace flotilla that was attempting to break the siege on 21 May.
European diplomats in Brussels now believe Israel’s stranglehold of Gaza has been discredited.
“That logic must now be abandoned,” said a joint statement signed by the foreign ministers of Italy, France and Spain. If not, more tragedies will occur, warned the three European ministers.
Israel’s leading food chains plan to stop importing Turkish-made pasta, flour
Published: 06.18.10
Israel’s leading supermarkets have joined the boycott against Turkey following the flotilla affair and will soon stop importing products made in the country.
The main victim of the boycott is expected to be pasta imported from Turkey, which was marketed by the food chains due to its cheap price.
Youths hang signs informing shoppers that most clothes sold by fashion chain are made in Turkey and that ‘by buying them you are funding anti-Israel terror’
Full story
“Although I am against boycotts and believe the problem between Israel and Turkey must be solved on the diplomatic level, I am considering stopping the imports of pasta from Turkey,” said Willi Food CEO Zvi Williger, one of the main importers of pasta from Turkey.
He added that “all the suppliers from Turkey are pro-Israel and against the anti-Israeli policy.”
The Mega chain, which markets Turkish-made pasta under its private label, said Sunday that it would also stop importing pasta and flour from Turkey. The chain noted, however, that the Turkish products could still be found in the stores until the stock run out.
Rami Levy, the owner of Shivuk Shikma, has also joined the move. “We will stop importing pasta from Turkey and start importing past from Italy instead, although it is more expensive than the Turkish pasta,” he said.
“I believe the consumers will support our move and I hope that all retailers importing from Turkey will join the initiative and found an alternative in other countries,” he added.
The Shufersal chain said Sunday that it was still looking into the matter.
Netanyahu’s PR, which plays on the paranoia and deepest fears of the ghetto , is working – but only internally.
By Doron Rosenblum
War criminal Benjamin Netanyahu at a weekly cabinet meeting
If the Israeli public employed the classification system famously used by Napoleon Bonaparte – who made light of the courage and cleverness of officers who were recommended to him, focusing instead on the question “But are they lucky?” – there is no question that not only would Defense Minister Ehud Barak drop to the bottom of the popularity scale, but so, and to the same degree, would Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
It is hard to be certain which of them is the schlemiel and which the schlimazel, or whose luck is worse. But one thing is clear: Every time those two grab the steering wheel – whether together or separately – they find themselves battered and bruised, limping from mishap to fiasco, from screw-up to snafu, and from there to all kinds of bad luck that have not yet even made it into the slang dictionaries.
It wouldn’t matter if it were only them. The problem is that those two get all of us into trouble: Shortly after the journey begins, the entire Israeli bus finds itself overturned on the side of the road with its wheels spinning uselessly on top.
In order to understand why public opinion surveys nevertheless tend to fault the ticket taker more than the driver, you have to get to the bottom of the difference, which does exist, between Barak’s schlimazel personality and Netanyahu’s schlemiel personality. The former, despite his great expectations, sees every initiative blow up in his face. But the latter has no intention of succeeding, and never did have.
In his ambition to perform spectacular pirouettes that will take the region’s breath away, Barak repeatedly finds himself on the boards. Netanyahu gets even more battered, but somehow looks less ridiculous, since he repeatedly tries – and repeatedly succeeds – to prove his standard opening argument: The floor is crooked. It was, still is and always will be. Or as he summed up his own failure of statesmanship this week, “Once again, Israel faces hypocrisy.”
For Barak bad luck is random, an accident (even if it is a multivehicle pileup ). For Netanyahu, bad luck is a worldview, a psychological situation assessment, almost an ideology – the decree of “Jewish” fate. That is precisely the difference between Barak’s premature assertion in the city square – “This is the dawning of a new day” – and what Netanyahu told the Likud Knesset faction this week: “Benighted medieval forces are rising up against us … A wave of hatred is flooding us … They are trying to grip us in an iron vise of missiles and terror.” Perhaps these words were a boastful “I told you so,” or perhaps they were a type of vision: a pessimistic vision that, whether consciously or not, fulfills itself every day as long as the prophet of destruction – this Job, who scratches himself with a potsherd – continues to serve as prime minister.
Is it by chance that during the term of “Mr. Public Relations” of all time, Israel has become one of the most ostracized and misunderstood countries in the world? Ironically, the person who built his entire political career on being a fluent spokesman for Israel’s righteousness to the outside world changed the direction of the loudspeaker the moment the responsibility became his. He has turned into the great rebroadcaster of every external threat for internal consumption – into a person who repeatedly plays on the paranoias and deepest fears of the ghetto mentality.
In that sense, Netanyahu’s PR has in fact succeeded, but only internally: The national PR man has once again succeeded in explaining to the domestic consumer, who is wallowing in his fears and hatreds, that there really is a reason for the sense of siege, isolation and persecution: The world is hypocritical, the wave is getting stronger, the vise is closing in.
Ostensibly, his reason for doing so is clear: to obviate the need for action and to avoid personal responsibility. For if this is a deterministic existential situation, there is nothing to be done: There is no point in further shaking up the ship that is being flooded in any case, or in trying to navigate it. All that remains is to sit and curse the entire world. But in that case, one question arises: Why did Netanyahu want to be prime minister, and for a second time yet?
After all, he can be a “concerned citizen” at home, too. So why is he behaving this way? Where is he actually trying to lead us? What does he want to promote, if anything – even according to his own lights? The answers to these questions have long since gone beyond the political realm. They apparently belong to the realm of the soul. And not only Netanyahu’s.
By Donald Macintyre in Jerusalem
18 June 2010
Israel announced yesterday it would “liberalise” the flow of goods to Gaza in a statement which stopped short of a pledge to allow in raw materials needed to revive the besieged territory’s paralysed manufacturing sector.
The EU and aid agencies welcomed the Cabinet decision, taken after two days of deliberations, as “a step in the right direction” but warned that much more needed to be done to restart Gaza’s moribund economy and boost post-war reconstruction. Israel had been under mounting international pressure for a significant relaxation of its three-year-old embargo since its lethal commando raid on a pro-Palestinian flotilla earlier this month.
The inner Security Cabinet said it had agreed to expand the shipment of construction materials needed for internationally supervised infrastructure projects. And it said further decisions would be taken in the coming days on “additional steps to implement this policy”. Some such projects, requiring strict security guarantees from international organisations like the UN, will be exempted from a general prohibition on materials like cement which Israel says it fears will be used by Hamas to build up its “military machine”.
Raed Fattouh, the Palestinian co-ordinator for the shipment of goods from Israel into Gaza, said a newly expanded list of goods would now include food items, toys, stationery, kitchen utensils, mattresses and towels. There was no sign however of goods like industrial margarine or glucose which could be used for food processing being allowed in.
There was no mention in yesterday’s Cabinet statement of a switch from an “allowed” list of goods to a “banned list” – something which Tony Blair, representing the “Quartet” of the US, EU, UN and Russia, said on Monday in Luxembourg had been agreed “in principle” by the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. A senior Israeli official said yesterday that the idea of the switch from a “white list” to a “blacklist” was still “on the table.” The list would make it more difficult for the Israeli authorities to ban items like raw materials to revive private sector production but which did not pose a threat to Israel’s security.
Western diplomats have been pressing Israel to take more concerted action in what could be a relatively short window before a fresh flotilla poses a fresh maritime crisis by setting out from Gaza, on the grounds that it is much easier to condemn the flotillas if the blockade is being relaxed. At least two Lebanese organisations are threatening to send boats to the territory.
The EU’s foreign policy chief Baroness Ashton said the European Union had noted the development with “great interest” but hoped “the in-principle statement by the Israeli government can now be followed up very quickly with the detail which we shall look at with interest”.
A Foreign Ministry official in Turkey, nine of whose citizens were killed in the commando raid this month, said Ankara wanted to “evaluate” the Israeli move. “However, our attitude on the issue is obvious, we expect that the blockade be lifted altogether,” the official added.
While in Gaza one Hamas official condemned the move as “window dressing,” the chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said the Israeli decision was “not sufficient”. He added: “With this decision, Israel attempts to make it appear that it has eased its four-year blockade…. In reality, the siege of the Gaza Strip, illegally imposed on Palestinians, continues unabated.” Continue reading June 18, 2010
EDITOR: The cracks appear in Israeli intransigence
Make no mistake about it – any easing of the Gaza Blockade will make real difference for Palestinians, and it is a sure sign of the anger and shock after the Flotilla murders which has brought about enormous public pressure on Israel, forcing it to mitigate its illegal and immoral blockade. However, this is only a chink in the Israeli armour; important in that it tells of a new trend, it will not, in itself, be enough. Gaza cannot be rebuilt in this manner, and that is what Palestinians need now. Some people with little knowledge of the conflict may even think that this is humanistic measure by Israel… It is definitely planned to affect them in that way. This reaction will be mistaken, of course. Israel moved because it was forced by public opinion.
It seems that this is also an important lesson: for three years, and ever since the Gaza massacre of Dec 2008 – January 2009, Israel has been shouting from the rooftops that nothing will force it to ease the blockade, yet here they are doing exactly that. We should redouble our effort on the BDS front, to put even more pressure on this criminal regime, before it has a chance to commit more war crimes.
17 June 2010
A Palestinian labourer collects gravel at an abandoned airport that was damaged by past Israeli air strikes, in Rafah in the southern
Israel agreed today to ease its land blockade on the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip, hoping to quell growing worldwide outrage following a deadly raid on an international flotilla bound for the Palestinian territory.
In one of the major changes, Israel will now allow in more desperately needed construction materials for civilian projects, provided those projects are carried out under international supervision, government and military officials said. Israel has barely allowed in materials such as cement and steel, fearing Hamas militants could use them to build weapons and fortifications.
That policy has prevented rebuilding after Israel’s brief but fierce war with Hamas in Gaza last year.
An Israeli military official told The Associated Press that all foods would be freely let in to Gaza, effective immediately. Israel has previously allowed a narrow and constantly changing list of authorized food items.
A brief government statement announcing today’s decision also indicated the naval blockade on Gaza would remain in force.
Israel will “continue existing security procedures to prevent the inflow of weapons and war material,” it said. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly warned that if the naval closure is lifted, then the Iranian-backed Hamas would turn Gaza into an “Iranian port.”
There was no mention of lifting or easing bans on exports or the import of raw materials that would be crucial to galvanizing the territory’s battered economy. And the statement contained no specifics on what else would be allowed into Gaza.
But the fact that Israel was forced to respond to an international outcry over the blockade was evidence of the intense pressure the country’s leaders felt.
The European Union cautiously welcomed the decision.
“This is a step in the right direction,” said Cristina Galach, spokeswoman for the bloc’s Spanish presidency.
The EU’s foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, said officials wanted to see how the Israeli decision is carried out. “The detail is what matters,” she said.
Israel must “make sure that many, many more goods can get in to Gaza to enable people to reconstruct their homes, to build schools, to place infrastructure, and also enable people to get on with ordinary lives,” she said.
UN spokesman Chris Gunness said the blockade has prevented the United Nations from bringing in construction materials needed to carry out an internationally approved plan to rebuild thousands of homes and other buildings Israel damaged or destroyed in last year’s war in Gaza.
The closure has also shuttered hundreds of factories, put tens of thousands of people out of work and brought the territory’s fragile economy to a standstill, mainly hurting ordinary Gazans.
EU officials will discuss the possibility of helping reopen Gaza’s border crossings, Ashton added. The EU helped monitor Gaza’s southern border with Egypt until Hamas took power in 2007.
The partial lifting of the siege did not satisfy Hamas.
“We want a real lifting of the siege, not window-dressing,” said Hamas politician Salah Bardawil.
Israel, with Egypt’s cooperation, imposed the blockade three years ago after Hamas, which calls for Israel’s destruction, violently wrested control of Gaza. For the most part, only basic humanitarian goods have been allowed in.
But the blockade failed to achieve its aims of stanching the flow of weapons to Gaza, weakening Hamas or winning the release of an Israeli soldier held in captivity in Gaza for years. A network of smuggling tunnels under the Egypt-Gaza border became a conduit for both weapons and commercial goods sold at black market prices. Gazans sank deeper into poverty, turning their anger against Israel and not their Hamas rulers.
Israel drew new scrutiny of the embargo when it sent naval commandos to stop a blockade-busting flotilla in late May. The troops clashed with activists on board one of the ships, killing nine Turks. Both sides said they acted in self-defence.
In the West Bank, the rival pro-Western Palestinian government of President Mahmoud Abbas also criticized the Israeli decision. Negotiator Saeb Erekat said the closure should be ended altogether. “The siege is collective punishment and it must be lifted.”
Amid the heavy international criticism that followed the Israeli naval raid, Egypt opened its land border crossing with Gaza — the main gateway for some residents to enter and exit the crowded territory.
But most Gazans remained confined to the territory. Egypt is only letting in people with special travel permits, such as students and Gazans with foreign passports. In the past two weeks, only 10,000 Gazans have crossed into Egypt.
On Sunday, the Israeli commission appointed to investigate the flotilla attack met for the first time. Two international observers are to join the deliberations later.
EDITOR: Speaking in Tongues…
Read this please. Two announcements from the same Netanyahu office at the same time, but saying very different things, as one is in Hebrew intended internally, while the English one is for export…
Prime Minister’s office issues two statements, one in English announcing plan to ease blockade, and one in Hebrew devoid of binding decision.
The Prime Minister’s Office announced on Thursday that the security cabinet had agreed to relax Israel’s blockade on the Gaza Strip, but as it turns out, no binding decision was ever made during the cabinet meeting.
The Prime Minister’s Office issued a press release in English following the meeting, which was also sent to foreign diplomats, was substantially different than the Hebrew announcement – according to the English text, a decision was made to ease the blockade, but in the Hebrew text there was no mention of any such decision.
It is not clear whether this discrepancy was a deliberate attempt to buy time in the face of international pressure, or a clerical omission on behalf of the Prime Minister’s Office.
The cabinet ministers held a long discussion on Wednesday and another one Thursday morning on the topic of altering Israel’s policy following the three-year siege on the Hamas ruled territory. The siege was imposed after Hamas violently seized control over the Gaza Strip in 2007. The aim of the discussions was to approve a plan drafted by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the envoy of the Quartet of Middle East peace negotiators Tony Blair. The discussions spanned a total of six hours, but no decision was ever made.
During both meetings, many ministers voiced their opinions regarding the blockade, and the defense establishment presented the plans for the “liberalization” of the blockade. However, upon concluding the discussions, the ministers did not vote on any binding practical draft of the decision. In fact, the policy by which the government is currently bound is the one decided by the security cabinet during the previous term of former prime minister Ehud Olmert, by which the blockade remains as it was.
Two official statements came out of the Prime Minister’s Office in regard to the security cabinet meeting – one in Hebrew for the Israeli media and another in English for the foreign media and foreign diplomats. The English version said that “It was agreed to liberalize the system by which civilian goods enter Gaza [and] expand the inflow of materials for civilian projects that are under international supervision.” The Hebrew version addressed mainly remarks made by Netanyahu, but failed to mention any decision or agreement.
The Hebrew version also failed to mention whether the prime minister’s position was formally approved. “Israel will alter the system in order to allow more civilian goods into Gaza,” the Hebrew statement read.
In addition to the English statement, word was sent to foreign consulates and embassies indicating that the decision made by the security cabinet will be implemented immediately. However, according to the officials charged with the actual monitoring of the transfer of goods into Gaza, they have not been notified of any change in policy as a result of the cabinet meeting.
A senior defense official said Thursday that “there was every intention to increase the transfer of goods into Gaza even before the cabinet meeting. We have notified the Palestinians, regardless of the cabinet meeting, that we will allow the entry of food items, house wares, writing implements, mattresses and toys. Beyond that, we have not said a thing.”
Sources at the Prime Minister’s Office admitted that there was no decision, and no vote, during the security cabinet meeting. One of the sources said that “it was a briefing by the prime minister,” and another source said it was a “declaration of intent.”
“A meeting will be held soon, and we hope that a binding decision will be taken then,” the prime minister’s office said, explaining that the reason for the delay is “the need for continued contact with allies within the international community in order to gain support for the liberalization plan.” This despite the fact that most of the international community has already voiced support for the plan, following a campaign launched by Blair, who drafted the plan with Netanyahu.
Stéphane Hessel
Israel’s illegal and immoral attack on the Freedom Flotilla humanitarian aid convoy, which left at least nine dead and dozens injured, has rightfully stunned the world. The all-civilian convoy of 6 ships carried over 10,000 tons of critically-needed humanitarian aid and nearly 700 citizens from 40 countries. The Flotilla was an ambitious attempt to break the siege imposed by Israel on the 1.5 million Palestinians of the occupied Gaza strip, since 2007. Carrying distinguished parliamentarians, religious leaders, authors, journalists, a Nobel Peace Laureate, and a Holocaust survivor, the relief convoy aimed not only to provide relief supplies to Gaza; it sought to direct the international spotlight towards the humanitarian crisis imposed on Gaza’s residents and the imperative to end it. There is no denying that the latter objective has succeeded, albeit with tragic consequences.
The Israeli attack on the unarmed aid convoy in international waters was “[a clear] violation of international humanitarian law, international law of the seas, and [by most interpretations] international criminal law,” to use the words of Richard Falk, Professor of International Law and UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. It is a sad reality that world governments have for too long become either complicit or apathetic to Israel’s crimes and fostered its culture of impunity, under a shield of unquestionable backing by the US. Its initial condemnation notwithstanding, the US government has pressured the UN Security Council members, again, to adopt ambiguous language which relieves Israel of responsibility and creates parity between aggressor and victim.
Characteristically, the Israeli government has blamed the victims of its raid for attacking the Israeli soldiers, claiming “self-defense.” Prominent legal expert and Director of the Sydney Centre for International Law at Sydney Law School, Professor Ben Saul, squarely refutes Israel’s claim arguing: “Legally speaking, government military forces rappelling onto a ship to illegally capture it are treated no differently than other criminals. The right of self-defense in such situations rests with the passengers on board: a person is legally entitled to resist one’s own unlawful capture, abduction and detention.” He adds that “if Israeli forces killed people, they may not only have infringed the human right to life, but they may also have committed serious international crimes. Under article 3 of the Rome Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation of 1988, it is an international crime for any person to seize or exercise control over a ship by force, and also a crime to injure or kill any person in the process.”
Despite UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon’s statement calling for an end to Israel’s illegal siege of Gaza, the Security Council has failed to call for an unconditional end to the blockade, allowing Israel to commit grave war crimes with impunity, as well documented in the UN Goldstone report.
The absence of meaningful action from governments to hold Israel accountable to international law leaves open one path for citizens of conscience: to take this responsibility upon themselves, as done against apartheid South Africa. Non-violent citizen-led initiatives, exemplified by the Flotilla and the various boycott and divestment campaigns around the world, present the most promising way to overcome the failure of world governments to stand up to Israel’s intransigence and lawless behavior. By flagrantly attacking the aid ship, Israel has inadvertently brought unprecedented awareness and condemnation not only of its fatal siege of Gaza but also of the wider context of Israel’s occupation practices in the Palestinian Territories, its denial of Palestinian refugee rights, and its apartheid policies against the indigenous, “non-Jewish” citizens of Israel.
The Freedom Flotilla brings to mind the kind of civil society solidarity initiatives which brought an end to segregation laws in the US and apartheid in South Africa, an analogy impossible to ignore. Like the apartheid regime of South Africa, Israel’s reaction has been to label this non-violent act an “intentional provocation.” As in the case of South Africa, the call for international solidarity, in the form of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) came from an overwhelming majority of Palestinian civil society unions and organizations in 2005, and is being embraced by citizens of conscience and social movements worldwide. The BDS initiative calls for effectively isolating Israel, its complicit business, academic and cultural institutions, as well as companies profiting from its human rights violations and illegal policies, as long as these policies continue.
I believe that the BDS initiative is a moral strategy which has demonstrated its potential for success. Most recently, German Deutsche Bank became the latest of several European financial institutions and major pension funds to divest from Israeli arms manufacturer Elbit Systems. Last week, two main Italian supermarket chains announced a boycott of produce from illegal Israeli settlements. Last month, performers Elvis Costello and Gil Scott-Heron cancelled appearances in Israel. Reminiscent of the South African anti-apartheid popular struggle, the current generation of students across university campuses is actively calling upon their administrations to adopt divestment policies.
I endorse the heartfelt words of Scottish writer Iain Banks, who in reaction to Israel’s atrocious attack on the Freedom Flotilla suggested that the best way for international artists, writers and academics to “convince Israel of its moral degradation and ethical isolation” is “simply by having nothing more to do with this criminal government.”
Stéphane Frédéric Hessel is a diplomat, former ambassador, French resistance fighter and BCRA agent. Born German, he obtained French nationality in 1937. He participated in the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948.
15 June 2010
He said Israel had been pressuring states like France and South Korea not to sell Jordan nuclear technology.
Israel, believed to be the only country in the Middle East that has nuclear weapons, has denied the accusation.
High oil prices are pushing countries to consider nuclear energy, but the spread of the technology increases the risk of proliferation, analysts say.
‘Underhanded’
In a lengthy interview in The Wall Street Journal, King Abdullah strongly criticised Israel for what he said were its efforts to persuade potential suppliers to abandon plans to sell Jordan nuclear power generating reactors, something Israel denies.
There are many reactors in the world and a lot more coming, so [the Israelis must] go mind their own business
King Abdullah
He said Israel’s “underhanded” actions have helped bring Jordan-Israeli relations to their lowest point since a 1994 peace agreement.
“There are countries, Israel in particular, that are more worried about us being economically independent than the issue of nuclear energy,” King Abdullah said. “There are many such reactors in the world and a lot more coming, so [the Israelis must] go mind their own business.”
Jordan, with US backing, is determined to develop nuclear power to escape from its near total dependence upon imported oil.
It hopes that nuclear energy will provide up to 30% of its power needs by 2030.
The desert kingdom recently short-listed a French-Japanese consortium, as well a Canadian and a Russian company, to build its first nuclear plant, due to be operational by 2019.
The Obama administration, while supportive of Jordan’s nuclear ambitions, is worried that the spread of nuclear power could open the door to the proliferation of nuclear weapons, the BBC’s diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus reports.
So Washington wants to secure a nuclear agreement with Jordan under which the country would surrender its right to manufacture its own uranium fuel, our correspondent says.
That could prove a major sticking point between these two long-time allies, he adds.
Defense Minister says ‘the international preoccupation’ with Israel following the flotilla controversy emphasizes the need to rebuild ties with the United States.
Tags: Israel news Gaza flotilla Ehud Barak Benjamin Netanyahu
Defense Minister Ehud Barak has stressed to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other members of the forum of seven senior ministers that Israel must put forth a “daring and assertive political initiative” in the coming months to emerge from its international isolation of the past year.
Barak will travel to Washington for talks with senior administration officials on advancing the peace process with the Palestinians.
A senior political source in Jerusalem said that in talks at the forum of seven after the Gaza flotilla incident, Barak spoke a great deal about the damage to Israel’s international standing. He repeated this stance in talks about setting up a commission of inquiry.
Barak said that “the international preoccupation” with Israel following the flotilla controversy emphasizes the need to rebuild ties with the United States.
“There is no way to rehabilitate ties with the administration without presenting an assertive political program that will address the core issues of a final settlement with the Palestinians,” Barak told Netanyahu and his other colleagues. “It is necessary to make decisions and take genuine political steps.”
Barak stressed that the flotilla incident and the assistance of the Obama administration at blocking the establishment of an international commission of inquiry prove how much Israel needs to assist the United States in pushing the peace process forward. If the United States’ standing in the world is undermined further, Israel is the one that will suffer, Barak said.
“A political initiative will break us out of the isolation and prevent phenomena like the flotillas to the Gaza Strip and international investigations,” Barak told the forum of seven.
“There have been governments in Israel that were able to operate freely from a military point of view only because they initiated political moves. We all need to think what the alternative would be to presenting a political program and what is the significance of continuing with the current situation. Israel’s isolation will only intensify.”
One reason Barak is trying to convince Netanyahu and the other ministers of the need for change is the growing pressure from within the Labor Party. Ministers from the Labor Party including Isaac Herzog and Benjamin Ben-Eliezer have questioned whether the party should remain in the coalition if the political standstill continues.
The head of the Histadrut labor federation, Ofer Eini, has joined the criticism; Eini is considered a future candidate for the post of party chairman.
The senior political source said that Barak did not pose an ultimatum or threaten leaving the coalition, but in many discussions with the prime minister he made it clear that there is little time left for Israel to present a political initiative.
The next six months are likely to be critical, with September marking the end of the construction freeze in the settlements. Meanwhile, the UN General Assembly will meet in October, followed by the congressional elections in the United States in November.
Barak says that this is the time frame for making a political decision. If an initiative is undertaken, it may be necessary to broaden the coalition by including Kadima. If not, Labor may leave, which would leave Netanyahu with a narrower coalition government including right-wing parties Shas and Yisrael Beiteinu.
Wednesday, 16 June 2010 King Abdullah II of Jordan: ‘There will be many more reactors coming, so the Israelis should go mind their own business’
Jordan’s King Abdullah II has accused Israel of making “underhand” efforts to prevent the Middle Eastern country from developing a peaceful nuclear energy programme.
In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, King Abdullah said Israel had sought to persuade countries such as France and South Korea not to sell Jordan the nuclear technology it needs to develop its own civilian nuclear power industry.
“There are countries, Israel in particular, that are more worried about us being economically independent than the issue of nuclear energy, and have been voicing their concerns,” King Abdullah said. “There are many such reactors in the world and a lot more coming, so [the Israelis should] go mind their own business.”
King Abdullah, a vital ally of Israel in a largely hostile Middle East, warned that Israeli meddling in its nuclear ambitions had helped plunge relations between the two countries to their lowest point since a peace agreement was signed in 1994.
Israel, universally thought to have developed its own nuclear weapons, has long voiced its fears of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East triggered by the threat of Iran’s atomic ambitions. The United Nations and the West suspect Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons under the guise of a civilian energy programme.
Jordan discovered huge deposits of uranium ore in 2007, giving the kingdom a tantalising glimpse of what an energy future free of dependence on costly oil imports might look like. Under an ambitious new energy strategy, Jordan envisages that nuclear energy will meet 30 per cent of its energy needs by 2030.
Crucially, Amman has won backing for its nuclear ambitions from Washington, which is seeking to promote the civilian use of atomic energy. Jordan is currently working out a nuclear cooperation deal with the US that would see American companies bring technology and know-how to Jordan.
The deal has been thrown into jeopardy, however, because the US does not want Jordan to produce its own nuclear fuel, the newspaper reported.
The accord would not prevent Jordan from mining the uranium, but it would not be allowed to convert it to fuel.
Jordanian officials have argued that the kingdom, a signatory of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, has the right to produce the reactor fuel that would help shore up the country’s economy.
King Abdullah argued that Jordan’s model to involve private companies in the project would allay international concerns, and set an example for other countries. Besides Iran, both Syria and Israel have tried to block external scrutiny of their nuclear capabilities.
“I believe nuclear energy in Jordan will be done in such a way where it is a public-private partnership so everyone can see exactly what’s going on,” King Abdullah said. “If we can be the model of transparency, it will push others.”
A spokesman from the Israeli Prime Minister’s office declined to comment on the Jordanian claims.
MK Afu Aghbaria, speaking at a hearing of the European Parliament, also said 700 Gazans have died at border crossings due to Israel’s actions.
Speaking at a hearing of the European Parliament, MK Afu Aghbaria (Hadash) accused Israel of deliberately harassing the residents of the Gaza Strip and called for Israeli leaders to be tried at the International Criminal Court.
The hearing, also attended by MK Nahman Shai (Kadima) and MK Einat Wolf (Labor), was organized by the Communist Party in the European Parliament.
“In its 62 years of existence, Israel has attacked its neighbors and its Arab citizens nonstop,” Aghbaria said.
“Israel prevents the passage of medicines and medical supplies to Gaza. As a result of this, 700 Gazans have died at the border crossings. [Benjamin] Netanyahu, [Ehud] Barak, [Avigdor] Lieberman and [Tzipi] Livni should be brought to the International Criminal Court in The Hague,” the lawmaker said.
Shai and Wilf quickly condemned Aghbaria’s words, in a joint statement.
“It is very grave that at a time when MKs are making every effort to calm spirits, lessen the damage and bring a positive message to the European Parliament, an Arab MK comes and arouses tempers and takes advantage of his position to call on the European Parliament to enact sanctions on Israel,” they said.
“We plan to bring the contents of MK Aghbaria’s speech to the attention of Knesset speaker Reuven Rivlin.”
EDITOR: Is this a joke?
Now, after more than 18 months, with Israel leaders responsible for the senseless murder of over 1400 Palestinians in Gaza, the IOF has found fit to take ONE soldiers to court-martial for the ‘killing of two women”…
According to the Army Radio report, solider suspected of opening fire at the women in an alleged disregard of the IDF’s rules of engagement.
According to the Army Radio report, the solider will be charged with opening fire at the women in an alleged disregard of the IDF’s rules of engagement during Operation Cast Lead, Israel’s three-week war on Hamas which took place which took place in late 2008 and early 2009.
An Israel Defense Forces soldier is to face charges over the fatal shooting of two Palestinian women during Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza early last year, Army Radio reported on Wednesday.
According to the Army Radio report, the solider will be charged with opening fire at the women in an alleged disregard of the IDF’s rules of engagement during Operation Cast Lead, Israel’s three-week war on Hamas which took place which took place in late 2008 and early 2009.
Israel’s military conduct during the Gaza war was severely criticized by a UN report compiled by former South African jurist Richard Goldstone, who charged both Israel and Hamas with war crimes and acts that amounted to crimes against humanity, saying that the conflict dominated by Israel’s military superiority had killed 1,400 Palestinians and caused widespread damage to properties in Gaza.
Earlier this year, Israel submitted its response at the end of a three-month deadline set by the United Nations General Assembly for issuing its own report on the Israel-Hamas fighting in Gaza Strip.
“This morning we handed the UN a report of the investigations and operations that took place during Operation Cast Lead,” Barak, who was speaking at a Jewish National Fund tree-planting ceremony near the Negev town of Omer, said. “This report stresses that the IDF is like no other army, both from a moral standpoint as well as from a professional standpoint.”
“All of the soldiers and officers whom we sent to battle need to know that the state of Israel stands behind them even on the day after,” Barak said.
The UN General Assembly has already endorsed the controversial investigation led by South African Judge Richard Goldstone on the 22-day fighting between December 2008 and January 2009.
Mad Israelis section
EDITOR: Melanie Phillips is not Israeli, indeed. But this piece by John Crace is too good to miss, so I have upgraded Melanie to an Honorary Israeli, so this can be included…
Encounter Books, £13.99
John Crace, 14 June 2010
This book arose from a sense of perplexity that almost everyone in the world thought I was clinically mad. Everywhere I looked there were people who believed boarding a humanitarian aid convoy in international waters and murdering nine people was a little bit naughty. So I did what I’ve always done as a columnist for the Daily Mail; go where my bigotry leads.
Conspiracy theories abound in public life. Almost all of them are based on myth. The simple fact is that global warming is a lie created by politically correct liberals who are holding the universe to ransom. The reality is that not a single glacier has melted in Israel over the last 50 years. Likewise, green activists try to claim the teeny oil-spill in the Gulf of Mexico is an environmental disaster. How much oil has been washed up on the beaches of Eilat? None.
The legitimacy of the war in Iraq has been similarly subverted. Hard-line Trotskyists say we were led into the war on a lie. This is not the case. After Saddam Hussein was toppled, Mossad found huge caches of nuclear weapons in bunkers throughout the country. Understandably, Mossad chose not to go public with this because, as a responsible government agency, it didn’t want to worry anyone unduly.
Not that anyone has ever thanked Israel for this act of global compassion. But this is symptomatic of the way Israel is misrepresented. It is often suggested the Palestinians have an equal right to Israeli lands. This is demonstrably false. If you follow the Old Testament family tree from Adam to Abraham, you can see God gave the country to the Jews. Indeed, it is a mark of Israel’s tolerance that it allows some so-called Palestinians to live in the Gaza slums. And how do the Palestinians repay Israel? By throwing stones. How dare the world complain if Israel responds proportionately by returning the Palestinians to the Stone Age where they belong?
These falsehoods are presented as unchallengeable truths; in fact, they are anti-Semitic leftwing ideologies based on twisted evidence. We now live in a world of moral relativism where to believe in scientific inquiry or to be gay or a Muslim is socially acceptable. How can any right thinking person go along with this new age of Reason? The Enlightenment has a lot to answer for. Surely it must be apparent to even Richard Dawkins that he couldn’t have written the God Delusion without God’s help? Though obviously not the Muslim God because he doesn’t exist.
Secularism is the curse of modern life. If everyone went to Synagogue to thank the Intelligent Designer there would be no more conflict. Instead there is a global coalition of Muslims, environmentalists and vegetarians whose sole purpose is to destroy the state of Israel. The 9/11 attack on the World Trade Centre – co-ordinated by Osama bin Laden and George Monbiot – was nothing less than a dry run for a ram raid on the Burger King in central Tel Aviv.
Anti-Zionists claim the neocons are in the pockets of the Jews. Nonsense. Reason naturally aligns itself with reason. That is why no reasonable person can possibly be a Muslim. Many of the central tenets of Islam run contrary to Judaism and since Judaism is correct in every respect, ergo it must be irrational to be nice to Muslims. Yet such is our topsy-turvy world it is the Jews who get demonised for trying to do everyone a favour by preventing the Palestinians from becoming a recognised terrorist state.
The anti-Semitic lies proliferate at a terrifying speed. The most pernicious is that Israel has no sense of humour. What’s not to laugh about Mossad agents flying in to Dubai and taking out an Arab? All I can say is thank God there are still some fearless media outlets, such as Fox News and the Daily Mail, who are prepared to stand up for the truth. Hey? What’s with the strait-jacket? Where are you taking me?
Digested read, digested: Black is white.
12/06/10
Uri Avneri
If a real Commission of Inquiry had been set up (instead of the pathetic excuse for a commission), here are some of the questions it should have addressed:
What is the real aim of the Gaza Strip blockade?
If the aim is to prevent the flow of arms into the Strip, why are only 100 products allowed in (as compared to the more than 12 thousand products in an average Israeli supermarket)?
Why is it forbidden to bring in chocolate, toys, writing material, many kinds of fruits and vegetables (and why cinnamon but not coriander)?
What is the connection between the decision to forbid the import of construction materials for the replacement or repair of the thousands of buildings destroyed or damaged during the Cast Lead operation and the argument that they may serve Hamas for building bunkers – when more than enough materials for this purpose are brought into the Strip through the tunnels?
Is the real aim of the blockade to turn the lives of the 1.5 million human beings in the Strip into hell, in the hope of inducing them to overthrow the Hamas regime?
Since this has not happened, but – on the contrary – Hamas has become stronger during the three years of the blockade, did the government ever entertain second thoughts on this matter?
Has the blockade been imposed in the hope of freeing the captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit?
If so, has the blockade contributed anything to the realization of this aim, or has it been counter-productive?
Why does the Israeli government refuse to exchange Shalit for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners, when Hamas agrees to such a deal?
Is it true that the US government has imposed a veto on the exchange of prisoners, on the grounds that it would strengthen Hamas?
Has there been any discussion in our government about fulfilling its undertaking in the Oslo agreement – to enable and encourage the development of the Gaza port – in a way that would prevent the passage of arms?
Why does the Israeli government declare again and again that the territorial waters of the Gaza strip are part of Israel’s own territorial waters, and that ships entering them “infringe on Israeli sovereignty”, contrary to the fact that the Gaza Strip was never annexed to Israel and that Israel officially announced in 2006 that it had “separated” itself from it?
Why has the Attorney General’s office declared that the peace activists captured on the high seas, who had no intention whatsoever of entering Israel, had “tried to enter Israel illegally”, and brought them before a judge for the extension of their arrest under the law that concerns “illegal entry into Israel”?
Who is responsible for these contradictory legal claims, when the Israeli government argues one minute that Israel has “separated itself from the Gaza Strip” and that the “occupation there has come to an end” – and the next minute claims sovereignty over the coastal waters of the Strip?
Questions concerning the decision to attack the flotilla: When did the preparation for this flotilla become known to the Israeli intelligence services? (Evidence on this may be heard in camera.)
When was this brought to the attention of the Prime Minister, the Minister of Defense, the Cabinet, the Committee of Seven (in charge of security matters) and the IDF Chief of Staff? (ditto)
What were the deliberations of these officials and institutions? (ditto)
What intelligence was submitted to each of them? (ditto)
When, by whom and how was the decision taken to stop the flotilla by force?
Is it true that the secretary of the cabinet, Tzvi Hauser, warned of the severe consequences of such action and advised letting the flotilla sail to Gaza?
Were there others who also advised doing so?
Was the Foreign Ministry a full partner in all the discussions?
If so, did the Foreign Ministry warn of the impact of such an action on our relations with Turkey and other countries?
In light of the fact that, prior to the incident, the Turkish government informed the Israeli Foreign Ministry that the flotilla was organized by a private organization which is not under the control of the government and does not violate any Turkish law – did the Foreign Ministry consider approaching the organization in order to try to reach an agreement to avoid violence?
Was due consideration given to the alternative of stopping the flotilla in territorial waters, inspecting the cargo for arms and letting it sail on?
Was the impact of the action on international public opinion considered?
Was the impact of the action on our relations with the US considered?
Was it taken into consideration that the action may actually strengthen Hamas?
Was it taken into consideration that the action may make the continuation of the blockade more difficult?
Questions concerning the planning of the action: What intelligence was at the disposal of the planners? (Evidence may be heard in camera.)
Was it considered that the composition of the group of activists in this flotilla was different from that in earlier protest ships, because of the addition of the Turkish component?
Was it taken into consideration that contrary to the European peace activists, who believe in passive resistance, the Turkish activists may adopt a policy of active resistance to soldiers invading a Turkish ship?
Were alternative courses of action considered, such as blocking the progress of the flotilla with navy boats?
If so, what were the alternatives considered, and why were they rejected?
Who was responsible for the actual planning of the operation – the IDF Chief of Staff or the Commander of the Navy?
If it was the Navy Commander who decided on the method employed, was the decision approved by the Chief of Staff, the Minister of Defense and the Prime Minister?
How were the responsibilities for planning divided between these?
Why was the action undertaken outside of the territorial waters of Israel and the Gaza Strip?
Why was it executed in darkness?
Did anyone in the navy object to the idea of soldiers descending from helicopters onto the deck of the ship “Mavi Marmara”?
During the deliberations, did anyone bring up the similarity between the planned operation and the British action against the ship “Exodus 1947”, which ended in a political disaster for the British?
Questions concerning the action itself: Why was the flotilla cut off from any contact with the world throughout the operation, if there was nothing to hide?
Did anyone protest that the soldiers were actually being sent into a trap?
Was it taken into consideration that the plan adopted would place the soldiers for several critical minutes in a dangerously inferior position?
When exactly did the soldiers start to shoot live ammunition?
Which of the soldiers was the first to fire?
Was the shooting – all or part of it – justified?
Is it true that the soldiers started firing even before descending onto the deck, as asserted by the passengers?
Is it true that the fire continued even after the captain of the ship and the activists announced several times over loudspeakers that the ship had surrendered, and after they had actually hoisted white flags?
Is it true that five of the nine people killed were shot in the back, indicating that they were trying to get away from the soldiers and thus could not be endangering their lives?
Why was the killed man Ibrahim Bilgen, 61 years old and father of six and a candidate for mayor in his home town, described as a terrorist?
Why was the killed man Cetin Topcoglu, 54 years old, trainer of the Turkish national taekwondo (Korean martial arts) team, whose wife was also on the ship, described as a terrorist?
Why was the killed man Cevdet Kiliclar, a 38 year old journalist, described as a terrorist?
Why was the killed man Ali Haydar Bengi, father of four, graduate of the al-Azhar school for literature in Cairo, described as a terrorist?
Why were the killed men Necdet Yaldirim, 32 years old, father of a daughter; Fahri Yaldiz, 43 years old, father of four; Cengiz Songur, 47 years old, father of seven; and Cengiz Akyuz, 41 years old, father of three, described as terrorists?
Is it a lie that the activists took a pistol from a soldier and shot him with it, as described by the IDF, or is it true that the activists did in fact throw the pistol into the sea without using it?
Is it true, as stated by Jamal Elshayyal, a British subject, that the soldiers prevented treatment for the Turkish wounded for three hours, during which time several of them died?
Is it true, as stated by this journalist, that he was handcuffed behind his back and forced to kneel for three hours in the blazing sun, that he was not allowed to go and urinate and told to “piss in his pants”, that he remained handcuffed for 24 hours without water, that his British passport was taken from him and not returned; that his laptop computer, three cellular telephones and 1500 dollars in cash were taken from him and not returned?
Did the IDF cut off the passengers from the world for 48 hours and confiscate all the cameras, films and cell phones of the journalists on board in order to suppress any information that did not conform to the IDF story?
Is it a standing procedure to keep the Prime Minister (or his acting deputy, Moshe Yaalon in this case) in the picture during an operation, was this procedure implemented, and was it implemented in previous cases, such as the Entebbe operation or the boarding of the ship “Karin A”?
Questions concerning the behavior of the IDF Spokesman: IS it true that the IDF Spokesman spread a series of fabrications during the first few hours, in order to justify the action in the eyes of both the Israeli and the international public?
Are the few minutes of film which have been shown hundreds of times on Israeli TV, from the first day on until now, a carefully edited clip, so that it is not seen what happened just before and just after?
What is the truth of the assertion that the soldiers who were taken by the activists into the interior of the ship were about to be “lynched”, when the photos clearly show that they were surrounded for a considerable time by dozens of activists without being harmed, and that a doctor or medic from among the activists even treated them?
What evidence is there for the assertion that the Turkish NGO called IHH has connections with al-Qaeda?
On what grounds was it stated again and again that it was a “terrorist organization”, though no evidence for this claim was offered?
Why was it asserted that the association was acting under the orders of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, when in fact it is close to an opposition party?
If it was in fact a terrorist organization known to the Israeli intelligence services, why was this not taken into account during the planning of the operation?
Why did the Israeli government not announce this before the attack on the flotilla?
Why were the words of one of the activists, who declared on his return that he wanted to be a “shahid”, translated by official propaganda in a manifestly dishonest manner, as if he had said that he wanted “to kill and be killed” (“shahid” means a person who sacrifices his life in order to testify to his belief in God, much like a Christian martyr)?
What is the source of the lie that the Turks called out “Go back to Auschwitz”?
Why were the Israeli doctors not called to inform the public at once about the character of the wounds of the injured soldiers, after it was announced that at least one of them was shot?
Who invented the story that there were arms on the ship, and that they had been thrown into the sea?
Who invented the story that the activists had brought with them deadly weapons – when the exhibition organized by the IDF Spokesman himself showed nothing but tools found on any ship, including binoculars, a blood infusion instrument, knives and axes, as well as decorative Arab daggers and kitchen knives that are to be found on every ship, even one not equipped for 1000 passengers?
Do all these items – coupled with the endless repetition of the word “terrorists” and the blocking of any contrary information – not constitute brainwashing?
Questions concerning the inquiry: Why does the Israeli government refuse to take part in an international board of inquiry, composed of neutral personalities acceptable to them?
Why have the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defense announced that they are ready to testify – but not to answer questions?
Where does the argument come from that soldiers must not be called to testify – when in all previous investigations senior officers, junior officers and enlisted men were indeed subjected to questioning?
Why does the government refuse to appoint a State Commission of Inquiry under the Israeli law that was enacted by the Knesset in 1966 for this very purpose, especially in view of the fact that such commissions were appointed after the Yom Kippur war, after the Sabra and Shatila massacre, after the podium of the al-Aqsa Mosque was set on fire by an insane Australian, as well as to investigate corruption in sport and the murder of the Zionist leader Chaim Arlosoroff (some fifty years after it occurred!)?
Does the government have something to fear from such a commission, whose members are appointed by the President of the Supreme Court, and which is empowered to summon witnesses and cross-examine them, demand the production of documents and determine the personal responsibility for mistakes and crimes?
Why was it decided in the end to appoint a pathetic committee, devoid of any legal powers, which will lack all credibility both in Israel and abroad?
And, finally, the question of questions:
What is our political and military leadership trying to hide?
A committee whose makeup and authority are perceived as predetermined will be unable to satisfy international leaders and their constituencies abroad who demanded the inquiry in the first place.
The government yesterday authorized the creation of an independent committee to examine the events surrounding the raid on the Gaza-bound flotilla last month. Unfortunately, neither the committee’s membership nor its authority is suited to meet the challenges posed by the affair.
The committee should have been asked to examine the facts and hold responsible those who caused the incident to end as it it did, thereby allowing Israelis and their government to implement the lessons that need to be learned. Instead, the cabinet created a panel aimed at appeasing the world, in particular the United States. Its authority is too limited to conduct a real investigation, and its makeup raises the suspicion that it is designed more as a public-relations tool than to properly examine the events and reveal the responsible parties.
A panel that is not a state commission of inquiry will be unable to bring justice to bear on those found responsible for the operation’s failings. And no matter how esteemed the committee members may be, all have for decades been away from events in both the military and government, and will thus not be able to reach the necessary conclusions. Committee chairman Jacob Turkel’s observation ahead of his appointment that certain people must not be found at fault raises a question mark over whether he was selected precisely because of that remark.
Stopping the flotilla has already caused Israel immense political damage. Stopping a real investigation by appointing a committee with such limited powers is liable to lead to further damage not only to Israel’s image abroad, but also to its capacity to avoid similar imbroglios in the future. It is hard to believe that the newly appointed committee, even though it includes two international observers, will convince the world that Israel is seriously investigating the raid’s operational failures.
The government had an opportunity to try to control the damage it brought on itself by conducting an audacious and comprehensive investigation. Yesterday the government missed that opportunity. The strange hybrid that emerged instead – both its puzzling membership and weak mandate – bodes ill for Israel. A committee whose makeup and authority are perceived as predetermined will be unable to satisfy international leaders and their constituencies abroad who demanded the inquiry in the first place. It would therefore have been better if the Turkel committee had never been born, sparing us the deceptive appearance of a real investigation.
Israel’s Defense Minister Ehud Barak canceled an official visit to Paris on Sunday (13 June), announcing he would stay in Israel while the government establishes an investigative committee to explore Israel’s deadly naval attack on the Freedom Flotilla.
The announcement comes after French activists who were aboard the Gaza bound aid convoy threatened to bring charges against Barak over the raid that killed nine. The suit would be filed under the principle of universal jurisdiction, a principle that allows the prosecution of suspected war criminals in countries that have no direct connection with the events, in France and in the International Criminal Court in The Hague, according to the Associated Press. Three members of French parliament have also joined the effort.
“We must stop this bloody Israeli escalation and the only way is international judiciary. We want to stop Israel through punishing its leaders who partook in the operation. We will mainly target the leaders who gave the orders and those who executed them,” said Lilian Jalok, who represents the French activists.
Barak was set to dedicate a new Israeli booth at the Eurosatory arms fair, which opens in Paris this week.
“We believe it is unacceptable and unjust that the French government hosts Ehud Barak honoring him with official ceremonies after he claimed responsibility for the attack on our flotilla and the bloodshed,” said Tomas Hud, one of the Freedom Flotilla activists.
A small French cinema chain also took action to protest the Freedom Flotilla attack. The Utopia art cinemas canceled screenings of the Israeli comedy “Five Hours from Paris” and replaced them with the documentary “Rachel,” about an American student crushed to death by a bulldozer in 2003 while protesting Israeli house demolitions in Gaza.
“It was a protest of our whole company,” Anne-Marie Faucon, the co-founder of Utopia, said in an interview. “We show many Israeli films, we organize a lot of debates on what happens in the world, but this time we reacted very strongly and in a very emotional way.”
“Rachel” is a documentary made by Simone Bitton, a Moroccan-born, French-Israeli director who emigrated to Israel with her family as a child, served in the Israeli army, became a pacifist and mostly lives in France, wrote the New York Times. Bitton is also the director of “Wall,” a 2004 documentary about the Israeli Separation Wall that is dividing Palestinian communities and carving up land.
After Israeli-Dutch director Ludi Boeken told the Utopia he planned to withdraw his film, “Saviors in the Night,” from the cinemas “in solidarity with the censored,” and Culture Minister of France, Frédéric Mitterrand, contacted Ms. Faucon voicing his “incomprehension” and “disapproval,” the cinemas relented.
It “was a symbolic and limited gesture” Ms. Faucon said, stating that Utopia had planned to eventually release the Israeli comedy. She called “Rachel” “a film that corresponds perfectly to this mission of participating in democratic debate.”
EDITOR: War Criminal Blair rises from his deep slumber
As a prize for his war crimes on behalf of the House of Bush II, Mr. Blair got this cushy job in Jerusalem, which also allowed him to collect $1million from Israel through the Tel Aviv University. He has spent the last few years in hibernation, seldom arising from his lair. He has managed to keep his silence through thick and thin, and now appears set to collect some coupons for the coming end of the blockade, when in reality he was one of the main supporters of the blockade. You can see what he said a week ago in the item below, speaking to the Jewish Chronicle.
By Geoff Meade, Press Association
Monday, 14 June 2010
The world must give “hope, help and prospects” to the people of Gaza, Tony Blair insisted today.
Emerging from talks with EU foreign ministers in Luxembourg, he repeated his belief that the Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip will be eased within days.
The key, he said, was an agreement to change from a situation in which Israel operates a limited list of permitted goods allowed through border crossings into Gaza, to a prohibited list of goods – weapons and “combat material” – which are not.
“After my talks (with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu), there is now in principle a commitment by Israel to move to such a list,” he said.
That would mean Israel maintaining the existing blockade to keep out arms while allowing in building materials and foodstuffs essential to normal daily life, Mr Blair said.
The change would simplify access for non-military goods, “rather than people struggling to get household items and foodstuffs in, rather than them having to fight over almost every bit of construction material”.
The former UK prime minister and current Middle East envoy added: “Most of all we must give the people of Gaza some hope, some help and some prospects.
“I believe and hope that we can reach a situation where we get a policy with regard to Gaza which is right regarding security, and regarding the people of Gaza and which gives the people of Gaza eventually the prospects of joining a two-state solution.”
Baroness Ashton, European High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, said EU governments were ready to send monitors to help police border crossings as part of any Israeli decision to ease access.
She gave a cautious welcome to Israel’s decision to launch an inquiry into how nine people aboard a flotilla of humanitarian aid ships attempting to breach the blockade were killed by Israeli fire when troops halted the convoy.
A spokesman for Baroness Ashton described the inquiry as “a constructive step” while Mr Blair said: “The issue of the inquiry continues to be an issue of strong political debate … it is a step forward.”
But some EU Governments, notably the Dutch and Swedes, want to see a full international investigation.
That view was included in a statement at the end of today’s talks in which EU foreign ministers expressed deep regret for the loss of life during “the Israeli military operation in international waters” and condemned the use of violence.
The statement declared that “an immediate, full and impartial inquiry into these events and the circumstances surrounding them is essential”.
It went on: “To command the confidence of the international community this should include credible international participation.”
The statement also called for “an immediate, sustained and unconditional opening of crossings for the flow of humanitarian aid, commercial goods and persons to and from Gaza including goods from the West Bank”.
It said the EU stood ready to contribute to the reconstruction of Gaza and its economic revival, adding: “To this end, full and regular access via land crossings, and possibly by sea, on the basis of a list of prohibited goods, should be the prime aim, while at the same time providing strict control over the destination of imported merchandise.”
Oxfam warned that the Gazan economy would continue to “unravel” unless the blockade was completely and immediately lifted.
Jeremy Hobbs, executive director of Oxfam International, said: “The blockade has unleashed a tragic chain reaction that has affected many of Gaza’s one and a half million residents. When a factory is forced to shut down because it can’t import or export, it doesn’t just affect the employees who lose their jobs – entire families relying on that salary also lose out, becoming dependent on humanitarian aid.”
He said that in recent months, Israel had allowed in an increasing number of food items, such as coriander, jam, biscuits and other sweets:
“While this is certainly welcomed, what Gaza needs most are jobs, raw materials for reconstruction and for industry, and the ability to export – not just short-term aid and consumer products like jam that, without a job, they can’t afford to buy.
“The civilian population has been kept just above the bar of a humanitarian crisis. It is trapped in a crisis of dignity that the international community must help resolve.”
Oxfam said Israel currently allows about 100 types of items into Gaza, compared with more than 4,000 before the blockade.
Meanwhile, a ban on political delegations entering Gaza angered Euro-MPs in Brussels today.
The Israeli embassy in Brussels has advised the European Parliament that Israel will no longer “facilitate the entry of political delegations to Gaza”.
The same ban applies to British MPs.
The Israeli letter to all MEPs said the accumulation of political visits “not only undermines Israel’s security but also undermines the efforts of the Palestinian Authority to lead the Palestinian people to peace”.
UK Liberal Democrat MEP Chris Davies, who has been to Gaza four times, said: “I’m not surprised that Israel wants to keep politicians away from Gaza: every time one visits they return horrified at the results of policies that leave more than a million people undergoing collective punishment.”
Mr Davies, a member of the European Parliament’s Palestine Delegation, urged the British Government to open direct talks with Hamas – described in the Israeli letter as a “brutal terrorist organisation which openly calls for Israel’s destruction and appears on the EU’s list of terrorist organisations”.
Mr Davies responded: “I don’t agree with the policies of Hamas but the organisation cannot be ignored. The new British Government should follow the recent lead of the Russian president and meet with their representatives face to face.
“You cannot make peace without talking to your enemies.”
June 9, 2010
Tony Blair said Israel has his full support
Tony Blair has said in an interview that Israel has the right to check supplies that are sent into Gaza.
Speaking on Israeli television, the former British prime minister and Middle East Quartet envoy said the Gaza blockade should be lifted but “when it comes to security, I am one hundred per cent on Israel’s side.”
Mr Blair added: “There’s no question that there are rockets fired from Gaza and that there are people in Gaza who want to kill innocent Israelis.
“Israel has the right to inspect what goes into Gaza.”
He also said that any probe into the clashes between pro-Palestinian activists and the Israel navy should be “full and impartial”.
Mr Blair reiterated concerns about Iran gaining nuclear weapons. “That is not something we should contemplate or allow,” he said.
Poland to rule within month on extraditing alleged Mossad man suspected of obtaining forged passport for January assassination of Hamas leader.
Tags: Israel news Israel Mossad Dubai assassination
Polish prosecutors will ask a Warsaw court to heed Germany’s request to extradite an Israeli man wanted there in connection with the Dubai assassination of a top Hamas official, a prosecutor spokesman said Monday.
The spokesman said prosecutors were not taking politics into consideration, but were acting in accordance with procedures, according to the Polish Press Agency.
An Israeli citizen using the name Uri Brodksy was arrested in Poland over the weekend on suspicion of fraudulently obtaining a German passport believed to have been used by a member of the hit squad that killed Hamas commander Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in a Dubai hotel room in January.
A spokesman for the Polish court said earlier Monday that justices were to rule within a month whether to extradite the suspected Mossad agent in connection with the assassination.
Dubai has accused Israel of being behind the killing and provided the names of more than two dozen alleged members of a team it says tracked and killed the Palestinian, using fraudulent British, Irish, French, German and Australian passports.
Israel has neither confirmed nor denied any role in the assassination, prompting international indignation.
“The man sought by Germany was detained a week ago. He will be held for up to 40 days and during this time the court will have to rule whether to extradite him,” said Wojciech Malek, a spokesman for the Warsaw district court.
A spokesman in the Polish foreign ministry said there had been no formal request from Israel that its citizen be allowed to return home.
A spokesman for the German justice ministry declined to comment on the case, but said EU rules mandated that extraditions take place within 40 days of an arrest.
Mabhouh, born in the Gaza Strip, had lived in Syria since 1989 and Israeli and Palestinian sources have said he played a key role in smuggling Iranian-funded arms to militants in Gaza.
Australia and Britain have both ordered the expulsion of some Israeli diplomats over the use of fake passports in the assassination.
German Activists File War Crimes Complaints
By John Goetz
Left Party parliamentarians Annette Groth (l.) and Inge Höger (r.) together with human rights activist Norman Paech (c.).
Left Party parliamentarians Annette Groth (l.) and Inge Höger (r.) together with human rights activist Norman Paech (c.).
Public prosecutors in Germany are looking into a war crimes complaint filed against Israel by two members of parliament with the far-left Left Party and a human rights activist who were on board the Mavi Marmara when Israeli troops stormed it 11 days ago.
Eleven days ago, the Israeli military stormed the Turkish ship Mavi Marmara, part of a flotilla carrying pro-Palestinian activists toward the Gaza Strip in an attempt to break the Israeli blockade. Now, it has become a case for German prosecutors.
Human rights activist Norman Paech and two German parliamentarians from the far-left Left Party, Annette Groth and Inge Höger, have filed criminal complaints for “numerous potential offences, including war crimes against individuals and command responsibility … as well as false imprisonment.”
At 5:10 a.m. on May 31, the complaint reads, Höger, Groth and Paech heard from the captain of the Mavi Marmara via the ship’s loudspeaker that the Israeli soldiers who had boarded the ship as part of the commando operation were taking over control of the ship. An hour later, Israeli soldiers ordered the Germans on deck, where their backpacks and other belongings were searched. Their hands were temporarily bound.
German Jurisdiction?
It wasn’t until 9:10 p.m. that parliamentarian Annette Groth was given the possibility of contacting the German Embassy. At 2 a.m. on June 1, the Germans were brought to the airport in a prisoner transport vehicle for their flight back home.
According to international criminal law expert Florian Jessberger of Berlin’s Humboldt University, “there is cause to believe that false imprisonment was perpetrated as understood by German law.” He says that German criminal law would have jurisdiction “irrespective of the fact that the act was perpetrated on the high seas.”
German public prosecutors told SPIEGEL ONLINE that they were currently investigating whether there was enough evidence to warrant pursuing the case further.
‘Barbaric’
The Israeli raid of the Mavi Marmara, which resulted in the deaths of nine activists onboard the ship, unleashed a storm of criticism against Israel and its ongoing blockade of the Gaza Strip. It has also severely damaged Israel’s relations with Turkey.
The blockade began in 2007 after the Islamist militants from Hamas took over power in Gaza. Israel claims that many of those traveling with the flotilla had ties to Hamas or other terrorist groups, but the activists deny the charge.
Upon returning home to Germany, Höger told reporters that “we felt like we were in a war, like we had been kidnapped.” Her colleague Groth spoke of a “barbaric act.”
That’s the banner this bus driver decided to adorn his bus with.
Speaking of signs and the commandos, I’ve seen quite a few large banners along the highway that read: “Commando Soldiers, Israel is proud of you!”
Public rage against opposing views has reached a boiling point. Last week on my way to a demonstration protesting Israeli action against the flotilla I walked by
a crowd of right wing protestors screaming “Kill the Lefties, Kills the Lefties” at the top of their lungs. I was glad to see police near by.
That’s the quick Israel report for today.
The three-year Israeli embargo on goods going into Gaza is ‘unacceptable and counterproductive’, says a report by the Quartet.
By Donald Macintyre, Sunday, 13 June 2010
Israel’s cabinet meets today under the heaviest international pressure yet – in the aftermath of its lethal naval commando assault on a pro-Palestinian flotilla a fortnight ago – to relax the three-year economic embargo on Gaza.
Western diplomats are hoping that Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, will give the first indication this morning of a major rethink of Gaza policy, under which a wide range of civilian goods would be admitted to start reviving the paralysed commercial life of the besieged territory. The international Middle East envoy, Tony Blair, met Mr Netanyahu for the third time in eight days on Friday to press him to end the heavily restrictive list of “allowed” civilian goods and produce one for those that are to be banned instead, as a first step towards reviving commerce and allowing postwar reconstruction.
The seemingly technical change would have potentially far-reaching consequences since it would require Mr Netanyahu to agree the general authorisation of civilian imports to Gaza – including raw materials needed for manufacturing and subsequent exports – other than those agreed to pose a clear threat to Israel’s security.
Today’s Israeli cabinet meeting comes 24 hours ahead of a meeting in Brussels of EU foreign ministers, three of whom, France’s Bernard Kouchner, Italy’s Franco Frattini, and Miguel Moratinos of Spain, also called publicly last week for a relaxation of the naval embargo and the reopening of the main cargo crossing between Gaza and Israel at Karni.
The embargo, imposed after Hamas seized full control of Gaza by force when its coalition with Fatah collapsed in June 2007, has precipitated the virtual collapse of Gaza’s once productive private-sector manufacturing industry, decimated agricultural exports, confined the formerly vital fishing industry within a one-mile limit, left 80 per cent of Gazans dependent on food aid, and rendered pointless the vast bulk of the $7.5bn pledged by donor countries for reconstruction after Israel’s 2008-2009 military offensive in the territory.
An insight into the plans being worked on by the Quartet (the UN, US, EU and Russia) – which has specifically mandated Mr Blair to conduct the negotiations with Mr Netanyahu – is contained in a draft of the paper authorised for circulation by the British Foreign Secretary, William Hague, in the wake of the flotilla attack, and which describes the three-year-old blockade as “unacceptable and counterproductive”. It adds that the blockade “hurts the people of Gaza, holds their future hostage, and undermines work to drive reconstruction, development and economic empowerment. At the same time, the blockade empowers Hamas through the tunnel economy and damages Israel’s long-term security through its corrosive impact on a generation of young Palestinians.”
The British draft, which has been seen by The Independent on Sunday, stresses that the new approach is “not about rewarding Hamas”; that the Quartet needs to restate its “wider position on Hamas and its concern about Hamas’s role in Gaza” and repeats calls for the unconditional release of Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier captured by Hamas and other Gaza militants four years ago.
But although the working paper was drafted for last week’s Quartet meeting, it summarises what it says was “already broad agreement” on a package of measures needed to ease the blockade, “including through earlier work by the UN and the Quartet representative [Mr Blair]”. These include:
* Urgent UN-led reconstruction. It says the blockade has prevented implementation of the UN’s “comprehensive” plan for the most urgently needed building of schools, hospitals, sewerage water and other infrastructure;
* Switching from the list of “allowed” to one of “permitted goods” – which it says is “the right way to protect both valid security measures and vital economic activity”;
* “Robust monitoring” of potential dual-use materials such as cement and piping, with the international community playing an important potential role;
* The reopening of Karni, “the only crossing suited to the large volume of goods that need to start flowing”, with a possible EU monitoring role such as that undertaken at Rafah before June 2007;
* Starting seaborne delivery “via [the Israeli port of] Ashdod” to help kickstart both imports and exports;
* A boost in funding for the UN refugee agency UNRWA, which is responsible for the education and health of almost 1 million of Gaza’s 1.5m residents.
The negotiations on the embargo have overlapped with those – especially between Israel and the US – over what form of inquiry should be conducted into the commando raid which halted the flotilla and cost the lives of nine Turks in the fighting aboard the biggest of the boats, the passenger ferry Mavi Marmara. Israel, whose military chief of staff, Gabi Ashekenazi, has appointed Giora Eiland, a reserve general and former head of the national security agency, to head an internal inquiry into the naval operation, has indicated that it will also appoint a former high court judge to head a civilian inquiry. It is not expected that such an inquiry will take testimony from naval special forces personnel who took part in the raid.
While Western governments and Israel have denied any direct linkage between the two issues, diplomats have acknowledged that any expectation that Israel was prepared for a significant relaxation of the Gaza embargo would lessen pressure for a full international inquiry, of the sort proposed by the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon.
The switch from an “allowed” to a “banned” list would be a major policy shift, since the latter would presumably only include goods deemed to put Israel’s security at risk. That would reflect a change of purpose at the time of the original imposition of the embargo – reinforced by the Israeli cabinet’s declaration of Gaza as a “hostile entity” – which had the much wider goal of crippling its economy.
Documents produced by the Israeli authorities at the time in the face of court challenges to the blockade specifically cited international conventions permitting “economic warfare” under certain circumstances. Mr Netanyahu, not then in office, could thus plausibly argue that he had no responsibility for the original decision.
When Israel relaxed the embargo last week to allow in a range of additional foods – from the previously banned coriander, jam, packaged hummus and biscuits – Gisha, the Israeli human rights organisation, pointed out that Israel was still not letting in raw materials like margarine and glucose that could be used for processed food manufacture in Gaza itself.
The same is true of a much wider range of raw materials – such as textile fabrics that up to 2007 were imported in large quantities by hundreds of small clothing firms. It is well nigh impossible to justify a ban on importing rolls of cloth on security grounds.
The switch from a “permitted” to a “banned” list is reportedly envisaged by Mr Blair as the first of three principles for a relaxation of the embargo. The second is that international aid agencies, in consultation with Israel, would have oversight for “dual use” goods which Israel fears could be seized by Hamas for military purposes. The model is the severely limited increase of building materials for sewage, hospital and housing projects in Gaza in the past few weeks, in which the UN has successfully acted as guarantor that the imports will not so be used, and which it wants expanded.
While some Europeans have been suggesting that the naval blockade could be lifted to allow ships to go to Gaza after international and/or Israeli inspection, Israel has so far been resistant to any transfer to Gaza other than by land.
The third is the reopening of land crossings – most notably the big cargo terminal at Karni – in which EU officials, and possibly in the longer term, units of President Mahmoud Abbas’s presidential guard would assume responsibility for monitoring goods entering Gaza.
Israeli blockade has dangerous ramifications for children of Gaza Strip
Amr Moussa, the Arab League secretary-general, has called for an end to Israel’s siege on the Gaza Strip.
“This blockade…must be lifted and must be broken and the Arab League decision is very clear in this regard,” he said on Sunday.
Moussa’s comments came immediately after he arrived in the Gaza Strip, his first visit to the territory since Israel’s imposition of a crippling blockade in 2006.
He told reporters at the Rafah crossing point that Arab governments should help in implementing the Arab League resolution that seeks to end the siege.
Moussa reached the Palestinian side of the Rafah crossing shortly before 10:00am (0700 GMT) where he was welcomed by members of Gaza’s ruling Hamas movement, as well as representatives of various Palestinian groups.
He crossed into the enclave from Egypt, two weeks after Israel’s deadly interception of a Gaza aid flotilla that was intended to deliver humanitarian aid to the territory.
Palestinian reconciliation
At a joint news conference with Moussa shortly after his arrival, Basim Naeem, the Hamas health minister, said the visit indicated that “the boycott between Gaza and the Arab nation was broken”.
Egypt had kept its border with Gaza largely closed, bolstering Israel’s embargo, since Hamas seized control of the Strip from Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah forces in 2007.
But Cairo eased restrictions at its Rafah crossing with the territory after Israeli marines killed nine pro-Palestinian Turkish activists during violent confrontations on the Turkish-flagged aid convoy on May 31.
Palestinian and Arab League officials said Moussa’s visit was also aimed at giving momentum to reconciliation talks between Hamas and Fatah. Egypt has sponsored the talks but they have failed to bridge deep mistrust between the two rivals.
Moussa, however, said he had not come to Gaza to give support to any political faction, but to meet the Palestinian people of the territory.
Ismail Haniya, Hamas’s leader in Gaza, said he hoped that Moussa’s visit would result in practical measures to end the siege on Gaza.
EDITOR: Denial as proof…
The more this deal below is fervently denied, the more persuasive this news seems… again, the Anglo-Americans are out to save Israel from itself. Let us hope Israel prevails and goes on destrying its own foundation…
Britain denies report in the Daily Telegraph that in exchange for decreased world pressure for an international probe into Gaza flotilla events, Israel is expected to ease the Gaza siege.
By Natasha Mozgovaya and Barak Ravid
Tags: Gaza flotilla Benjamin Netanyahu
Britain has denied a report in The Daily Telegraph of a British plan wherein Israel will ease the Gaza siege in exchange for decreased world pressure for an international probe into the events of the Gaza flotilla, the British Embassy in Tel Aviv said in a statement on Wednesday.
“We don’t know where the idea of a quid pro quo came from… the Foreign Secretary has made clear that the current restrictions on Gaza must be lifted in line with UNSCR 1860,” the statement read.
“In this context, we are of course giving some thought to how this might be done, and discussing with our partners, including Israel. Other partners are doing the same, and we hope that all such discussions will lead to rapid progress on this issue,” the statement continued.
The Daily Telegraph reported on Tuesday that Israel is expected to agree to a British proposal in which it will ease the Gaza blockade in exchange for international acceptance of Israel’s internal investigation into the events that led up to the deaths of nine Turkish activists aboard a Gaza-bound flotilla last week.
According to the report in the conservative British daily, Britain has taken upon itself a central role in mediating the crisis that has erupted following the Gaza flotilla events and has drawn up a confidential document proposing ways of easing the blockade on Gaza.
Israeli officials said that in light of growing international criticism over Gaza’s humanitarian situation, they would agree to permit a substantial amount of aid to pass through Israel’s land crossing into the Gaza Strip, the paper reported.
According to the Telegraph, Israeli officials denied any direct link between their readiness to cooperate over the blockade and the decrease in international support for the UN-led proposal for an international probe. However a Western source involved in the discussions with Israel said that there are talks of a mutually beneficial deal.
“A quid pro quo deal is in the offing,” said the Western source.
Moreover, British Foreign Secretary William Hague also hinted that pressure for a UN investigation was easing after he said that a probe with simply international presence may also be acceptable.
U.S.: International probe into Gaza flotilla raid is ‘essential’
Echoing countless calls on Israel to subject itself to an international investigation of the events that led up to the deaths of nine Turkish activists aboard a Gaza-bound aid ship last week, the U.S. on Tuesday demanded that some international body be involved in the probe of the events.
This, after a senior official said earlier Tuesday that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has nearly completed a draft of guidelines for the establishment of a commission of inquiry comprised of Israeli jurists.
The future commission would investigate the clash between Israeli navy commandos who were rappelled onto a Turkish ship, participating in a flotilla attempting to break Israel’s three-year blockade on the Gaza Strip and deliver aid, and Turkish activists aboard the ship.
The incident sparked harsh criticism against Israel and international calls for an independent investigation. Israel has so far rejected any external investigation, insisting that any investigation by an external body would be biased against Israel.
“International participation in investigating these matters will be important to the credibility that everybody wants to see,” said U.S. State Department spokesman Philip Crowley on Tuesday. “We are discussing with Israel and others the prospective nature of international participation in the investigation. And we’re sharing different ideas on how to best accomplish that.”
“We want to see an impartial, credible, prompt, thorough investigation. We recognize that international participation, which lends itself to countries and entities being able to vouch for the results of the investigation – will be an essential element to putting this tragedy behind us,” he went on to say.
Meanwhile Tuesday, Netanyahu demanded that he and his forum of seven senior ministers be allowed to testify before the investigation committee that will be established, comprised of Israeli jurists, and said that he and his top ministers would supply any future committee with all the required information.
In drafting the guidelines for the future investigation, Netanyahu insisted that Israel Defense Forces soldiers will not be personally interrogated, and asked that the investigation committee use instead the findings of internal military investigations already conducted. Netanyahu added that IDF Chief of Staff would testify.
According to the senior official, the guidelines for the panel of investigation have been almost finalized by the forum of seven during a meeting they held Monday morning. However, the forum is expected to convene an additional meeting on the topic on Wednesday. The draft of the guidelines has been approved unanimously by the forum ministers, who supported Netanyahu’s demands.
The Prime Minister’s Bureau has neither made the draft public nor the names of the individuals who will serve on the committee. The reason, according to the official, is the fact that the cabinet has yet to complete coordinating the investigation with the U.S. administration and other Western countries in order to ensure their support. The aim, he said, is that these countries will send observers to oversee the investigation. In addition, the official added, conflicts of interest must be examined in regard to the possible members of the investigation panel.
The Prime Minister’s Bureau approached several top litigators to inquire whether they would be interested in taking part in the work of the committee. Several of the candidates are former Israeli ambassador to the U.S. Meir Rosen, former legal adviser to Israel’s Foreign Ministry Alan Baker, and Bar-Ilan University professor Yaffa Zilbershatz, who is also a candidate to become Israel’s next ambassador to the United Nations.
The government’s efforts to avoid a thorough and credible investigation of the flotilla affair seem more and more like a farce.
The government’s efforts to avoid a thorough and credible investigation of the flotilla affair seem more and more like a farce. The conclusions of an ostensible probe are intended to justify retroactively the decision to blockade Gaza, to forcibly stop the Turkish aid flotilla in international waters and to use deadly force on the deck of the Mavi Marmara.
To make the costume seem credible, the Prime Minister’s Bureau asked a retired Supreme Court justice, Yaakov Tirkel, to chair the committee. Alongside him will sit foreign observers in order to legitimize the conclusions in international public opinion. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu even pledged to testify before the committee, together with Defense Minister Ehud Barak, other ministers and the chief of staff, so “the truth will come out.”
The truth that Netanyahu wishes to bring out involves the identity of the flotilla’s organizers, its sources of funding and the knives and rods that were brought aboard. He does not intend to probe the decision-making process that preceded the takeover of the ship and the shortcomings that were uncovered. As far as Netanyahu is concerned, it will be enough for television channels to broadcast footage of dark-suited jurists, and politicians addressing them, to present the semblance of an “examination.”
But Netanyahu’s panel will have no powers, not even those of a government probe, and its proposed chairman does not believe in such a panel. In an interview to Army Radio, Tirkel said there is no choice but to establish a state committee of inquiry. He opposed bringing in foreign observers and made clear that he is not a devotee of drawing conclusions about individuals and dismissing those responsible for failures. When a Haaretz reporter confronted Tirkel about these remarks, the former justice evaded the question saying, “I don’t remember what I said.”
The disagreements that erupted at the week’s end between Netanyahu and his deputy, Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya’alon, over the question of whether Ya’alon was updated in time about the action underscored the suspicion of serious faults in the decision-making process with regard to the flotilla. Instead of being part of the whitewash, Tirkel, whose dodging of his earlier statements does him no honor, should return his mandate to the prime minister and demand that Netanyahu establish a government committee of inquiry with real powers. The public, as Netanyahu said, has a right to know the truth.
After coordinating trip with Palestinian president, Amr Moussa slated to meet with Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh to discuss internal reconciliation, ways to lift blockade following flotilla raid
Published: 06.13.10, 10:45
Arab League chief Amr Moussa on Sunday arrived in Gaza following the league’s decision to break the siege on the Strip due to the recent Israeli raid on the Gaza-bound flotilla.
Moussa, who arrived in the Strip via Rafah crossing accompanied by Egyptian security officers, is slated to meet with Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, as well as with representatives of other Palestinian organizations in the Strip.
The main issues to be discussed are the need for internal Palestinian reconciliation and ways to end the blockade on the Strip.
The Arab League chief said, “The siege on the Strip must be broken immediately, and the Palestinian organizations must reconcile at once.”
At a press conference held at Rafah crossing, Moussa said the efforts for internal Palestinian reconciliation must not fail, and that the Arab League is determined to proceed and demand the blockade be lifted.
“The Palestinians deserver that the world, and not just the Arab world, stand by them in the face of the siege and in the face of what is happening in the occupied territories and Jerusalem.”
Moussa said he was in Gaza to show his support of the Palestinians, “in hopes that the Palestinians do not act as pawns in the hands of one source or another.”
He said he had visited Gaza before, during Yasser Arafat’s rule.
Moussa was welcomed by Hamas Interior Minister Bassem Naim, Fatah Central Committee member Zakaria al-Agha and other parliament members.
‘Arab recognition of Hamas’
While the visit was coordinated in advance with the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Hamas elements consider the vist official Arab recognition of their control over the Strip.
The movement has gone to great lengths to ensure that the visit is a success and leads to cooperation with the Arab League.
However, sources in the Strip are still skeptical that Moussa’s visit will help lift the siege, and are hanging most of their hopes on international pressure, and in particular, pressure from the United States and Europe.
After the crossing between Gaza and Sinai has been closed for three years, save for isolated incidents, Egypt formally announced last week that the crossing, which was opened at the start of the month following the takeover of the Gaza aid sail, is to remain open indefinitely.
On Tuesday, nine Egyptian parliament members crossed Rafah crossing into Gaza. Two of them, Mohammed al-Baltaji and Hazem Farouq, took part in the sail to Gaza.
The delegation visited the Strip in a show of “identification with Gaza’s residents”. The members met with Hamas officials, including some of the movement’s parliament members.
Tourism minister suggests Israel use relations with Poland to fight Uri Brodsky’s extradition to Germany, meanwhile Mabhouh’s brother reiterates desire for extradition to Dubai, says arrest is another Mossad ’embarrassment’
Published: 06.13.10, 12:06
Government ministers on Sunday objected to the extradition to Germany of an additional suspect in the assassination of Hamas commander Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, Uri Brodsky, who was arrested in Poland.
Tourism Minister Stas Misezhnikov called on the government to utilize its relationship with Poland in order to convince the latter to allow Brodsky to be tried in Israel, despite Israeli assessments that his extradition to Germany is as good as a done deal.
“I don’t believe the arrest of an Israeli citizen in Warsaw will amount to a crisis with Germany. They need to prove that he did indeed commit the acts he is suspected of. Because he is our citizen, we are obligated to bring him back to Israel,” Misezhnikov told Ynet.
“We should make use of our great friendship (with Poland), which has shown endless support of Israel recently. Poland must tell Germany that this is an Israeli citizen who must be legally handled in his country. Our legal system is known throughout the world and can handle this issue,” he said.
Transportation Minister Yisrael Katz added that “Israel must object to the extradition of an Israeli citizen to another country, regardless of the reason for his arrest”.
But Mabhouh’s brother Hussein said Brodsky’s arrest was just another embarrassment for the Mossad.
The brother said he and the rest of the family had not received any official updates on the ongoing affair, and were mainly using the media to update themselves.
“We hope the man who was arrested will be extradited to Dubai so the authorities there can question him, but we have received no promises or guarantees that this will happen,” he said.
According to reports Saturday, the German probe conducted in recent months revealed that Brodsky’s role was to assist Mossad men in acquiring German passports.
This would mean that Brodsky was responsible for the logistical operation in Germany in respect to the Mabhouh killing, where the hit team apparently used a real German passport issued to a “Michael Bodenheimer.”
Polish officials confirmed that the Israeli suspect was detained in connection with the Dubai assassination.
Prime minister says he expects US agreement on inquiry committee’s composition, rights shortly
Published: 06.13.10, 11:21
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu confirmed Sunday at a Likud ministers meeting that the Israeli investigation on the IDF flotilla raid will be headed by retired Supreme Court Justice Yaakov Tirkel.
Netanyahu added that negotiations with the US over the establishment of an investigation committee, its composition, and the rights afforded it were held until late Saturday night, and that he expects an agreement on the matter shortly.
Regarding the blockade on the Gaza Strip Netanyahu said, “There are others in the region concerned over this matter aside from Israel. There is real concern in the Islamic Republic, if indeed Iran can be called a ‘republic’. There are also those in Europe and the Middle East who oppose a naval port in Gaza.”
Netanyahu also spoke of the Gaza blockade at his opening speech in the weekly Cabinet meeting. “Even before the flotilla we held discussions in different forums on the continuation of our policy in Gaza,” he said.
“The debates continued last week. Our policy is clear: We must prevent weapons and combat support equipment from entering the Strip while allowing civilian humanitarian aid to enter. These discussions will continue.”
Government ministers justified the delay in announcing the establishment of the inquiry committee. Minister Isaac Herzog, of the Labor Party, rejected speculations that Israel had postponed the announcement until the World Cup began in order to soften international pressure.
“It’s a nice illusion,” he said. “We need to cooperate with our allies in the international arena and shake off the image of the siege from Israel. This issue will actually come up during a meeting of the foreign ministers of the European Union.”
On Friday the White House denied a Weekly Standard report that the US administration intends to support the appointment of a UN commission to investigate the flotilla raid.
White House Spokesman Tommy Vietor said the United States continues to back the swift, credible, independent and transparent probe that Israel plans to launch.
Earlier Friday, Washington sources told Ynet that the US administration was disappointed with Israel’s proposed solution for an investigation into the flotilla raid.
According to the sources, time is working against Israel, and the delays are only pushing the US into a corner and decreasing the chances it may promote a solution that is favorable for Israel.
Yaakov Tirkel is to head the Israeli investigative committee that will look into the IDF’s takeover of Gaza-bound flotilla, which resulted in nine deaths.
Former Supreme Court Justice Yaakov Tirkel is to head the Israeli investigative committee that will look into the events surrounding the takeover of the Gaza-bound aid flotilla nearly two weeks ago, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Sunday.
Netanyahu added that he had personally updated U.S. President Barack Obama as to the move, as well as to the developing nature of the commission.
Also Sunday, Defense Minister Ehud Barak canceled a planned trip to a Paris arms show, over what his office described was his desire to be present in the discussion over the formation of the Gaza flotilla probe committee.
It is estimated that Barak wants to avoid a situation in which Netanyahu would fold in the face of international pressure and agree to make, what the defense minister would see as, unacceptable changes to the committee’s charter.
Referring to the blockade on Gaza at the opening the weekly cabinet meeting in Jerusalem, Netanyahu said that discussions on the decision to blockade the Strip had taken place “even before the Gaza-bound flotilla.”
“These discussions continued last week, inter alia, in the meetings I held on the subject with Quartet envoy Tony Blair,” Netanyahu said, adding that the “principle guiding our policy is clear – to prevent the entry of war materiel from entering Gaza and to allow the entry of humanitarian aid and non-contraband goods into the Gaza Strip.”
Netanyahu did not, however, announce the creation of a committee of inquiry into the naval commando raid on the Gaza Strip flotilla, and the matter will not be brought before the cabinet for a vote in Sunday’s meeting.
The Prime Minister’s Bureau said yesterday evening that the conditions have not matured for such an announcement “due to political reasons.”
Talks have been held with the U.S. administration and several European countries to rally support for the mandate of the committee of inquiry and approval of its makeup. The Americans have rejected – a number of times – Israel’s proposals and asked that a retired Supreme Court justice head the probe. The issue was resolved when Justice Yaakov Tirkel was proposed for the post.
Gaza blockade not ending yet: Egypt prevents hundreds of activists carrying Palestinian flags, trucks carrying humanitarian aid from entering Strip via Rafah Crossing; meanwhile, Hamas says no Red Cross visits for Shalit
Published: 06.12.10, 22:42
Egypt banned hundreds of activists from Gaza, igniting protests at the Rafah border that is the only non-Israeli entry into the Palestinian enclave, a security official said on Saturday.
Hundreds of Egyptian activists headed to the Rafah border crossing on Friday but were denied entry into the Gaza Strip, the official told AFP on condition of anonymity.
“They spent the night in front of the crossing asking to be let in and continued protesting on Saturday,” the official said.
Carrying Palestinian flags, they chanted “Palestine is Arab,” “Open the border,” and “Lift the blockade,” witnesses told AFP.
By Saturday afternoon, most of the activists had started making their way back to Cairo, the official said.
Authorities also denied entry to two trucks carrying humanitarian aid sent by the people of the Egyptian province of Daqahliya.
“Authorities forced the truck drivers to head back to the (north Sinai) town of El-Arish saying that the Rafah crossing was only for the passage of people not goods,” one of the organizers, MP Mohsen Radi, said.
Blockade relief?
Amid the international outcry over an Israeli commando operation against a Gaza-bound aid flotilla which killed nine Turkish activists in international waters on June 1, Egypt announced it was opening its Rafah border crossing.
The surprise move has allowed some additional aid into Gaza but only some Palestinians, such as those seeking treatment or study abroad, are permitted to cross.
The Egyptian opposition has long campaigned against the government’s refusal to fully open the Gaza border, even at the height of the deadly offensive which Israel launched against the territory in December 2008.
Opposition parties have accused the authorities of being complicit in the Israeli blockade through their construction of an underground barrier intended to prevent smugglers tunneling under the border.
Meanwhile, Hamas’ Political Bureau Chief Khaled Mashaal said Saturday that the Gaza blockade should not be linked to the Gilad Shalit issue. The Hamas leader said that Shalit is just like the Palestinian prisoners held by Israel and rejected any possibility that a Red Cross delegation would be allowed to visit him.
Mashaal spoke at a Khartoum press conference, where a Hamas delegation is visiting at this time.
OPINION: Future historians will puzzle over the western media’s portrayal of the flotilla activists as humanitarians, ignoring evidence of motive
AN IMPARTIAL historian analysing, 20 years hence, the events of last week surrounding Israel’s interception of the Gaza “Freedom Flotilla”, will be perplexed by several aspects of the media coverage of the episode. One would expect that, by then, the salient facts will be available to all and agreed upon by those who share a commitment to the truth.
The first and most obvious of these facts is the difference in outcome between six of the flotilla ships, including the Rachel Corrie, and the remaining one, the Mavi Marmara, on which the regrettable loss of life occurred. On the former, only passive resistance was offered to Israeli personnel and the ships were peacefully escorted to the port of Ashdod. Our historian will wonder at media headlines that portrayed Israeli commandos as opening fire, unprovoked, on unarmed men and women trying only to bring aid materials to the “besieged” inhabitants of Gaza. If this had been the case, why the offer to unload the aid cargos at Ashdod in Israel? And why no violence on six of the seven ships?
Regarding the seventh ship, the facts now emerging will tell a very different story from the western media’s rushed judgment of the affair. Already in the public arena was the Al Aqsa TV interview of May 30th and the Guardian newspaper report of June 3rd in which members of the IHH “charity”, a jihadist organisation with proven links to Al Qaeda and Hamas, spoke of their wish to “die as martyrs”.
There was also the video footage (now available on YouTube) showing the Mavi Marmara passengers leaving port chanting “Khaybar, Khaybar, ya Yahoud, jaish Muhammad sa yaoud” (“.. O Jews, the army of Muhammad will return”) a reference to a seventh-century slaughter of Arabian Jews that has become a modern jihadist battle-cry.
Lastly, there was the footage of the answer sent to the Israeli ship that warned the Mavi Marmara it was approaching the blockade: “Shut up, go back to Auschwitz . . . don’t forget 9/11”. Our historian will puzzle over the media’s ignoring of this evidence of motive, and its portrayal of such self-styled warriors as “humanitarians”.
Interviews with the detained passengers of the Mavi Marmara are now confirming that the violence met by the Israeli commandos as they boarded the ship was not spontaneous but an organised, premeditated action carried out by a hardcore of approximately 40 IHH operatives, recruited specially for the mission. This group boarded at Istanbul without undergoing security checks, while the other 500 or so passengers boarded at Antalya after a full check. (It is also emerging that the Mavi Marmara, the biggest ship in the flotilla, carried no humanitarian aid at all; only personal possessions and extremely large sums of money were found on board).
The hardcore took over the upper deck and set up a communications room. They took control of the ship using walkie-talkies and restricted the movements of the other passengers and crew. As they approached the blockade, they sent ordinary passengers below, donned ceramic vests and gas masks, and armed themselves with weapons such as knives, axes, hammers, slingshots, wooden clubs and steel rods cut in advance from the ship’s railings using angle grinders. This latter action appears to have been carried out contrary to the captain’s orders.
The IHH operatives were instructed not to allow the Israeli soldiers to board. They successfully repelled the attempts to board the ship from corvettes using grappling hooks. When Israeli commandos landed one by one by rope from a helicopter, they were surrounded by these IHH operatives and beaten severely with the weapons already prepared. Once again, these facts are corroborated by video footage. Initially under strict orders not to open fire, the Israeli commandos had anticipated at worst a riot-control situation, not a violent ambush. Only when several of them had been beaten, shot and stabbed and it was clear that they were fighting for their lives did they open fire.
Our historian of the future will find it curious that, in an age of instant video documentation, the Irish media showed so little interest in revisiting their initial hasty judgments of the whole episode. (S)he will also remark on the very different portrayals of the Israeli soldiers and the IHH activists given in the western media and those of the Islamic world. While the former paint the Israelis as brutal, shoot-first aggressors and the IHH as weak victims, the Turkish paper Hurriyet proudly showed photographs, taken with the cameras of the jihadist-humanitarians, of Israelis as bloodied prisoners humiliated by the ‘warriors of Islam’.
Another aspect of the affair that will perplex our historian will be the media’s focus on Israel’s interception as taking place in international waters, and their characterisation of Israel’s Gaza blockade as ‘illegal’, as if no historical precedents or legal justification existed for either.
Under the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 12 June 1994, maritime blockades are a legitimate measure that may be implemented as part of an armed conflict, and are included as such in the naval handbooks of several western countries. A blockade may be enforced in international waters so long as it does not bar access to the ports and coasts of neutral states.
A state of armed conflict exists between Israel and Hamas, which forms part of the Iranian strategy aimed at encircling Israel with hostile forces in furtherance of its declared goal of “wiping it off the map”. Many of the 1,350 rockets fired into southern Israel by Hamas in 2008 alone were of the sophisticated Grad 2 type smuggled into Gaza from Iran. It is worth remembering that Israel has intercepted two ships sent by Iran, the Francop destined for Hizbullah in 2009, the Karine A destined for Hamas in 2002, each carrying large supplies of weapons and war material.
In the case of the Gaza flotilla, Israel acted perfectly legally in (i) warning the boats of the existence of the blockade and providing them with its precise co-ordinates through the accepted maritime channels, (ii) asking them to change course and to take their cargo to the port of Ashdod, (iii) when these notices were rejected, warning them that they faced being boarded and commandeered by its navy. Finally, our future historian, while aware that Israel restricted the entry of certain items into Gaza, will read with amazement of the woman in a Gaza market who told Danish journalist Steffen Jensen in 2010: “We have nothing. We need everything! Food, drinks . . . everything!” The woman spoke of this doomsday scenario while standing, according to Jensen, between ‘mountains of vegetables, fruit, eggs, poultry and fish . . .’ The historian will be able to see visual corroboration of this in the pictures published in Gaza newspapers and on Palestinian websites in 2009-10 that show Gaza food stalls laden with supplies.
While aware that life in Gaza was difficult, (s)he will wonder all the more at the persistence of the claim of the ‘humanitarian crisis’, and the gullibility of well-intentioned westerners in accepting the Hamas propaganda of victimhood.
Having calmly analysed the staged made-for-media event of the 2010 “Freedom Flotilla”, she or he will see it for what it is: merely the latest phase in an ongoing war to undermine the state of Israel. The enemies of the Jewish state, having failed over 62 years to defeat it either in open frontal attack or by terror and rocket campaigns, had resorted to a different tactic: the delegitimisation of its right to defend itself.
Uri Brodsky arrested in Warsaw for allegedly obtaining forged German passport involved in Hamas strongman hit, AFP reports; Foreign ministry confirms Israeli citizen arrested in Poland.
An alleged Mossad spy from Israel wanted in connection with the hit-squad slaying of a Hamas agent in Dubai has been arrested in Poland, officials said Saturday.
The man, using the name Uri Brodsky, is suspected of working for Mossad in Germany and helping to issue a fake German passport to a member of the Mossad operation that allegedly killed Hamas agent Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai in January, a spokesman for the German federal prosecutor’s office told The Associated Press.
Brodsky was arrested in early June upon his arrival in Poland because of a European arrest warrant issued by Germany which is now seeking his extradition, the spokesman said, declining to be named in line with department policy.
The spokesman had no estimate of how long it could take for Brodsky to be extradited from Poland to Germany, saying the matter is now in the hands of the Polish authorities. “If Brodsky agrees, the extradition could take a few days, but that isn’t likely,” the spokesman said.
In Warsaw, Monika Lewandowska, a spokeswoman for Polish prosecutors, confirmed that the suspect, identified only as Uri B., was arrested at the city’s international airport on June 4. She told the AP that the arrest warrant was made in connection with the murder of a Hamas member in Dubai.
“The suspect appeared before a Polish court on June 6, and was ordered to remain in temporary arrest for up to 40 days,” she said. Lewandowska had no information on his possible extradition.
In Israel, the Foreign Ministry said without elaborating that it was aware of the man’s fate. “At the moment, we’re looking into that like any other Israeli who has been arrested, and he’s getting consular treatment,” spokesman Andy David said.
Police in the United Arab Emirates said the elaborate hit squad linked to the Jan. 19 slaying in Dubai of al-Mabhouh – one of the founders of Hamas’ military wing – involved some 25 suspects, most of them carrying fake passports from European nations.
Dubai’s police chief, Lt. Gen. Dahi Khalfan Tamim, has said he is nearly 100 percent certain that Mossad, Israel’s spy agency, masterminded the killing.
The brazen assault in a luxury hotel and its alleged perpetrators were widely captured by security cameras. Some footage, released by Dubai’s police, showed alleged members of the hit squad disguised as tourists, wearing baggy shorts, sneakers and baseball caps, and carrying tennis rackets.
At the time, Israel said it didn’t know who was responsible for the killing but welcomed it, claiming al-Mabhouh was a key link in smuggling weapons to Gaza and a possible middleman with Israel’s archenemy, Iran.
The German news weekly Der Spiegel reported that the arrest in Poland already has led to some diplomatic friction. The Israeli Embassy has urged Polish authorities not to extradite Brodsky, the magazine reports in its issue to be published Monday.
Germany’s Foreign Ministry had no comment on the case and referred to an ongoing judicial investigation by the federal prosecutor’s office. The country’s top investigating unit deals with all cases affecting internal or external security, including terrorism or espionage.
After a German passport was used by a person linked to the Dubai slaying, the prosecutor’s office in February started investigating a possible connection to a foreign intelligence agency.
Authorities in the western city of Cologne had issued a passport to a man named Michael Bodenheimer. “A man using that name was among the assassins who killed the Hamas operative,” according to Dubai police.
In February, German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle urged a thorough investigation and said German authorities would do everything possible to support their counterparts in the U.A.E.
If Brodsky’s extradition goes through, however, it could put the government in Berlin – a staunch Israeli ally – in a difficult diplomatic position.
Page last updated at 15:02 GMT, Saturday, 12 June 2010 16:02 UK
E-mail this to a friendPrintable version Mahmoud al-Mabhouh was killed in his hotel room in Dubai on 19 January
Polish authorities have reportedly arrested a suspected Israeli agent in connection with the murder of a Hamas operative in Dubai in January.
German prosecutors say the agent was arrested in early June. Media reports named him as Uri Brodsky.
Germany is seeking his extradition over a forged German passport used by one of the killers, the prosecutors say.
Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, one of the founders of Hamas’s military wing, was found dead in a Dubai hotel on 20 January.
Dubai police have said they are 99% sure Israeli agents were involved, but Israel says there is no proof.
On Saturday, German prosecutors said the agent had been arrested on a warrant issued by Germany, as he arrived in Poland.
“It’s now up to the Poles to decide if they are going to hand him over,” a spokesman for the federal German prosecutor’s office told AP news agency.
There have been no comments so far from the Polish or Israeli authorities.
Forged passports from Britain, the Irish Republic, France, Australia, and Germany were used in the Dubai operation, leading to diplomatic rows between those countries and Israel.
The UK and Australia have expelled Israeli nationals over the forgeries.
Israel gave itself a nice present to celebrate the 43rd anniversary of losing its borders. The raid on the Gaza flotilla in international waters is like the first Lebanon War – as if in a nightmarish experiment, we seem to be examining the question: What happens when a country has no borders?
By Sefi Rachlevsky
Israel gave itself a nice present to celebrate the 43rd anniversary of losing its borders. The raid on the Gaza flotilla in international waters is like the first Lebanon War – as if in a nightmarish experiment, we seem to be examining the question: What happens when a country has no borders?
Israel’s maritime attack did not happen by chance. A border is one of the fundamental factors that defines a country. Decades without one have distorted Israel’s thinking.
It is self-evident that, just as a person cannot build in an area that he does not own, a country cannot build settlements outside of its borders. And yet Israel has settled hundreds of thousands of its citizens in areas that, according to its laws, are not part of the State of Israel.
It is self-evident that any couple can marry “without regard to religion, race or gender.” And yet in Israel a Jewish man and a non-Jewish woman cannot legally marry. It’s self-evident that there is no arbitrary discrimination, and yet it’s enough to use the magic words “I’m a religious woman” or “I’m an ultra-Orthodox man” and the obligation to serve in the military evaporates.
It’s self-evident that the education provided to children be based on democracy and equality. And yet in Israel, 52 percent of first-graders defined as Jews study in various religious school systems that teach students things like “You are considered a human being and the other nations of the world are not considered human beings.”
They are taught that a non-Jew is not a human being, and that anyone who kills a non-Jew is not supposed to be killed by human hands; that women are inferior, and it is an obligation that males and females be separated; and that secular people, or anyone with secular family members, cannot enter these schools.
It is self-evident that racist education cannot be funded by the government and is illegal. And yet most of the country’s first-graders receive such “compulsory education” from their government.
The results of this nightmarish experiment are self-evident. In the most recent elections, 35 percent of voters defined as Jews cast their ballots for avowedly racist parties – Yisrael Beitenu, Shas, National Union and their friends.
Critics in the Israeli media wake up only when mistakes are made. That is why – after initially cheering the declaration that “the flotilla will not pass” – they changed their tune following the imbroglio, turning into advocates of the twisted logic “be smart, not right.” But what justice is there in an attack on civilians by soldiers on the open seas?
Like the territories, international waters are not Israel; they are outside its borders. A Turkish ship on the open sea is, in effect, a floating Turkish island. An Israeli attack on such an island is not all that different from sending the Israel Defense Forces to take on demonstrators at the Luxembourg Gardens in Paris. There, too, unpleasant people who are not friends of Israel can sometimes be found.
Turkey, which is a member of NATO, was not in a state of war with Israel before the attack. Attacking its citizens on territory that is by definition Turkish is another expression of the Israeli lunacy that lacks any kind of boundaries.
An attack beyond the border must be reserved for extreme cases involving a military target that represents an entity fighting against the country and when citizens are in danger. But civilian ships, that are not carrying weapons, but are bringing civilian aid to a population that is denied chocolate, toys and notebooks, are not nuclear reactors in Iraq, Syria or Iran.
A person who grows up without external borders tends to create distorted internal borders. That is the reason for the attack on Arab MK Hanin Zuabi and her colleagues. While there were certain Arab public figures who went too far in their statements, joining a civilian aid flotilla is one of those legitimate acts which are supposed to be self-evident.
And yet, what was self-evident became betrayal. And citizenship, one of the unconditional foundations of existence, has turned into something that can be revoked – in this case on the basis of ethnicity, a tactic used in fascist regimes. The street has returned to the atmosphere that prevailed under “responsible” opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu and led to the assassination of prime minister Yitzhak Rabin – and the next murder is in the air.
The Israeli deed at sea is liable to reach The Hague. The problem is that Israel has genuine enemies who want to destroy it. A country that does not do everything in its power to accumulate legitimacy, along with turning Iran into an entity that is losing legitimacy and can therefore become a target of activities to undermine it, is a country losing its basic survival instinct. Without borders, it turns out, you lose even that.
Young Israelis who have grown up without borders are now dancing and singing “In blood and fire we will expel Turkey” and “Mohammed is dead.” If this keeps up, Israel will not make it to The Hague. The entity gradually replacing the State of Israel is liable not to exist long enough to get there.
AP Delegates walk after posing for a group picture inside the Ottoman-era Giragan Palace, the venue of the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia in Istanbul, Turkey. Photo: AP
As this rain-soaked city hosted the third summit of the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia (CICA), it was clear that Israel, at the receiving end of global condemnation for last week’s attack on an aid ship trying to sail to the Gaza Strip, faced further isolation for its “brazen act” that killed nine peace activists.
While the Gaza attack dominated the conference that concluded on Wednesday, challenges and threats such as terrorism, organised crime, elimination of weapons of mass destruction and curbing of drug trafficking and trans-boundary crimes also figured in the speeches of leaders and Ministers from 20 countries that attended the three-day summit.
As Turkey took over the CICA chairmanship from Kazakhastan, the grouping welcomed into its fold Vietnam and Iraq and granted the observer status to Bangladesh. The CICA also provides a platform for the nations in the high-tension regions of Asia that have become “hotspots” — be it Korea, Afghanistan, Israel or Iran.
There was an unforgiving mood towards Israel at the summit for its act of brazen aggression. The attack on the aid ship “cannot be forgotten” by his country, Turkish President Abdullah Gul said at the end of the summit, which brought together Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas and Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.
A final declaration of the grouping, however, omitted any reference to Israel, which as a fellow member objected to it. But a separate declaration said: “All member-states, except one, expressed their great concern for and condemnation of the actions undertaken by the Israeli defence forces against an international civilian flotilla transporting humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip.” The leaders also stressed the immediate need for lifting the four-year-old blockade.
As pointed out by Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, the tragedy of Gaza should remind the international community of the need for highlighting the plight of the people due to the lack of food, electricity and freshwater. “Like Afghanistan, Gaza is a test case before us,” he told the conference on the opening day.
Iran’s nuclear programme and the Iran-Turkey-Brazil deal on the proposed exchange of Iran’s low-enriched uranium with nuclear fuel for the Tehran Research Reactor were also discussed. “Given the already volatile situation in the region, there is no other viable and lasting solution, but a diplomatic one. We have intensified our efforts to promote a negotiated solution through diplomacy,” Mr. Davutoglu said.
Almost all the leaders agreed that most challenges to global security were emanating from Asia, and the top issues were the situation in the Middle East, Iraq and Afghanistan. They also agreed that they had a stake in a sovereign, democratic and stable Afghanistan.
Acknowledging the tough task ahead for the international community in rooting out terrorism, India pointed out that terrorists adapted themselves to countering the cooperative efforts of the States at tackling terrorism. “Distinctions among the terrorist organisations have become blurred, given the ease with which they blend together, both operationally and ideologically,” said Commerce and Industry Minister Anand Sharma, who attended the conference as the Prime Minister’s special envoy. India has been a CICA member since the grouping came into being in 1992.
Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi called for an international cooperative approach to tackling terrorism through real-time intelligence sharing and addressing its root causes that were being exploited by terrorists to radicalise the youth.
Though CICA has so far been a low-key platform, the Istanbul summit, which came after the Gaza attack, saw the multi-national forum becoming a global talking point. It also provided Turkey with a greater role and profile in hosting it and forging solidarity among the CICA members in denouncing Israel.
The CICA members are Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, China, Egypt, India, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Pakistan, Palestine, the Republic of Korea, Russia, Tajikistan, Thailand, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates and Uzbekistan.
The observers are the United Nations, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the League of Arab States.
Lebanese newspaper reports Ankara may supervise Gaza crossings as part of a deal to repair ties between Israel and Turkey.
The Palestinians would support any move that would lift the Gaza blockade, including Turkey’s possible involvement, Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad said Saturday.
Fayyad’s comments came after the Lebanese Ad-Diyar newspaper quoted an Arab diplomatic source earlier Saturday, saying that Turkey could be given a central role in supervising the border crossings with the Gaza Strip as part of a deal to repair ties between Israel and Turkey.
The relationship between Israel and Turkey has deteriorated dramatically since the IDF raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla on May 31 in which nine people, including eight Turks and one Turkish-American, were killed.
“The Palestinian Authority welcomes any mediation that would lift the siege off Gaza,” Fayyad told reporters, saying that alleviating the Strip’s condition was “a general Palestinian interest, and doesn’t strengthen this or that faction.”
The Palestinian PM also said that according to “international agreements, all of Gaza’s border crossings should be opened, and not just the Rafah crossing,” thus referring to the temporary opening of Gaza’s southernmost border crossing announced by Egypt in the wake of the flotilla raid.
According to the Ad-Diyar report, a new deal could see Turkey supervising all humanitarian aid entering Gaza, as well as committing to the blocking of weapons and money destined for Hamas.
In this position, Turkey would play a meaningful role in lifting the blockade of Gaza and a central figure in the Middle East which will enable the Islamic country to mediate between Israel and the Arab world in the future, as Turkey has sought in the past.
The report has not yet been validated by Turkish or Israeli officials.
In his talk with reporters, Fayyad also expressed his hopes that the proximity peace talks with Israel would lead to direct negotiations which would, eventually, lead to the declaration of an independent Palestinian state.
The top PA official responded to criticism over the PA’s boycott of settlement goods, saying that it was not an attempt to hurt Israel but a confiscation of goods produced in the settlements, who he said were considered an obstacle to peace.
On Friday Turkish President Abdullah Gul told the French daily Le Monde that Israel must make amends to be forgiven for a commando assault on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla, including apologizing for the attack and paying compensation.
Gul added that if Israel made no move to heal the rift, then Turkey could even decide to break diplomatic relations.
In an interview published on Friday, Gul said the Israeli attack at the end of May, which killed nine activists, was a “crime” which might have been carried out by the likes of al-Qaida rather than a sovereign state.
“It seems impossible to me to forgive or forget, unless there are some initiatives which could change the situation,”Gul was quoted as saying by Le Monde.
Asked what these might be, he said: “Firstly, to ask pardon and to establish some sort of compensation.” He added that he also wanted to see an independent inquiry into the botched raid and a discussion on lifting Israel’s blockade of Gaza.
Asked if Turkey might break relations with Israel if they did nothing, Gul said: “Anything is possible.”
Activists dressed as Israeli pirates protest 43 years of Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, Tel Aviv, 5 June 2010. (Oren Ziv/ActiveStills)
Is it possible to be shocked and yet not be surprised? Israel’s stupidity and disregard for human life is nothing new. It is a recurring theme in the life of the Jewish state from its very inception. Surely as the destruction in Gaza remains untouched 18 months after the murderous attacks that began on 27 December 2008 there can be no surprise at Israeli brutality. Yet as the news unfolded and the images of the Israeli assault on the Freedom Flotilla to Gaza began to unravel a sense of shock was expressed everywhere.
Israel too is shock stricken. Not by the sheer brutality of its forces, or by the injustice of the siege on Gaza but by the public relations blunder and fact that this “military mission” was a failure. Once again Israeli commandos are shown to be weak and helpless. How could the decision-makers not see that this would damage Israel’s image in the eyes of world and even worse, in the eyes of Israel’s enemies?
Israeli foreign ministry officials claim that Europe and the rest of the world have increased their diplomatic assault on Israel. They claim the world is emboldened by the fact that the American stand in support of Israel has weakened. This they will say is the fault of US President Barack Obama, a president Israelis never cared for anyway. The notion that the world is coming to a point where it is unable to bear the racism and brutality of Israel as a state never enters the conversation. Israeli talking heads will not apologize, will not stray from the official line: we, Israelis are right and they, everyone else are wrong; we are good and they are evil; we are victims of age-old anti-Semitism and they are hateful, violent Muslims intending to kill innocent Jews.
Lives were lost due to a cowardly reaction of trained assassins who were sent to a mission for which they were clearly unprepared, so in a way one can claim that the killers themselves are not to blame, those who sent them are. In the murky relations between the military and the civilian government in Israel it is quite common to fault the lowest person on the totem poll and more often than not it is the military. In this case the mission was an act of piracy aimed at a very determined group of activists who had no intention of backing down. The fact that this particular group of activists took on this difficult and dangerous mission should have in itself been a warning to the Israeli officials that they would not back down and would put up a fight.
There can be no argument as to the courage displayed by the activists aboard the ships as armed pirates with an overwhelming military power attacked them. The pirates, trained Israeli commandos who are known for their brutality and total lack of regard for human life, were armed to the teeth and had the support of the Israeli navy, air force and ground forces. Yet as they boarded the ships they were met with a justifiably angry and clearly determined crowd who were not willing to let go of their boats and cargo. Tragically some of them paid for this determination with their lives.
Will this tragedy bring any change? Clearly the only thing that can bring change is a strategic decision by President Obama to divorce the United States from the dysfunctional relationship with Israel. When the president decides that it is time to end the Israeli war on Palestinians he will engage in a head-on collision with Israel and its American bully, the influential pro-Israel lobby group, AIPAC. It is no secret that advisers with Zionist prejudice surround the president and naturally one is forced to wonder if a strategic shift of such magnitude is possible. Still, if one judges by the fear expressed in Israel perhaps there is some change, some outrage among the president’s men.
It is not unlikely that when Americans get tired of paying $10 million per day of their hard-earned money to the State of Israel that the president will act. The question is how many innocent Palestinian lives will be lost until that happens.
Miko Peled is a writer and Israeli peace activist living in San Diego. His father was the late General Matti Peled, his grandfather Avraham Katsnelson signed the Israeli declaration of independence and his niece Smadar was killed in a suicide attack in Jerusalem. He is the co founder of the Elbanna-Peled Foundtion. For more information or to respond, go to mikopeled.wordpress.com
Saudis practiced standing down anti-aircraft systems to allow Israeli warplanes passage for attack on Iranian nuclear sites, the London Times reports.
Saudi Arabia has practiced standing down its anti-aircraft systems to allow Israeli warplanes passage on their way to attack Iran’s nuclear installations, a British newspaper reported on Saturday.
The Saudis have allocated a narrow corridor of airspace in the north of the country that would cut flying time from Israel to Iran, the London Times reported.
“The Saudis have given their permission for the Israelis to pass over and they will look the other way,” the Times quoted an unnamed U.S. defense source in the area as saying. “They have already done tests to make sure their own jets aren’t scrambled and no one gets shot down. This has all been done with the agreement of the [U.S.] State Department.”
Once the Israelis had passed, the kingdom’s air defenses would return to full alert, the Times said.
Despite tensions between them, Israel and Saudi Arabia share a mutual hostility to Iran.
“We all know this. We will let them [the Israelis] through and see nothing,” the Times quoted a Saudi government source as saying.
According to the report, the four main targets for an Israeli raid on Iran would be uranium enrichment facilities at Natanz and Qom, a gas storage development at Isfahan and a heavy-water reactor at Arak.
Secondary targets may include a Russian-built light water reactor at Bushehr, which could produce weapons-grade plutonium when complete.
Even with midair refueling, the targets would be as the far edge of Israeli bombers’ range at a distance of some 2,250km. An attack would likely involve several waves of aircraft, possibly crossing Jordan, northern Saudi Arabia and Iraq.
Aircraft attacking Bushehr, on the Gulf coast, could swing beneath Kuwait to strike from the southwest, the Times said.
Passing over Iraq would require at least tacit consent to the raid from the United States, whose troops are occupying the country. So far, the Obama Administration has refused this.
On Wednesday the United Nations passed a fourth round of sanctions against Iran in an attempt to force it to stop enriching uranium. But immediately after the UN vote, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad vowed the nuclear program would continue.
Israel hailed the vote – but said sanctions were not enough and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has refused to rule out a raid.
Netanyahu’s predecessor, Ehud Olmert, is believed to have held secret meetings with high-ranking Saudi officials over Iran.
President threatens Israel’s security with his statements, acts, and silence Yiron Festinger
Published: 06.12.10, 12:27
While tens of thousands of Turkish protestors chant anti-Semitic Nazi-style battle cries, on top of Prime Minister Erdogan’s wild incitement (which even outdid Ahmadinejad’s rhetoric,) and while all Muslim world radicals join forces in a venomous, unprecedented anti-Israel campaign, the deafening silence of the Obama-led United States is especially conspicuous.
This is the same US Administration that only months ago raised a hue and cry over the “grave insult to America” as result of the declaration of Ramat Shlomo construction, a neighborhood in no-man’s land that is not even located in east Jerusalem, turning the affair into a direct, hypocritical, deliberate, and ugly confrontation with the Israeli government.
Islamic Terror
Yet as it turns out, the calls for Israel’s destruction in the wake of the Turkish incitement campaign do not constitute an “insult” for America. They are merely a great “success” for Obama’s policy of currying favor with radical Islam; in the president’s view, as long as the protestors burn Israeli flags rather than American flags, his “success” is proven beyond any reasonable doubt.
Ever since he emerged from the radical margins of the American Left and managed to win the presidency on the strength of his rhetorical talents, Obama had been acting methodically in order to undermine America’s status as the world’s lone superpower. He has been doing it by neutralizing the use of force, utilizing international institutions, over-legalization, endless chatter about human rights, and so on and so forth. This delusional liberal policy views the US as the reason and cause for the globe’s problems, rather than as the most successful enterprise in human history, as historian Paul Johnson noted.
A side observer could examine the madness that has overcome America’s leadership with curious consternation, yet we Israelis do not have the privilege to play the role of side observers. Every Obama move has a significant effect for us and undermines our very existence. This ranges from statements defining terror as a manmade disaster, to the observation that there is no such thing as radical Islam and that it has no connection to attempted attacks in the US, as declared by Obama’s Attorney General, Eric Holder.
Meanwhile, the president’s counter-terrorism advisor argued that Jihad is a “legitimate tenet of Islam” and that terrorists are “victims of political, economic and social forces.”
On top of this, we see the US Administration’s denial and the turning of a blind eye to actual terror acts. This happened in respect to the doctor who murdered 13 US soldiers and wounded dozens of others, while shouting “allahu akbar”; officials claimed he is no terrorist, even though he maintained ties with al-Qaeda, and that the attack was motivated by rage; if that’s the case, Israel’s prisons are full of enraged people who aren’t terrorists.
Most hostile president in US history
Then there is the desire to bring to justice CIA investigators for using harsh interrogation techniques against the masterminds of the Twin Towers attacks – that is, ticking time bombs who revealed further conspiracies of that sort during their interrogation. Where does this leave our Shin Bet investigators then, and who will be finding themselves in the International Court of Justice in The Hague first?
In the pathetic, miserable speech delivered by Obama in Cairo, where he embarrassed the Egyptian government by demanding that the Muslim Brothers – the spiritual father figures of al-Qaeda – also be invited to hear him wax poetic, the president in adopted fact Ahmadinejad’s thesis: The Jews suffered in the Holocaust and the Palestinians have been suffering ever since then. Israel was established because of the Shoah.
The only thing left shrouded in fog is the conclusion that stems from this distorted view, expressed by Ahmadinejad and accepted by European Union leaders behind closed doors: Israel’s establishment was a historical mistake, and it is not too late yet to turn back the wheel.
All of the above was further supplemented by the weak policy vis-à-vis Iran’s nuclearization effort, to the point where even Syrian President Assad dared say that America no longer exists in the Middle East, and is being replaced by Turkey, Iran, and Syria. Meanwhile, the US Administration allowed repeated UN votes against Israel, as well as the calls for the Jewish State’s nuclear disarmament.
Prime Minister Netanyahu should not be envied over the challenge posed by the most hostile president in US history; a president who makes the anti-Semite Jimmy Carter look like a Righteous Gentile. However, we should be calling a spade a spade and informing the public of the truth, even if this truth is disturbing, painful, and bitter.
We must make it clear to our many supporters in the US that this president, by viewing America and its ally Israel as the reason for all the world’s problems, threatens our very existence here. We should not be surprised to see the anti-Semitic franticness and ecstasy that has taken hold in the Muslim world, to the point where even moderate Arab states headed by Egypt feel threatened by America’s policy, prompting Vice President Biden to arrive for a reassuring visit.
Top Bush Administration official Elliott Abrams argued that another Islamist attack on US soil may change Obama’s policy somewhat. Yet the only change we can expect in such case would be blaming Israel as the direct cause for the “justified Muslim rage” against the US,” thereby only radicalizing the hostile policy of the serving president.
Israel has tens of millions of mostly non-Jewish supporters in the US, Abrams said. It would be good to make the grave results of his actions clear to them immediately, as well as the kinds of grave dangers that threaten our very existence because of his policy.
