‘ONE STATE SOLUTION’ WORKED OUT IN SYDNEY AUSTRALIA

May 14, 2013 at 10:14 (Australia, Collaboration, Human Interest)

Hopefully dying together will lead to living together ;)
*
With both communities facing a severe shortage of burial space at Rookwood Necropolis, believed to be the largest cemetery in the Southern Hemisphere, the New South Wales State Government officially opened the last available land there to be shared by the two faiths.
*

Sydney’s Muslim, Jewish communities to share burial space in local cemetery

New 3.3-hectare site will have enough burial space for both communities for the next decade or more.

By Dan Goldberg
*
Lakemba Mosque’s Sheikh Safi and Yair Miller.
Lakemba Mosque’s Sheikh Safi and Yair Miller at Rookwood General Cemetery.Photo by Courtesoy of Rookwood General Cemetery.

*

Sydney’s Muslims and Jews may not see eye to eye on certain matters, especially those involving Israel, but last week the two communities found some much-needed common ground. Burial ground, that is.

With both communities facing a severe shortage of burial space at Rookwood Necropolis, believed to be the largest cemetery in the Southern Hemisphere, the New South Wales State Government officially opened the last available land there to be shared by the two faiths.

The Harbor City’s Muslim population, which numbers more than 150,000, would have run out of burial space within months, according to officials.

The city’s 45,000-plus Jewish community would have managed in the short term.

The new 3.3-hectare site will have enough burial space for both communities for the next decade or more.

Half of the new lot will be reserved for about 4000 double-depth Islamic graves; the other half will be for around 2,700 single Jewish burial plots, said Katrina Hodgkinson, the Primary Industries Minister.

The two sections will be divided by small roads inside the cemetery, she added.

The development comes amid allegations of Hezbollah sleeper cells operating in Australia and a controversial call for an academic boycott of the Technion in Haifa by students at the University of Sydney.

Yair Miller, president of the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies, said the new burial site was proof of the healthy relationship between the two faiths in New South Wales.

“It needs to always be worked on but we have a very cordial relationship in NSW with most of the mainstream Muslim groups,” Miller said.

“The Jewish community is still in need of a long-term solution but we’re very, very thankful.”

Ahmad Kamaledine, the Muslim representative on the Rookwood General Cemeteries Trust, told local media: “Being able to see [members of] the Jewish and Muslim community being buried side by side and sharing the same ground will demonstrate the willingness of the community in Australia to work together.”

It was “vitally important for cultural and religious reasons” that the two communities had some certainty about where their loved ones would be buried, said Victor Dominello, the Minister for Citizenship and Communities.

Miller said he was not aware of any opposition within the Jewish community to the plan. “The model of a multi-faith cemetery is one we’ve lived with here in the last 200 years.

“These plots happen to be next to each other but are not intertwined. There are still roads between the sections, it’s a very big plot divided by internal roads so there’s no inter-burying.”

But Michael Burd, a vocal critic of Islamic extremism in Australia, said he was horrified. “When I read about this decision I very disappointed,” he said.

Referring to Lebanese-born Sheikh Yahya Safi, the Imam of Lakemba Mosque who was at last week’s official opening, Burd added: “Sheikh Safi presides over a mosque that is notorious for espousing hatred of Israel and Jews in Sydney. Our Jewish community representative who agreed to this joint venture should be ashamed of himself,” he said.

“I am not exactly happy about it,” added a Jewish woman from Sydney, who wished to remain anonymous.

“But then I am not happy either with all the Muslim interfaith rubbish the Board of Deputies gets up to either.”

Jeremy Jones, a former president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry and a founder of the Australia National Dialogue of Christians, Muslims & Jews, said the local media’s interest in the story was out of context with decades of Jewish-Muslim relations.

“The biggest story here is that some journalists seem surprised that Jews and Muslims work together on such matters. It was more than 30 years ago when I began working with Muslims (and vegetarians) due to a mutual interest in having food ingredients labeled.”

The two faiths have collaborated on many other matters, such as anti-discrimination legislation, he added.

But Jones conceded that “extra special care” will have to be exercised by cemetery officials for certain high-profile burials.

“But there is no reason for any group to disturb or dismay one another,” he said.

 

Source

4 Comments

ISRAEL AND AMERICA’S LATEST THREAT TO WORLD PEACE

April 26, 2013 at 10:48 (Associate Post, Collaboration, Corrupt Politics, Iran, Israel, Palestine)

Seeking to appease his Israeli hosts, Hagel said maintaining Israeli military superiority was a top priority for the Obama administration. “President Obama has made not only maintaining but improving Israel’s military qualitative edge a top priority,” he said.
*

New US-Israel arms deal a threat to peace

 

 

The latest arms deal between Washington and Tel Aviv not only puts Tehran in the crosshairs, but will also underline Israeli intransigence on Palestine, writes Khalid Amayreh in occupied Jerusalem
*

 

New US-Israel arms deal a threat to peace
US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel is greeted by Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem (photo: Reuters)
*

A new major US arms deal with Israel is intended to further enhance the Hebrew state’s ability to strike Iran, even without direct American operational involvement. The multi-billion dollar package include anti-radiation missiles designed to take out enemy air defences, new sophisticated radar for fighter jets, KC135 aerial refuelling tankers and Osprey V-22 tilt-rotor transport aircraft.

The deal, however, will not include laser-guided bunker-buster bombs, according to The New York Times.

The deal was announced this week during the visit of US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to Israel. Hagel reassured Israeli officials of America’s traditional commitment to Israel’s security and to maintaining its qualitative military edge over all its neighbours.

The KC135 tankers are reportedly capable of being used in long-range operations by Israel against Iran. The sale of the V-22’s would also mark the first time the aircraft have been released to any country outside the United States. The deal will be implemented in several months.

Seeking to appease his Israeli hosts, Hagel said maintaining Israeli military superiority was a top priority for the Obama administration. “President Obama has made not only maintaining but improving Israel’s military qualitative edge a top priority,” he said.

Hagel reiterated earlier statements concerning Iran, saying that all options for dealing with that country were on the table. The American official also said his country would continue to help Israel develop the Iron Dome anti-missile defence system.

According to intelligence reports published by the Israeli media, the Iron Dome performed “much worse than expected” during last year’s brief war between Hamas and Israel. Israeli officials claimed then that the costly defence system scored an 80 per cent success rate, a claim strongly contested by the Hebrew media.

It is widely believed the continued funding by the US of further research pertaining to the anti-missile system vindicates reports about its dismal performance.

The additional military aggrandisement is expected to further enforce the arguments of those in Israel who advocate striking Iran’s nuclear facilities unilaterally, ie without cooperation and coordination with the US.

Following talks with Hagel, Israel’s War Minister Moshe Yaalon, was quoted as saying: “One way or another, Iran’s nuclear programme will be stopped.”

Yaalon is no stranger to war given his role in murdering and maiming thousands of Palestinian civilians when he was chief of staff of the Israeli army in the mid-1950s.

Hagel’s visit to Israel is the first leg of a tour that will also take him to Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Both Saudi Arabia and the Emirates will also sign arms deal with Washington. Washington has always sought to promote Arab-Iranian contradictions at the expense of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

According to informed Israeli sources, the weapons these two countries will purchase from Washington will be of an inferior quality in comparison to those sold to Israel. Moreover, Washington will see to it that both countries will not try to transfer these weapons to a third country, especially one hostile to Israel.

 

FULL-FLEDGED ALLIANCE AGAINST IRAN: It is uncertain if the highlighted American-Israeli alliance against Iran will be brought to fruition by carrying out an Israeli or joint-Israeli-American strike against Iranian nuclear facilities.

Some commentators in Israel contend that US reluctance to supply the Hebrew state with more strategic weapons, such the bunker-buster bombs, may indicate that the US is trying to pacify Israel, and to convince Tel Aviv to give diplomatic efforts a chance to succeed.

However, one of the main goals — if not the main goal — of the current Israeli government is “to neutralise the Iranian danger”.

Israel, which possesses a large arsenal of nuclear weapons, along with their delivery systems, doesn’t face a real existential threat from Iran. This means that the hyperbolic and often phobic language used by Israeli officials and leaders to highlight the “Iranian danger” is intended largely to maintain the Israeli state’s military supremacy and hegemony in the region.

Moreover, it is widely believed that if Iran were to be allowed to possess nuclear weapons, this would trigger a nuclear arms race involving countries such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt. One Saudi official was quoted as saying in a press interview several months ago that “if Iran got the bomb, we would get it a few weeks afterwards.”

Thus, if this nightmarish scenario found its way to reality, Israel would then face not one Iran but many, as the possession of a nuclear deterrence by Arab countries would change the rules of the game of politics in the region to Israel’s disadvantage.

Earlier this month, the former head of Israeli Military Intelligence, Amos Yadlin, said that while an Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities would only delay Iran’s nuclear capability, “this delay could be important because we may have a regime change”.

Yadlin added: “Israel has defined what the trigger is, what the red line is. Iran is already there.”

Nonetheless, most observers and experts doubt whether regime change in Iran would lead to a degradation let alone disappearance of the country’s nuclear programme. Other pundits argue that Iran’s nuclear programme has already reached the point of no return.

A final point: It is very likely that the new arms deal will further embolden Israel with regards to the Palestinian issue.

Last week, US Secretary of State John Kerry warned that the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be dead within two years if action were not taken now.

“I believe the window of the two-state solution is shutting,” Kerry told the US House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee. “I think we have some period of time, a year, a year-and-a-half. Or two years, or it is over.”

Past experience has proven that the aggrandisement of Israeli military might at the expense of Arab and Muslim countries in the region makes Israel more intransigent, and much less prone to make peace.

 

Written FOR

 

2 Comments

PALESTINIANS TO PAY FOR GOOGLE’S FREE WI-FI IN NEW YORK NEIGHBOURHOOD

January 24, 2013 at 12:05 (Boycott Israel, Collaboration, Corporate Crime, DesertPeace Exclusive, Israel, Occupation, Palestine)

Photo © by Bud Korotzer
SONY DSC
*
Just where is the Palestinian connection?
Perhaps after you read THIS post from the other day you will see …
*
Google has been working with New York to foster a technology hotbed in the city. Last year it agreed to donate office space to Cornell University and the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology for an engineering school while the institutions build a permanent home on Roosevelt Island.
*
The following report from Bloomberg’s Businessweek gives the details;
*

Google to Offer Free Wi-Fi in Chelsea

By Sarah Frier and Henry Goldman

Google Inc. (GOOG), the world’s biggest Internet-search company, plans to offer free wireless Internet access in parts of New York’s Chelsea neighborhood, creating the largest public outdoor network in the city.

The Wi-Fi network, which doesn’t require a password, is available today, Google said in a statement. U.S. Senator Charles Schumer, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and other officials attended an event to announce the service in Chelsea, where Google has offices.

Google has been working with New York to foster a technology hotbed in the city. Last year it agreed to donate office space to Cornell University and the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology for an engineering school while the institutions build a permanent home on Roosevelt Island.

“New York is determined to become the world’s leading digital city, and universal access to high-speed Internet is one of the core building blocks of that vision,” Bloomberg said at the Manhattan news conference. “Free Wi-Fi across this part of Chelsea takes us another step closer to that goal.”

Google also benefits from wider access to the Internet, which it uses to deliver services to customers and advertisers.

The new network is part of an effort to cultivate Silicon Alley, a concentration of startups in Manhattan. Wi-Fi will be available to thousands of New Yorkers between Gansevoort Street and 19th Street from 8th Avenue to the West Side Highway, according to a statement.

“We all know New York’s next job-growth engine is the tech industry,” Schumer said at the event. “This is the future.”

‘Digital Divide’

The project with Google is a small step in a city that has a long way to go before it can boast about its Wi-Fi service, said Gale Brewer, who heads the City Council’s Government Operations Committee and has advocated for free Internet service for more than 10 years. Thick walls in older buildings will prevent Wi-Fi signals from penetrating inside, she said.

“The city’s digital divide is growing, with people packing libraries to use computers because they can’t afford $50 subscription fees for Internet at home,” the councilwoman said. “We have citywide service for first responders; we should be able to create a firewall for use by civilians and provide this service citywide.”

Pilot Program

The network will cost $115,000 to build and $45,000 a year to maintain. Google will cover two-thirds of those costs, with Chelsea Improvement Co., a nonprofit neighborhood development group, paying the rest. The service will be operated as a pilot program for two years, said Dan Biederman, Chelsea Improvement’s president.

The service will be free of advertising except for a message that Google is the provider, said George Townley, director of information systems for Chelsea Improvement.

Google has been hosting a free Wi-Fi network in its home town of Mountain View, California, since 2006. Last year, it introduced a fiber network in the Kansas City, Missouri, area to deliver connections the company says are 100 times faster than typical high-speed Internet lines.

New York would like to extend Wi-Fi to all neighborhoods eventually, said the mayor, who is the founder and majority shareholder of Bloomberg LP, the parent company of Bloomberg News.

Comments Off

BIBI SOLVES THE WORLD’S PROBLEMS (WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM HIS FRIENDS IN THE US SENATE)

January 21, 2013 at 09:16 (Collaboration, Corrupt Politics, Cover Up, Iran, Israel)

“Building in Jerusalem is not the problem of the world. A nuclear Iran is the problem of the world,” Netanyahu told the senators during the meeting, which took place in his office in Jerusalem.
*
img398807
Netanyahu and McCain
Flash 90
*
“History will not forgive those who do not stop Iran’s nuclear program,” was Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s message during a meeting with top U.S. senators on Saturday evening.

The delegation is led by Sen. John McCain of the Senate Armed Services and Homeland Security Committees and the 2008 Republican Presidential candidate and also includes Senator Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Senator Christopher Coons (D-DE), and Christian Brose, a senior advisor on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

“Building in Jerusalem is not the problem of the world. A nuclear Iran is the problem of the world,” Netanyahu told the senators during the meeting, which took place in his office in Jerusalem.

According to a statement issued by the Prime Minister’s Office, the meeting dealt with the intensification of the sanctions against Iran.

It added that the Prime Minister Netanyahu thanked the Republican and Democratic senators for the “unwavering support of Israel in the Senate.”

*

*

Taken FROM

3 Comments

THINK TWICE BEFORE SUBSCRIBING TO HAARETZ

January 20, 2013 at 06:26 (Collaboration, Ethnic Cleansing, Hypocricy, Israel, Palestine, zionist Media)

The English edition of the liberal Zionist paper has a global reputation and is read and trusted by many Palestinian rights activists, who often look forward to the work of dissident journalists like Amira Hass and Gideon Levy.

Recently the paper put its English edition behind a paywall, requiring a subscription to read articles. But this link-up with the JNF is a new reason to make you think twice before handing over your money to Haaretz.

*

Subscription offer from liberal Israeli newspaper helps JNF, a “charity” implicated in ethnic cleansing

Submitted by Asa Winstanley 
*

Israeli newspaper Haaretz is currently circulating this email. Subscribe to the paper’s digital edition during an upcoming Jewish holiday season and you will be helping the work of the Jewish National Fund, it promises.

The English edition of the liberal Zionist paper has a global reputation and is read and trusted by many Palestinian rights activists, who often look forward to the work of dissident journalists like Amira Hass and Gideon Levy.

Recently the paper put its English edition behind a paywall, requiring a subscription to read articles. But this link-up with the JNF is a new reason to make you think twice before handing over your money to Haaretz.

“Green” ad

The ad promises that for each new subscriber to Haaretz, the JNF will plant a tree in the Carmel forests (in the vicinity of Haifa) to help replace those that were burnt down in huge 2010 forest fires.

But as Max Blumenthal wrote for The Electronic Intifada at the time, many of these trees were planted on the ruins of destroyed Palestinian villages – deliberately so in order to cover up Israeli crimes.

After 1948, when Zionist militias drove out 750,000 Palestinians by force, the new state of Israel destroyed hundreds of their villages hoping to ensure the Palestinian refugees could not return. In many cases, the JNF planted trees on the ruins.

Palestinians and their supporters have protested against the JNF with a group called Stop the JNF making some headway in the UK, for example.

Charity?

Operating as a registered charity in many countries, the JNF is a long-standing Zionist institution with quasi-governmental status and authority over land in Israel – which it holds in trust for Jews only.

As well as a long history of planning for and implementing the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, stretching back to even before the 1948 Nakba, it’s also linked to more contemporary expulsions.

In the Naqab, it is involved in projects to “Judaize” the southern desert – known as the Negev in Hebrew. Palestinian Bedouin communities are being compelled to move into American Indian style reservations dubbed “development towns.”

The “unrecognized” village of al-Araqib, for example, has reportedly been destroyed by Israel and rebuilt more than 40 times since 2010.

In October 2012, Budour Hassan reported for The Electronic Intifada that JNF representatives raided the 5,000-strong town of Bir Hadaj (which is ostensibly “recognized”) alongside the interior ministry, handing out demolition orders. When local youths protested, police invaded, firing tear gas, rubber bullets and some live ammunition.

But globally, the JNF promotes itself as a “ecological” charity, playing down its involvement in these abuses against Palestinians. Haaretz focuses on this greenwashing narrative.

With thanks to Jonathan Cook for drawing attention to this email.

Written FOR

4 Comments

KISSING ASS NEVER TASTED SO GOOD

November 15, 2012 at 07:27 (Collaboration, Corrupt Politics, Gaza, Israel, Palestine, U.S. Election)

*
Just days after the US election I posed a question to my readers …. ‘HOW MUCH ASS KISSING WILL IT TAKE FOR NETANYAHU TO GET HIS WAY WITH OBAMA?’
*
Well, we got our answer, more or less ….
First in THIS Ynet report;
US backs Israel; UN calls for de-escalation

Obama speaks to Netanyahu, Morsi and reiterates US support for Israel’s right to self-defense; Ban Ki-moon discusses need to prevent further deterioration with two leaders*

But, mainly from the following essay; 

The reality is that the White House is stuck with an Israeli government, with or without Netanyahu, that rejects an agreement with the Palestinians. As violence flares again in Gaza — as occurred in the run-up to the last Israeli election — it looks disturbingly like four more years of the same.

Why Obama won’t take on Israel

Jonathan Cook 

Barack Obama with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Zhang Jun / Xinhua/Zumapress)

Barack Obama’s victory in the US presidential election last week was greeted with general unease in Israel.

Surveys conducted outside the US shortly before polling day showed Obama was the preferred candidate in every country but two — Pakistan and Israel. But unlike Pakistan, where the two candidates were equally unpopular, he scored just 22 percent in Israel against a commanding 57 percent for Mitt Romney.

Given these figures, it is unsurprising that Israel’s right-wing prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, made little effort to conceal his political sympathies, laying on a hero’s welcome for Romney when he visited Jerusalem in the summer and starring in several of his TV campaign ads.

Ehud Olmert, a former Israeli prime minister, accused Netanyahu of “spitting” in the president’s face, warning that Israel would now be exposed to Obama’s second-term wrath (“Olmert blasts Bibi on Iran, relationship with Obama,” The Daily Beast, 6 November).

The general wisdom is that the president, freed of worries about being re-elected, will seek his revenge, both for Netanyahu’s long-term intransigence in the peace process and for interfering in the US campaign.

Newspaper cartoons summed up the mood last week. The liberal Haaretz showed a sweating Netanyahu gingerly putting his head into the mouth of an Obama-faced lion, while the right-wing Jerusalem Post had Netanyahu exclaiming “Oh bummer!” as he read the headlines.

The speculation among Israelis and many observers is that an Obama second term will see much greater pressure on Israel both to make major concessions on Palestinian statehood and to end its aggressive posturing towards Iran over its supposed ambition to build a nuclear warhead.

Bullish mood

Such thinking, however, is fanciful. The White House’s approach towards Netanyahu and Israel is unlikely to alter significantly.

Netanyahu’s bullish mood was certainly on display as voting in the US election was under way: his government announced plans to build more than 1,200 homes for Jewish settlersin East Jerusalem, the presumed capital of a future Palestinian state (“Israel pushes forward with 1,200 homes in East Jerusalem settlements,” Guardian, 6 November).

The reality, as Netanyahu understands well, is that Obama’s hands are now tied as firmly in the Middle East as they were during his first term.

Obama got burnt previously when he tried to impose a settlement freeze. There are no grounds for believing that Israel’s far-right lobbyists in Washington, led by AIPAC, will give the president an easier ride this time.

And as Ron Ben Yishai, a veteran Israeli commentator, noted, Obama will face the same US Congress, one that has “traditionally been a stronghold of near-unconditional support for Israel” (“Obama better for Israel,” Ynet, 6 November).

Obama may not have to worry about re-election but he will not want to hand a poisoned legacy to the next Democratic presidential candidate, nor will want to mire his own final term in damaging confrontations with Israel. Memories are still raw of Bill Clinton’s failed gamble to push through a peace deal — one that, in truth, was a far-more generous to Israel than the Palestinians — at Camp David in the dying days of his second term.

And whatever his personal antipathy towards the Israeli prime minister, Obama also knows that, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict aside, his policies in the Middle East are either aligned with Israel’s or dependent on Netanyahu’s cooperation to work.

Limited revenge?

Both Obama and Netanyahu want the Israel-Egypt peace agreement to hold. Both need to ensure the civil war in Syria does not spiral out of control, as the cross-border salvos in theGolan Heights have indicated in the past few days. Both prefer repressive West-friendly dictators in the region over Islamist gains.

And, of course, both want to box in Iran on its nuclear ambitions. So far Netanyahu has reluctantly toed the US line on “giving sanctions a chance,” toning down his rhetoric about launching an attack. The last thing the White House needs is a sulking Israeli premier priming his cohorts in Washington to undermine US policy.

A sliver of hope for Netanyahu’s opponents is that a disgruntled US president might still take limited revenge, turning the tables by interfering in the Israeli elections due in January. He could back more moderate challengers such as Olmert or Tzipi Livni, if they choose to run and start to look credible.

But even that would be a big gamble.

The evidence shows that, whatever the makeup of the next Israeli governing coalition, it will espouse policies little different from the current one. That simply reflects the lurch rightwards among Israeli voters, as indicated in a poll this month showing that 80 percent now believe it is impossible to make peace with the Palestinians.

In fact, given the mood in Israel, an obvious attempt by Obama to side with one of Netanyahu’s opponents might actually harm their prospects for success. Netanyahu has already demonstrated to Israelis that he can defeat the US president in a staring contest. Many Israelis are likely to conclude that no one is better placed to keep an unsympathetic Obama in check in his second term.

Faced with a popular consensus in Israel and political backing in the US Congress for a hard line with the Palestinians, Obama is an unlikely champion of the peace process – and even of the Palestinians’ current lowly ambition to win observer status at the United Nations. A vote on this matter is currently threatened for 29 November, with the Palestinian Authority’s President Mahmoud Abbas apparently hoping that the anniversary of the 1947 UN partition plan for Palestine will provide emotional resonance.

Meanwhile, all Israel’s main parties are battling for the large pool of right-wing votes. Shelly Yacimovich, leader of the opposition Labor party, last week denied her party was “left-wing,” in a sign of how dirty that word has become in Israel. She has studiously avoided mentioning the Palestinians or diplomatic issues.

And the great new hope of Israeli politics, former TV star Yair Lapid, has rapidly come to sound like a Netanyahu-lite. Last week he publicly opposed giving up even the Palestinian parts of East Jerusalem, arguing that the Palestinians could be browbeaten into surrendering their putative capital (“Lapid: If Israel stands firm Palestinians will give up on East Jerusalem,” Haaretz, 8 November).

The reality is that the White House is stuck with an Israeli government, with or without Netanyahu, that rejects an agreement with the Palestinians. As violence flares again in Gaza — as occurred in the run-up to the last Israeli election — it looks disturbingly like four more years of the same.

 

Written FOR

Comments Off

WHERE WILL ABBAS’ ‘KISSING UP’ TO ISRAEL LEAD TO?

November 19, 2011 at 12:52 (Associate Post, Collaboration, Israel, Palestine, Palestinian Authority)

See THIS humourous post as well
*
*

The great Arab poet, Abu’ttayeb al-Mutannabi, said:
wa’inna domo’a la’yni ghodron berabbeha  Itha konna ithra al ghadereena jawariya
*
(The tears of the eye betray a man if they keep running after the traitors)
*
PA must end security coordination with Israel now
By Khalid Amayreh in occupied Jerusalem

*

The apartheid Israeli regime decided last week to freeze the transfer of tax and customs revenue levied by Israel on behalf of the Palestinian Authority (PA).
*
The illegal and immoral measure, which Israel resorts to rather routinely, is intended to bully the Ramallah leadership to capitulate to Zionist whims and blackmailing tactics.
*
Israel never stopped threatening to strangulate the PA economically and financially if the latter didn’t succumb to the Israeli will.
 *
The systematic Israeli blackmail of the PA is a disgraceful expression of the Oslo Accords and other subsequent accords and understandings between the pseudo autonomous authority and the Nazi-like Israeli occupation regime. 
 *
Needless to say, these scandalous agreements which effectively reduced the Palestinian regime-from the supposed equal partner envisioned in these so-called agreements-to a vanquished supplicant begging for virtually everything from the Israeli side, from travel permits to basic commodities without which any modern society wouldn’t be able to function.
*
But the story doesn’t end here, which reminds us of what the legendary Arab poet, Abu’ttayeb al-Mutannabi, said about slaves who cling to their masters while crying out for freedom:
 *
The great Arab poet said:
 *
wa’inna domo’a la’yni ghodron berabbeha  Itha konna ithra al ghadereena jawariya
*
(The tears of the eye betray a man if they keep running after the traitors)
 *
The PA does possess numerous cards which, if used properly and   forcefully, can force Israel to treat the Palestinians with a semblance of respect and dignity.
 *
For example, there is strong ongoing security coordination between the Israeli occupation army and Palestinian security agencies. 
 *
This security coordination, which is actually no more than a mere subordination, subjugation and  subservience by the PA security apparatus to the Israeli occupation army, covers the entirety of the West Bank and commits the PA to protect and safeguard Israeli interests, including guarding hundreds of Jewish settlers, most of whom indoctrinated in a Nazi-like ideology that teaches that non-Jews, e.g. Palestinians, living under Jewish rule,  must submit to the Chosen People or master race and resign to a status of water carriers and wood hewers.
 *
If the goyem (or non-Jews)  don’t submit and continue to demand human rights and civil liberties,  then they must be either expelled or killed.
 *
As mentioned above, Israel had resorted to withholding the transfer of Palestinian monies several times for the purpose of forcing the PA on its knees, with the PA doing virtually nothing to respond to the hostile provocation apart from issuing statements of denunciation and condemnation.
*
The estimated $100 million dollar which Israel transfers to PA coffers per month constitutes the lion’s share of the Palestinian monthly budget. Hence, PA inaction and ostensible indifference with regard to this issue must invite the strongest condemnation from the Palestinian masses, especially those tens of thousands of civil servants and wage earners who receive their income from the PA regime.
 *
The scandal becomes even more clarion and shocking when we know that a good part of the money  withheld is used to pay salaries for those very  soldiers and officers tasked with  coordinating security matters with Israel, or, more correctly,  guarding the Nazi-like settlers.
 *
What can the PA do?
 *
Without making a short story long, the PA can and must terminate all forms of security coordination with Israel. To begin with, this coordination is a stigma upon the forehead of every Palestinian political and security official, because in its simplest form, security coordination means collaboration with the enemy against the forces of resistance and freedom.
 *
Moreover, it is amply clear that Israel accords “security coordination” with a pliant PA a paramount  importance since that very coordination  allows Israel to maintain its enduring occupation with minimal costs. 
 *
During the heights of the first and second intifadas or uprisings, Israel maintained a heavy security presence of more than 80,000 troops in the occupied territories. 
Hence, a genuine threat by the PA to terminate security coordination with the Zionist regime is very likely to sound alarm bells in Tel Aviv and Washington. Needless to say, it is the latter than finances that security coordination and bribes the PA with more money to maintain that sinful relationship with Israel.
 *
In any case, it is illogical and unethical to keep the Palestinian loaf of bread hostage to the rapacious and cannibalistic instincts of Talmudic sages who view all non-Jews as subhuman creatures whose lives have no sanctity and who have no human rights or dignity.
*
It is these so fuehrers of Zionism who control rather tightly the present Israeli government of Binyamin Netanyahu.
 *
This throws the proverbial ball rather squarely onto the PA court.
*
In addition, I believe the PA should immediately revoke the scandalous Economic Protocol of Paris which made the very lifeline of the Palestinian economy subject to   Israel’s whims and haphazard, sadistic fantasies.
 *
The PA regime did commit an unforgivable blunder in 1994; it is time the Ramallah leadership rectified and corrected that blunder which has cost our people dearly.
Finally, the PA and other Palestinian forces ought to do their utmost to get  friendly Arab, Muslim and other states involved in enabling our people to withstand Israeli bullying and blackmail.
 *
For example, the PA ought to press the new rulers of   Egypt to make the Egyptian commitment to honor and uphold  the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty subject to  Israeli treatment of the Palestinian people.
 *
The same thing applies to all new governments and regimes in the Arab world. This is what everyone would call smart politics.
Otherwise, the Palestinian people should wait to seeing a mere reproduction of the same futility and same failure characterizing PA performance over the years.

3 Comments

ISRAEL, U.S. TO ABBAS: ‘TOE THE LINE OR PERISH’

October 31, 2011 at 08:08 (Associate Post, Collaboration, Corrupt Politics, Hasbara, Israel, Occupied West Bank, Palestine)

Not the exact words used, but that’s the jist of it…
*
Israel wants him to kiss the paramount right of return for the refugees goodbye, wants him to forget East Jerusalem, and wants him to formally accept perpetual Israeli control over Palestinian borders, water resources as well as the settlements established by Israel on occupied Arab land since 1967.
*
Image ‘Copyleft’ by Carlos Latuff
Will he remain the traitor he already is as seen in THIS report, that is the question…
*
*
Israel, U.S. , want Abbas to be full-fledged traitor 
By Khalid Amayreh

*
It seems that the tight Jewish stranglehold on the American government is not only preventing the Obama administration from pursuing a fair, rational and honest approach to the enduring Palestinian crisis, but is also inhibiting the formulation in Washington of an accurate and objective understanding of  basic facts in and about the Middle East.

 

An example of this willful and unnecessary ignorance was a statement made recently by the US Ambassador for Middle East Peace David Hale.According to Hale, the Arab Spring could “sweep Hamas from power.”

“The Palestinians are no more immune to currents of change and demand for democratization, reform and freedom than any other people in the region,” he was quoted as saying.

“I think you will see those same forces affect Hamas because clearly their leadership is not characterized by any of those words.”

Hale’s words exude a lot of ignorance and misunderstanding of the facts and realities in the region.

First of all, the Palestinian people have been languishing under a sinister Israeli military occupation for 44 years, and no amount of “democratization” in occupied Palestine will change this fundamental fact.

The Palestinian people therefore need, first and  foremost,  freedom from the Nazi-like occupation before they can exercise democracy. Perhaps people like Hale can’t bring themselves to uttering the word occupation for fear of  upsetting the Jewish lobby in Washington . He presumably could lose his job if he did, especially in a sensitive election year. Hence, the conceived phobic reaction.

Like most Palestinians, I am not against genuine democratization in Palestine. However, let us be honest and have no illusion: Without ending the evil Israeli occupation, no amount of democratization would really help the Palestinians attain their freedoms. The absence of democracy in Palestine is due to the presence of the occupation. Twisting this fact would be an expression of dishonesty and mendacity.

Does democracy practiced by inmates in a maximum-security jail bring freedom to prisoners? Yes, it might help them manage their daily life and routine inside the jail, but it won’t help them regain their freedom.

Likewise, the Palestinian people are not merely striving to enhance their daily life, though this is a legitimate and important task, if only to help Palestinians withstand the systematic and institutionalized oppression meted out to them by Zio-Nazism.

The Palestinian people want absolute and total freedom from the decades-old nefarious Israeli occupation.

Besides, since when did the US really show any serious concern about democratization in occupied Palestine or elsewhere in the Arab-Muslim region?

Didn’t the U.S. abruptly lose its composure and mental equanimity when Hamas won the Palestinian elections in 2006? Didn’t a U.S., under aggressive and frenzied Jewish pressure, acted rather spasmodically to strangle and throttle the Palestinians following the said elections which by the way the Bush administration itself had Okayed?

I am afraid I have bad news for Mr. Hale and his equally ignorant boss or bosses in Washington. Hamas is here to stay. Hamas, which only last week forced Israel to release hundreds of Palestinian prisoners from its dungeons and concentration camps, is strong and getting stronger:

Strong because it represents the true aspirations of most Palestinians for a better tomorrow; and stronger because an arrogant Israel driven by Talmudic insolence only understands the language of force, stubbornness and strength.

More to the point, a  soft, obsequious approach toward Israel won’t take the Palestinians anywhere. It will only transform them into vanquished supplicants begging for their legitimate rights from an arrogant and rapacious Israel that is hell bent on stealing the remainder of Palestinian land.

The truth of the matter regarding the impact of the Arab Spring on Hamas is that it has not only vindicated the liberation movement’s approach toward Israeli occupation, but it has also created an auspicious atmosphere conducive to helping Hamas and the Palestinians as a whole expedite their goals.

The growing good chemistry between Hamas and Cairo is undoubtedly an auspicious development. The upcoming elections in Egypt, slated to start on 28 November, is expected to produce pleasant surprises if the nationalist and Islamist forces achieve victory in the polls and form the next Egyptian government.

Israel and her guardian-ally, the U.S.,  (the latter is getting weaker and bankrupt by the hour) know that hundreds of millions of Arabs and Muslims expect the next government in Cairo to find a real correlation between the Egyptian commitment to uphold the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty and Israeli treatment of and behavior toward the Palestinian cause and people.  I bet this is going to be a serious matter for Israel’s firsters and the Zionist shipyard dogs in Washington who think Israel’s interests come even before American interests.

In any case, the Islamists are simply coming, and Israel will soon become bereft of friends in this region, no matter what desperate feats Israel is trying. And Israel has only itself to blame.

The Israeli state, itself a crime against humanity (perhaps people like Hale would shake in fear while reading this shocking but veracious phrase) never really lost an opportunity to alienate Arabs and Muslims. The murderous Israeli modus operandi toward the Palestinians and other peoples in the region has generated a huge reservoir of hatred toward the Jewish state. The Arab masses, whether in Egypt or Tunisia or even Libya, will not waste anytime venting their frozen rage and accumulative frustration vis-à-vis Israel when they are given the chance to do so.

The King of Jordan Abdullah II recently “warned” that Egypt might effectively abrogate its peace treaty with Israel and that Jordan was effectively becoming the last remaining advocate of peace with the Jewish state?  The king knew what he was talking about. However, his warnings are unlikely to be heeded, given Israel’s characteristic insolence and America ‘s brazen subservience to the evil entity and its backers in Washington .

As to the whoring peace process, it is really difficult to talk about this process using dignified language. How else can one relate to a process that is based on lies, fraught with lies, and shaped by lies?Israel, which we  earlier described as a crime against humanity because it is based on ethnic  cleansing, genocide, and aggression, wants Palestinian Authority (PA) Chairman Mahmoud Abbas to become a full-fledged traitor.Israel wants him to kiss the paramount right of return for the refugees goodbye, wants him to forget East Jerusalem, and wants him to formally accept perpetual Israeli control over Palestinian borders, water resources as well as the settlements established by Israel on occupied Arab land since 1967.Needless to say,  Abbas would rather commit suicide than agree to these irrational demands.  He knows that any Palestinian leader agreeing to these capitulations will not live long to even regret his folly.Besides, how can Abbas possibly offer a “workable” alternative to Hamas’s seemingly more logical and appealing line, which is based on resistance and steadfastness?

Will Israel, for the sake of Abbas’s legendary moderation, withdraw to the borders of the 4th of June, 1967? Will Israel terminate the building of colonies and Judaizing of Jerusalem? Will Israel allow for the repatriation of millions of refugees uprooted from their homes when the evil entity was established 63 years ago, which is a sine-qua-non for any genuine and durable peace deal in the region? Will Israel dismantle the settlements?

The answer is a plain NO.

Another question: Will the U.S. pressure Israel to end its decades-old occupation? The answer is also a plain NO because the Jewish lobby is in tight control of American politics and policies. Moreover, an American president, especially in an election year, won’t commit political suicide by displeasing the only state in the world that truly calls the shots in Washington.

4 Comments

PALESTINE HAS A HERO … AMERICA NEEDS ONE

September 26, 2011 at 07:56 (Collaboration, Corrupt Politics, Irony, Palestine, Palestinian Statehood)

The very same man who was exposed not too long ago as a mega collaborator with the zionist state has overnight turned into the hero of Palestine….
*
On the other side of the world, the man who promised change and prosperity has turned into something that Websters’ hasn’t quite mustered a label for….
Ironic as it seems, this is the reality of the day.
*
Below are recent photos of Abbas’ return to Ramallah, and a not very complimentary image of President Obama
*
Image by Skulz Fontaine
*
Click on image to enlarge
*
Report of Abbas’ return follows……
*
Ramallah prepares from President Abbas' return from the UN General Assembly.
Ramallah prepares for President Abbas’ return from the UN General Assembly.Reuters
*
President Abbas is greeted by thousands of supporters upon his return to Ramallah.
President Abbas is greeted by thousands of supporters upon his return to Ramallah.Reuters
*
President Abbas receives a hero's welcome in Ramallah after speaking before the UN General Assembly last week.
President Abbas receives a hero’s welcome in Ramallah after speaking before the UN General Assembly last week.AFP
*
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas prepares to speak before thousands in Ramallah upon his return from the UN General Assembly in New York.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas prepares to speak before thousands in Ramallah upon his return from the UN General Assembly in New York.
*
Protesters cheer as President Abbas returns to Ramallah from the United Nations in New York.
Protesters cheer as President Abbas returns to Ramallah from the United Nations in New York.
*
    Abbas calls for a 'settlement freeze' during his Ramallah speech on Sunday.
Abbas calls for a ‘settlement freeze’ during his Ramallah speech on Sunday.
*
Read the full report HERE
*

President Abbas receives hero’s welcome in West Bank, declares ‘Palestinian Spring’

Thousands gather in Ramallah as Palestinian President returns from New York; Abbas expected to convene top ministers to discuss the Quartet’s proposal for renewing peace talks.

2 Comments

ISRAEL’S DYNAMIC DUO ‘SAVING THE WORLD’ FROM A FREE PALESTINE

September 22, 2011 at 14:09 (Collaboration, Corrupt Politics, Hasbara, Israel, Palestine, Palestinian Statehood)

I am referring to none other than Netanyahu and Israel’s official President, Obama. It matters not what the people of Palestine want, it matters not what most of the world wants, it all comes down to what Israel wants.
*
*
Here’s the lesson that Obama learned to recite by heart… he never seems to forget who butters his matzo despite it being the other way around in reality.
 *
Netanyahu thanks Obama for supporitve UN address
*
During joint press conference with American president, prime minister says direct negotiations is only way to achieve a stable Middle East peace; Obama notes that ‘recent events in the region remind us how fragile peace can be’
*
Moments before his joint meeting with US President Barack Obama in New York, Netanyahu lauded the American leader for reiterating the unwavering US commitment to Israel during his speech at the United Nations General Assembly.
*

“Peace cannot be imposed – it has to be negotiated. Israelis and Palestinians sitting down together and working through these very difficult issues that have kept the parties apart for decades now; that is what I know is the ultimate goal for all of us – two states, side by side, living in peace and security,” he added.

*
Their talks can be seen in this video, ironically called Netanyahu Says Obama ‘Wearing Badge of Honor’ , A badge that I would not want to wear…
*
Video and italics taken FROM
*
President Obama’s speech can be read HERE.

6 Comments

SHOULD MUBARAK STAND TRIAL ALONE?

August 3, 2011 at 11:04 (Collaboration, Corrupt Politics, Egypt, Torture, War Crimes)

*
Justice can only be served if those that kept him in ‘business’ stand in the docket with him in an International Court of Law. The crimes committed by him went well past the borders of Egypt as did the criminals that supported those crimes.
*
“If you feel sympathy for any dictator broken and standing in a cage, remember him when he was unjust on the throne.”
*

Mubarak enters Cairo court on stretcher as trial opens for alleged crimes against protesters

Former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak flown to Cairo from hospital in Sharm el-Skeikh; faces possible execution if convicted.

*
Egypt’s ousted president Hosni Mubarak, on trial for conspiring to kill protesters, was wheeled into a courtroom cage in a hospital bed on Wednesday – an image that sends a chilling message to other Arab autocrats facing popular uprisings.
*

In this image taken from Egyptian state television on August 3, 2011, Hosni Mubarak is wheeled into a holding cell in the court room in the police academy in Cairo. Photo by: AFP photo / Egyptian TV

*

Read the entire report HERE

4 Comments

FLOTILLA READY TO SAIL TOMORROW ~~ SEE ACTION ALERT AT END

July 3, 2011 at 11:36 (Activism, Collaboration, Gaza, Hasbara, Humanitarian Aid Flotilla, International Solidarity, Israel, Palestine, zionist harassment)

Foreign minister says Israel was behind the Greek ban on departure of ships, claims Greek government understands Israel’s needs.
*
Perhaps this is the solution….
*

BOYCOTT GREECE! NO PRODUCTS, NO TOURISM. GREECE HOVERS AT THE EDGE OF COLLAPSE. A BOYCOTT WILL PUSH IT OVER THE EDGE AND BRING DOWN THE GOVERNMENT THAT CHOSE TO ACT AS ISRAEL’S PRIVATEERS AGAINST A US-FLAGGED SHIP!

SPREAD THE WORD.

BOYCOTT GREECE!

*

Add 520 to your Boycott List

*

*
Gaza flotilla to set sail Monday despite numerous setbacks

Activists say all operational ships will be ready to depart, but exact number is yet unknown.

By Amira Hass

The organizers of the Gaza-bound flotilla said Sunday that all operational ships will set sail on Monday, despite the numerous delays the flotilla activists had encountered in the past week.

The decision to depart on Monday was made following several days of deliberations on the subject, and the exact number of ships due to sail is still unknown.

In contrast to recent reports, most of the Gaza flotilla activists are still participating.

Moreover, activists in several countries of origin of the ships participating in the flotilla such as Canada and Belgium held protests in support of the Gaza flotilla and against the Greek government, which had issued an order to bar the ships from leaving Greek ports.

Eight of the ten ships due to participate in the Gaza flotilla were delayed over the weekend in various Greek ports, following an order by the Greek government to bar the departure of the vessels.

The activists as well as members of the leftist opposition in Greece accused the Socialist government of caving in to Israeli pressure. Greek Foreign Minister Stavros Lambrinidis said that the Greek government is preventing the departure of the vessels in order to avoid a ‘humanitarian disaster’ which will result from a violent confrontation with the Israeli navy.

The foreign minister also promised that he will continue to negotiate with the UN in order to find a solution to the flotilla crisis.

The Greek ban applies to all Greek and foreign vessels in Greek ports heading to Gaza.

The organizers of the flotilla were considering legal action to cancel the Greek ban on the departure of the ships. They were also trying to rally members of leftist parties in various countries and the European Parliament to convince the Greek government to change the orders.

Before the official publication of the instructions at 4:30 P.M. on Friday, the boat of the American delegation tried to set sail from the port of Perama without clearance from the Greek authorities. The ship was carrying 51 passengers, including five members of the crew and 11 journalists.

According to the flotilla organizers, the delays by the Greek authorities in granting permission to sail stemmed from political pressure.

The American ship, Audacity of Hope, named after President Barack Obama’s book, was blocked by a vessel of the Greek coast guard.

After the members of the American delegation were warned that their ship would be taken over by force they agreed to sail back to port, shadowed by the coast guard vessel.

Written FOR

*
Follow Amira Hass’ Flotilla Diary
*
*
Max Blumenthal reports the following
*

*

Also from HaAretz….

*Lieberman admits Israel was behind the departure ban …. in a roundabout way

*

Lieberman: Flotilla activists are blaming Israel for their failure

Foreign minister says Israel was behind the Greek ban on departure of ships, claims Greek government understands Israel’s needs.

Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Sunday that the Gaza flotilla activists, who had accused Israel of purposely sabotaging their ships, are just trying to place the blame for their failure on Israel.

“The activists are trying to blame someone for their failure – no doubt they have watched too many James Bond films,” Lieberman told Army Radio in an interview. “There is an attempt to evade responsibility for their propaganda, as well as a lack of support from countries around the world.”

Lieberman also said that Israel was behind the Greek government’s decision to forbid the flotilla from sailing to the Gaza Strip. “Things do not just happen on their own,” he maintained, “the Quartet, the governments of Greece, and Cyprus object to the flotilla, understand the needs of Israel, and are acting effectively.”

However, despite the technical difficulties and the Greek government’s decision to forbid the voyage, the activists on board believe that it is only a matter of time before they leave for the Gaza Strip, declaring Sunday that they intend to set sail on Monday.

The Greek authorities have announced that they will not allow the ships to sail, as they believe the mission is “too dangerous.” The captain of the American ship, Audacity of Hope, will appear in court on Tuesday where he is be charged with defying the Greek ban, as well as endangering the lives of the ship’s passengers.

In the aftermath of the captain’s arrest, as well as the forced transfer of the ship to a Greek military naval base, the activists held a press conference wherein they blamed Israel for “exporting the siege on Gaza to Greece” and condemned Greece for “implementing the policies of the Israeli government.”

The Middle East Quartet issued a statement on Saturday that pleaded with those interested in transferring humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip to do so “through established channels so that their cargo can be inspected and transferred via established land crossings.” The declaration further called on all governments involved to “use their influence to discourage additional flotillas, which risk the safety of their participants and carry the potential for escalation.”

*
ACTION ALERT FROM THE US BOAT TO GAZA….
*

The U.S. Government Must Pressure Greece 

to Let U.S. Boat to Gaza Sail

 

Release Captain John Klusmire 

and Our Boat Immediately!  
The U.S. Boat to Gaza calls for pressure 
on the U.S. State Department

 

People around the world are rallying for the release of the boats that Greece is preventing from sailing to Gaza. We call on you to show your solidarity and support for the flotilla as a whole, and in particular for the captain of the U.S. boat, John Klusmire.

 

Over the past two weeks, two boats of the international flotilla to Gaza have been sabotaged while docked at Greek ports.  No one has claimed responsibility for the damage done to these boats.  The potential danger to the U.S. boat was obvious to the captain, the crew and the passengers: there was a clear possibility that the U.S. boat would be sabotaged next.

The departure of the U.S. Boat to Gaza - The Audacity of Hope - was first delayed by a complaint filed by the Israel Law Center and shown to be frivolous. Greek authorities then inspected the boat but, until the boat set sail five days later the, the results of that inspection has not been shared with the captain and his crew. Those results were not shared until the Hellenic Coast Guard stopped The Audacity of Hope some 20 minutes after it had left the dock on Friday, July 1. The Hellenic Coast Guard intercepted the ship and ordered that the ship stop. This order was obeyed. Commandos with drawn rifles ordered the ship to return.  It is now impounded at a military dock in Athens and the captain has ben arrested.

Captain Klusmire faces two charges: disturbing sea traffic and endangering passengers; and moving away from the dock in violation of an order not to do so. He is being held in a cell without a bed and does not have access to toilet facilities. The only food and water he has had has been brought in by visitors. He has not been visited by anyone from the U.S. Embassy even though he is entitled to such a visit by international law.
The U.S. Boat to Gaza campaign urges you to immediately take the following actions. Even though it is a holiday weekend we urge you to make these calls now, and if necessary to place calls again on Monday and Tuesday.

  • Contact your members of Congress and urge him or her to pressure the Greek authorities to drop the charges against Captain Klusmire. 
  • Contact the U.S. State Department and the U.S. Embassy in Greece. Insist that they fulfill their duty to advocate on behalf of Captain Klusmire and that they demand the release of the U.S. boat by Greece so it can freely sail to Gaza.
    • Sect. of State Hillary Clinton: 202-647-5291
    • Kim Richter, Consular Affairs, Overseas American Citizens Services, U.S. State Dept: 202-647-8308
    • Greek Desk, U.S. State Dept: 202-647-6113
    • U.S. Embassy in Athens: 011-30-210-721-2951, fax 011-30-210-645-6282, website: athens.usembassy.gov
  • Activate your emergency response network to publicly demonstrate support for Captain Klusmire and our call for Greece to let the flotilla sail! Pass along this action alert as widely as possible.

 

Below is a copy of the latest press release from the U.S. Boat to Gaza.

 

———————–

 

July 3, 2011 Athens, Greece

 

On eve of U.S. Independence Day, U.S. passengers on 
flotilla start open-ended fast at U.S. Embassy in Athens
Demand that U.S. government pressure Greece to 
free their boat and captain, and allow boat to sail to Gaza

 

Members of the U.S. Boat to Gaza have begun an open-ended fast calling on the U.S. government to defend our right to sail out of Greece. The fast has begun in front of the U.S. Embassy at 91 Vasilisis Sophias Avenue in Athens. Fasters delivered an urgent letter to the Embassy and plan to sleep overnight outside the Embassy gates.

Passengers and U.S. boat organizers participating in the fast are: Medea Benjamin, Ken Mayers, Paki Wieland, Kathy Kelly, Ray McGovern, Helaine Meisler, Nic Abramson, and Carol Murry.     
Passenger Kathy Kelly said, “We call on officials at the U.S. Embassy in Athens to publicly acknowledge our right to sail and to call on the Greek government to free our ship and its captain immediately.”

There will also be a march in support of the flotilla beginning at 7 pm organized by Greek activists who have been protesting the government’s austerity measures in Syntagma Square. The march will include a demand on the Greek government to let all of the boats in the Freedom Flotilla 2 sail to Gaza and to free the captain of the U.S. ship, who has been held in jail.  
The departure of the U.S. Boat to Gaza - The Audacity of Hope - was first delayed by a complaint filed by the Israel Law Center and shown to be frivolous. Greek authorities then inspected the boat but, until the boat set sail five days later, the results of that inspection has not been shared with the captain and his crew. 
The Greek Coast Guard stopped The Audacity of Hope some 20 minutes after it had left the dock on Friday, July 1. The Coast Guard ordered the captain to stop the ship, which he did. Commandos with drawn rifles ordered the ship to return.  It is now impounded at a military dock in Athens and the captain has ben arrested.
Over the past two weeks, two boats of the international flotilla to Gaza have been sabotaged while docked at Greek ports.  The potential danger to the U.S. boat was obvious to the captain, the crew and the passengers: there was a clear possibility that the U.S. boat would be sabotaged next.

Greek consular officials in the United States, when besieged with calls by angry Americans,  told callers that they should direct their protest to U.S. officials because they were ultimately responsible.  ”We know that the U.S. government has been supporting Israel’s underhanded efforts to thwart the flotilla, and has been pressuring the Greek government to stop us. This is a disgrace,” said passenger/faster Medea Benjamin. “On July 4, it’s time for our government to declare independence from Israel and start supporting its own citizens.”

We note that on June 24, passengers on the U.S. Boat to Gaza visited the Consul General in Athens, Deputy Consul General Kate Brandeis agreed that the U.S. Boat “had a right to sail to Gaza.”   

Ms. Brandeis assured the passengers that the consulate was there to assist U.S. citizens that run into difficulty while in Greece.  To date, we have received no assistance from the U.S. Embassy and the captain of our boat, a U.S. citizen, remains in jail and has yet to be visited by anyone from the U.S. Embassy.

###

11 Comments

BEWARE OF GREEKS BEARING ORDERS TO BLOCK US BOAT TO GAZA

June 26, 2011 at 08:22 (Activism, Collaboration, Gaza, Humanitarian Aid, International Solidarity, Israel, Palestine, zionist harassment)

The passengers are wondering if Israel, which has extensive economic trade and investments in Greece, is using its clout to pressure the Greek government. “Israel has said openly that it is pressuring governments to try to stop the flotilla, and clearly Greece is a key government since several of the boats plan to leave from Greece,” says passenger Medea Benajmin. “It is unconscionable that Israel would take advantage of the economic hardship the Greek people are experiencing to try to stop our boat or the flotilla.”
*
*
GREEK OFFICIALS ATTEMPT TO BLOCK U.S. BOAT TO GAZA FROM LEAVING GREEK PORT
*
PASSENGERS SUSPECT ISRAEL/US ECONOMIC PRESSURE ON BELEAGUERED GREEK GOVERNMENT

Athens – Passengers on the U.S. Boat to Gaza, The Audacity of Hope, are asking Greek government officials to clarify whether the boat they are leasing is being blocked from leaving Greece because of an anonymous request of a private citizen concerning the seaworthiness of the ship or whether a political decision has been made by the Greek government in response to U.S. and Israeli government pressure. They specifically want to know if the U.S. is using its leverage at the International Monetary Fund over the implementation of an ongoing bailout of European banks with massive Greek debts to compel the Greek government to block the U.S. Boat to Gaza from leaving Greece.

On the morning of June 23, the American passengers learned that a “private complaint” had been filed against the U.S. Boat to Gaza, which is part of an international flotilla scheduled to sail to Gaza in the next few days. This complaint, its origin still unknown to the Americans, claimed that the boat is “not seaworthy” and therefore requires a detailed inspection. On June 25 a police order declared that until the complaint is resolved the boat will not be permitted to leave.

The passengers are wondering if Israel, which has extensive economic trade and investments in Greece, is using its clout to pressure the Greek government. “Israel has said openly that it is pressuring governments to try to stop the flotilla, and clearly Greece is a key government since several of the boats plan to leave from Greece,” says passenger Medea Benajmin. “It is unconscionable that Israel would take advantage of the economic hardship the Greek people are experiencing to try to stop our boat or the flotilla.”

Given the very close relationship between Israel and the U.S., and the public efforts by Israel to denounce and try to stop the flotilla, the passengers on the U.S. boat want to know if the Obama Administration is using U.S. leverage at the IMF to compel the Greek authorities to stop the U.S. boat from leaving Greece. Greece’s economic and political crisis is a result of extreme austerity measures imposed by the European Union and the largely U.S.-controlled International Monetary Fund. Past U.S. governments have used their influence at the IMF to impose political conditions on indebted countries that have nothing to do with restoring economic growth.

Mark Weisbrot, Co-Director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, said: “Greece is not going to be able to meet the targets that it is pledging to the IMF and the European authorities. In this situation the IMF and therefore the U.S. government will have enormous leverage because the Fund and EU authorities will decide what will be acceptable benchmarks for Greece to receive future tranches of IMF/EU funding.”

“We are guests here,” said Robert Naiman, a passenger on the U.S. boat. “But we ask the Greek authorities to be honest with us. What is the origin of this complaint? Is the decision to stop our boat from leaving truly due to legitimate technical issues that can be resolved, or is it a sign that our boat will be stopped from leaving no matter what we do? What is the role of the Israeli and U.S. governments in the Greek decision to stop our boat from leaving?”

“We have a right to protest the blockade of Gaza,” said Ann Wright, an organizer and passenger on the U.S. boat. “To its credit, the Greek government, like the Red Cross, Amnesty International, and Oxfam, agrees with us that the blockade on Gaza must be lifted. But for years, the only effective international action to challenge the illegal blockade has been freedom flotillas. We call upon the Greek government, which agrees that our cause is just, not to stand in the way of our peaceful protest in pursuit of our shared goal of lifting the blockade. The boat we are leasing for this journey, after its refitting for the voyage to Gaza, was surveyed by a professional surveyor and successfully completed its sea trials. There is no reason for any further delays on this matter, we are ready to sail.”

###

For regular updates follow the US Boat to Gaza on Twitter: http://twitter.com/usboattogaza and visit the US Boat to Gaza website.

*

Also read this related post by Joseph Dana

*

Greece: Israeli assault on the Flotilla is well underway

*

ATHENS: Israeli diplomatic and economic pressure is looming large over preparations of the second Gaza aid flotilla, set to sail from a number Greek ports at the end of the month. Israel has clearly stated that it will use every diplomatic and military avenue to maintain its naval blockade of the Gaza Strip. The events of the past few days in Athens confirm that Israel is making good on its claim. Learning from last year’s botched military operation against the flotilla– which left eight Turkish civilians and one Turkish-American civilian dead– Israel is seemingly applying pressure directly on the Greek government to stop the flotilla boats from setting sail.

Early this morning, I discovered that a ‘private complaint’ had been filed against the US boat to Gaza. The complaint, it is still unclear who filed it, stated that the US boat to Gaza is not ‘sea worthy’ and requires a detailed inspection.The harbor master where the boat is in port has declared that until the compliant is resolved the boat is not permitted to leave. Currently, lawyers representing the US boat are looking into the origins of the complaint and weather it was filed as a result of Israeli economic or diplomatic pressure on the Greek government. The boat is US flagged and registered in the United States.

The government of Greece has been on the edge of collapse due to expected European Union austerity measures which are overwhelmingly unpopular among the majority of the population. Demonstrations and riots have been rocking Athens for the past two weeks. Greek officials have confirmed that Israel and Greece have met in recent days to discuss various issues including the flotilla.

Given the fact that the Greek government is fighting for its political survival, it is unlikely that Greece would bend to Israeli diplomatic pressure. However, it is more probable that Greece would bend to direct Israeli economic pressure. Israel and Greece have a strong economic relationship which includes a joint gas pipeline project in the Eastern Mediterranean.

If substantiated, rumors that Israel is threatening the Israeli-Greek trade relationship could have profound effects on the economy of Greece which, in turn, would make implementing upcoming austerity measure much more difficult. Right now, these sentiments are merely rumors and the Greek government is maintaining silence on economic relations with Israel in connection with the Flotilla. What is clear is that Flotilla ships are being targeted in Greek ports and might not sail.

10 ships are expected to sail as part of the Gaza aid flotilla. Currently three ships, including the US boat, have had complaints levied against them.  US boat organizers believe that Greece will attempt to delay the ships indefinitely by using a serious of bureaucratic measures such as endless safety checks and cargo inspections. Despite the setbacks, organizers are continuing with their nonviolence and safety training. They are hopeful that the Greek government will allow the ships to sail next week as initially planned.

Posted AT

3 Comments

ISRAELI PRISONS ARE READY FOR THOSE ATTEMPTING TO ENTER GAZA

June 25, 2011 at 07:28 (Activism, Collaboration, Corrupt Politics, Gaza, Hasbara, Humanitarian Aid, Israel, Palestine)

US Dollars at work again…. attempting to halt those attempting to break the siege on Gaza.
*
*
Israeli authorities have prepared prisons to hold the participants of the flotilla, who will reportedly be arrested and thrown in jail for violating the blockade.
 *
Second Humanitarian Flotilla Prepares to Sail for Gaza
By Bego Astigarraga
*
BILBAO, Spain,  – As the second Freedom Flotilla, made up of some 10 ships carrying 1,000 activists from 20 countries, gets ready to sail for the besieged Gaza Strip, Israeli authorities are stepping up their threats.

The Israeli government is putting pressure on other Mediterranean countries from which the ships may sail late this month, although the exact date and place have not yet been revealed for security reasons.

Israel has warned foreign diplomats in Tel Aviv to get ready to “face the consequences,” says a statement issued by the Rumbo a Gaza (Sailing to Gaza) Spanish civil society initiative.

The Israeli daily Haaretz revealed that the Israeli Defence Forces held a large drill for special commandos and snipers to prepare to intercept the flotilla.

Israel Navy commander Adm. Eliezer Marom said Jun. 19 that “The Navy has prevented and will continue to prevent the arrival of the ‘hate flotilla’ whose only goals are to clash with IDF soldiers, create media provocation and delegitimise the State of Israel.”

The boat that will carry 50 people from Spain – including this reporter – was named Gernika and will carry to Gaza a loose interpretation by Basque Country artists of the famous painting that Pablo Picasso painted in 1937 after German and Italian forces bombed the Basque village of Gernika (or Guernica) in northern Spain.

The Spanish government has avoided making statements on the issue. But Foreign Minister Trinidad Jiménez said the best way to help Gaza is by means of diplomatic pressure, not flotillas.

“We strongly advise against taking part in the Rumbo a Gaza initiative because of the grave danger that participants in the flotilla could face,” says a warning on the Foreign Ministry web site.

Israel started tightening its stranglehold on the Gaza Strip after Hamas won the January 2006 Palestinian elections, and imposed a full blockade in subsequent years, especially after the Operation Cast Lead military offensive launched in late 2008.

Israel argues the blockade is necessary for security reasons, while human rights groups counter that the siege amounts to collective punishment of Gaza’s 1.5 million mostly civilian residents and that it is illegal under international law.

Israeli authorities have prepared prisons to hold the participants of the flotilla, who will reportedly be arrested and thrown in jail for violating the blockade.

“Last year, 15 days before setting sail, we knew that if the international community did not act, a massacre would take place – which ended up happening,” activist Manuel Tapial, coordinator of the Rumbo a Gaza initiative in Spain and one of the participants in the 2010 flotilla, told IPS.

In the early hours of the morning on May 31, 2010, Israeli commandos firing machine guns air-dropped from helicopters onto the first Freedom Flotilla’s flagship Mavi Marmara, killing nine and injuring over 50 of the civilians on board.

The rest of the 600 passengers were arrested and held without charges for a day and a half in Israel before they were deported.

There is no legal basis for Israel to intercept ships and prevent them from delivering humanitarian supplies, say experts in international law.

“Israel only has jurisdiction over its territorial waters of 12 nautical miles, and neither the waters off Gaza nor international waters are under its authority,” University of the Basque Country professor of international law Juan Soroeta told IPS.

“No U.N. resolution authorises the Gaza blockade,” said Soroeta. “On the contrary, it is an illegal, unilateral measure imposed by force by Israel in the context of an equally illegal occupation of Palestinian territory.”

U.N. Security Council Resolution 1860, adopted on Jan. 8, 2009, calls for “the unimpeded provision and distribution throughout Gaza of humanitarian assistance, including of food, fuel and medical treatment”.

But reports from the international humanitarian organisations working on the ground there confirm that this point is not being fulfilled.

“We have repeatedly urged our governments and international bodies to use observers to inspect the ships and the humanitarian cargo and passengers they are carrying, both at port and at sea, but no one has yet responded to this proposal,” Tapial said.

The Mavi Marmara was expected to take part in Freedom Flotilla II, but its owner, the Turkish Humanitarian Aid Foundation (İHH), said the repairs of damages caused last year have not been completed and the ship is not in a condition to make the trip.

There has been speculation as to whether this decision has anything to do with secret talks held by Turkey and Israel.

But the fact that the flotilla is going ahead undermines the argument that the campaign was organised by the IHH, an Islamic charity, which Israel accuses of having links to terrorism.

At the same time, within Israel, “a public debate is taking place on what to do, with some arguing that we should be allowed in because we are civilians only carrying humanitarian aid, while the blockade, according to Israel, is only against weapons smuggling,” Tapial said.

Regardless of the difficulties, the Freedom Flotilla II – Stay Human, named in honour of Italian peace activist Vittorio Arrigoni, who was murdered in April in Gaza, aims to deliver its humanitarian aid, including construction materials, medical supplies and educational materials.

The U.N. agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA) “informed us in a letter that they could not receive our deliveries, so that Israel could not accuse them of being part of the conflict,” Tapial said.

“But if we make it there, I am confident that they will accept the material, and that they will distribute it equitably,” he added.

The 10,000 tons of humanitarian aid carried by the first Freedom Flotilla was confiscated by Israel along with the personal effects of the passengers and the reporters’ equipment.

None of the items were ever returned, making it “booty in the best pirate tradition,” said Spanish lawyer Enrique Santiago, who was involved in preparing the charges against Israel for the assault on the flotilla in international waters.

International support for the second flotilla has only grown, with backing from thousands of personalities from around the world, such as Nobel Peace Prize-winners Rigoberta Menchú of Guatemala, Mairead Maguire of Northern Ireland, Jody Williams of the United States and Shirin Ebadi of Iran.

The four prominent peace and human rights activists called on U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to urge the governments of the countries concerned to take the necessary measures to guarantee the safety of those taking part in the mission.

Source
*
All with US Support…..
*
By invoking Israel’s supposed “right to self-defense” against civilian boats trying to reach Gaza, we must understand that Clinton is telling Israel the United States will not stand in the way of another military attack.
*

Hillary Clinton gives green light for Israeli attack on Gaza flotilla

Submitted by Ali Abunimah
*
In comments yesterday, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seemed to lay the ground – indeed almost provide a green light – for an Israeli military attack on the upcoming Gaza Freedom Flotilla, which will include the US Boat to Gaza.

Among the passengers aboard the American boat will be 87-year old Kindertransport survivor Hedy Epstein, and author and poet Alice Walker. In all it is expected that about 10 ships, carrying 1000 people from over 20 countries will take part.

Here’s what Clinton said in remarks at the State Department on 23 June:

Well, we do not believe that the flotilla is a necessary or useful effort to try to assist the people of Gaza. Just this week, the Israeli Government approved a significant commitment to housing in Gaza. There will be construction materials entering Gaza and we think that it’s not helpful for there to be flotillas that try to provoke actions by entering into Israeli waters and creating a situation in which the Israelis have the right to defend themselves.

Clinton must know that Gaza is not part of what any country recognizes as “sovereign” Israeli territory, and therefore neither are Gaza’s territorial waters. Any boats entering Gaza’s waters would not in fact be entering “Israeli waters” as Clinton claimed. Clinton also, presuming she is properly briefed rather than misled, must also know that last year Israel attacked the Gaza Freedom Flotilla when it was in international waters and GPS data showed that it was actually heading away from Israel.

By invoking Israel’s supposed “right to self-defense” against civilian boats trying to reach Gaza, we must understand that Clinton is telling Israel the United States will not stand in the way of another military attack.

And by citing Israel allowing construction materials into Gaza to make the case that the flotilla is “unnecessary” because “aid” can reach the Palestinian people in Gaza, Clinton is engaging in the ultimate obfuscation.

People in Gaza have been reduced to penury and rendered dependent on aid by decades of Israeli occupation, siege and military attacks. The issue is not the delivery of aid but freeing the people by lifting the siege. It is an abhorrent position to suggest – as Clinton seems to – that if people in Gaza receive enough calories or a few building supplies then we should not be concerned about Israel’s siege. The Palestinian people of Gaza are not caged animals for whom sufficient care consists of shoving rations through the bars of their prison.

Israel’s siege is intended as a form of collective punishment and has been declared illegal by the ICRC.

Israel, as The Electronic Intifada reported, is engaging in military drills to intercept this unarmed civilian flotilla. In light of Clinton’s statements, if any blood is spilled it will not only be on Israeli, but also American hands.

Prosecuting flotilla passengers under “material support” laws

Not content with tacitly encouraging Israeli violence, in another alarming development, the State Department has apparently threatened that Americans who board boats to Gaza could be jailed or fined for supporting terrorism. Haaretz reports:

The U.S. State Department said Friday that attempts to break the blockade are “irresponsible and provocative” and that Israel has well-established means of delivering assistance to the Palestinian residents of Gaza. It noted that the territory is run by the militant Hamas group, a U.S. designated foreign terrorist organization, and that Americans providing support to it are subject to fines and jail.

In effect, the US now seems to be defining any support for any Palestinians, including a besieged civilian population, as support for Hamas, and therefore support for “terrorism.”

This mirrors its use of such “material support” laws as a pretext to investigate and persecute Palestine solidarity, antiwar, and labor activists exercising their First Amendment rights at home.

 

Source

8 Comments

DESTRUCTION AND REBIRTH ON TWO SIDES OF THE PLANET

May 16, 2011 at 09:34 (Collaboration, Collective Punishment, Corrupt Politics, DesertPeace Editorial, Ethnic Cleansing, Human Rights, Israel, Nakba, Oppression, Palestine)

  Image by David Baldinger
*
*
Yesterday we commemorated the 63rd anniversary of the destruction and erasure of the land we knew as Palestine. Today, we look forward to its rebirth. As this becomes more of a reality we witness many interesting occurrences; one being the taking of sides. Throughout the years we have seen, as we do in most world events, the ‘fence sitters’. These people now find themselves in a position to take sides, which they must. We also found a group of individuals that spent the past 63 years spouting hatred and pointing fingers.
*
This continues to this very day. The fingers are pointed at anyone that disagrees with them, especially fellow Jews. We are referred to as traitors, self hating Jews, and worse, simply because we refuse to hate or allow the atrocities against Palestinians to be committed in our name. Despite the finger pointing and defamation, our struggle will continue.
*
Regardless of this, the world has finally reconciled itself to the fact that Palestine does exist and must be allowed independent statehood. The recent reconciliation of the two leading factions in Palestine has, of course, brought this struggle to the limelight. Needless to say, the uprisings in the Arab World have been a great inspiration.
*
Between you and me, I trust both Fatah and Hamas as far as I can throw them. Not necessarily because of  their own doing (definitely because of zionist intervention) both have demonstrated that they are not in a position to lead a newly emerged nation. Trust has now been given to the both of them that they must. If they fail, not only they, but the entire nation of Palestine will become the laughing stock of the world. We must not allow this to happen and must throw our support towards both of these Parties and stand behind them.
*
If we don’t, we will see a repeat of what is going on in the United States today, a land that was also divided by hatred and wars. A land that chose a ‘leader’ who promised ‘change’. And change there was, for the worse. The wars continue, the hatred grows, Islamophobia has become the ‘password’ for  patriotism. Dissent against these evils is virtually not allowed as the country has become a dictatorship, with it’s clocks being turned back to the darkest of days in its history.
*
Is the following the type of ‘change’ and ‘rebirth of the nation’ envisioned by the President?
*
*
You may ask why I singled out the United States. The answer is that there is a connection between it and the fact that Palestine has been prevented from moving ahead. The US has blindly supported Israel since its creation, supplying them with the funds and ammunition to completely destroy what is left of the Palestinian people. Their own people have suffered greatly because of this, yet they allow it to continue.
*
The United States has led the movement to convince the world that Palestine does not exist, never did. Daily we witness more countries moving away from this and offering recognition to a Free and Independent Palestine. Daily we see the continued support allowing Israel from preventing this from becoming  reality.
*
Palestine will be free soon regardless. Sixty three years is way to long for this issue to remain on the ‘back burner’… the flames are spreading and will not be extinguished until it happens. Denial and oppression will not stop progress. Americans MUST speak out for this as Dissent is Patriotic, not treason.
*
*

3 Comments

THE ‘NEW’ EGYPT CONTINUES TO STAND WITH ISRAEL

May 15, 2011 at 06:10 (Activism, Collaboration, Corrupt Politics, Dictatorship, Egypt, Gaza, Irony, Israel, Nakba, Palestine)

Hundreds of enthusiastic Egyptian young men were prevented from going to Gaza
*

Egyptian convoy bound for Rafah banned

*
Egypt’s ruling military council has forbidden solidarity convoys aiming to reach Rafah ahead of the Palestinian Nakba Day on Sunday

As planned, hundreds gathered on Saturday in Tahrir Square with the aim of heading to the Egypt-Gaza border at Rafah. However, organisers say, the ruling military council ordered tourism offices not to send the buses rented as transport for the convoy as it set a ban on all journeys to the border.

Starting 9am, several hundred stood in Tahrir Square waving Palestinian and Egyptian flags, hoping to march towards Gaza to stage a sit-in on Sunday, 15 May, which marks the Palestinian Nakba Day, or day of catastrophe, in reference to the founding of Israel in May 1948. The convoy was not able to leave Cairo.

May Shahin, one of the organisers of the convoy, said “We have been preparing for this for the past month and a half now. We wanted to have a convoy in memory of the Palestinian Nakba. It was supposed to be a mass march towards Palestine. After realising that entering Gaza might be a risk for the Palestinians, we decided to head only to the Rafah border. We were surprised, then, to know that all tourism offices refused to rent buses to reach Rafah and canceled our contract. They told us that this was an order from the ruling military council. Under the Mubarak regime we were able to organise a convoy from Cairo to reach Rafah. Now, after the revolution, we are banned.”

The solidarity convoy set to leave Cairo was not the only one to be stopped. A group of 15 activists from the “Free Egyptian Group” and “We are the Bus People”, a group that tours Egypt staging artistic performances, left Cairo Friday and were also stopped.

Ragia Omran from the “Free Egyptian Group” recounts: “We were heading to Sheikh Zwaied village near Arish to stage an awareness show and we had all the musical equipment with us. We were stopped right after crossing Salam Bridge. We told them that we were only going to stage our show there, and showed them the musical instruments, but they did not let us pass.”

Still attempting to reach Rafah, individuals stopped in convoys tried to reach the border either on foot or via public transport. Estimates from people living in Arish are that hundreds of those who were trying to reach the border area in solidarity with the Palestinians were able to, despite strict restrictions from the military.

Egypt is expected to witness mass demonstrations on 15 May despite security alerts issued from the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces. Shahin says: “On Friday, more than 5000 demonstrated in front of the Israeli embassy. That is the biggest demonstration ever staged in front of the embassy, which shows how much Egyptians are enthusiastic this year to participate in solidarity with Palestine.”

The Egyptian army fired shots Friday trying to disperse thousands of demonstrators in front of the Israeli embassy. Although protesters fled the scene upon hearing the shots, they quickly returned, chanting “We are going in!”

Egypt’s downtown area is flooded with posters reading “Palestine, we will return,” while Palestinian flags are sold on many street corners in the area surrounding Tahrir Square. The square itself was packed with tens of thousands on Friday chanting in solidarity with Palestine.

Published AT

7 Comments

EGYPTIANS HAVE NO OTHER OPTION; MUBARAK MUST GO

January 31, 2011 at 13:23 (Associate Post, Collaboration, Corrupt Politics, Egypt)

Ever since he first stood at the helm of power nearly 30 years ago, President Mubarak has ravaged his country in every conceivable manner. Under his corrupt and despotic regime, the status and stature of Egypt in the international arena declined to an unprecedented low degree.

Image ‘Copyleft’ by Carlos Latuff

Mubarak must go

Khalid Amayreh

No serious political analyst outside Egypt can claim to know President Hosni Mubarak more than the Egyptians themselves, and they are the  very people who have been out in the streets, demanding his resignation. They are doing this at the risk of being shot by the regime’s thuggish security forces who have been ordered to murder, vandalize, rob and spread chaos and anarchy everywhere in the country, for the purpose of stifling the revolution against tyranny and dictatorship.

Hence, claims that Mubarak is just a benevolent dictator who can maintain stability in a volatile region should be treated with contempt. Interestingly, some of the calls for the West to give Mubarak the benefit of the doubt, presumably until he kills and maims more Egyptians as he exhausts his energies to cling to power are coming from Israel. We could expect little else from the Zionist state, which all too readily adopts fascist-like policies and embraces Arab despots as long as they are soft on Israel but harsh on their own people. Needless to say, the Mubarak regime was one of those rotten regimes which paid great importance to relations with the war criminals running Israel, while harbouring an insensitive and even hostile attitude towards other Arab and Muslim states.

Ever since he first stood at the helm of power nearly 30 years ago, President Mubarak has ravaged his country in every conceivable manner. Under his corrupt and despotic regime, the status and stature of Egypt in the international arena declined to an unprecedented low degree.

Prior to his rule, Egypt had the potential to be an industrial power to rival countries such as South Korea and Malaysia; just look where they are now. Under Mubarak, Egypt is unable to feed its own population of 80 million souls. Israeli arrogance has grown with Egypt under Mubarak, to the point that it has near hegemony in the Middle East. Egypt has come to be considered by Israeli strategists as a satellite state kept on track by the US and its foreign aid.

It is true that Egypt was not an oasis of democracy and prosperity before Mubarak, but the country enjoyed an international stature and national dignity under both of his predecessors, Presidents Gamal Abdul Nasser and Anwar Sadat. Since the 1952 revolution which brought Nasser to power, Egypt had maintained a semblance of sovereignty, despite unrelenting conspiracies by Israel and the west. But when Mubarak succeeded Sadat following his assassination on 6 October, 1981, the first thing he did was basically to hand over Egypt’s sovereignty to the United States and Israel; some say that he gave Egypt on a silver platter to the CIA and Mossad. He has since shown repeatedly that he is answerable more to the White House than to his own people, and that he valued the legitimacy that came from Washington’s acceptance more than that which came from ordinary Egyptians who have waited for thirty long years in the hope that Mubarak might change his autocratic style of government. However, he has shown that he is not the sort of man who will change of his own volition.

To the chagrin of every Arab and Muslim, Egypt under Mubarak became an impediment rather than an asset, especially over the central issue of Palestine. This scandalous reality was made clear during Israel’s brutal assault on and invasion of the Gaza Strip in 2008-2009 when the Egyptian regime colluded with Israel in the killing and maiming of thousands of innocent Gazans, and the destruction of thousands of homes, mosques and other private and public buildings throughout the coastal enclave.

Gaza cried out for help from its big brother across the border at Rafah. Instead of a helping hand, Mubarak offered more treachery, more perfidy and more betrayal. The Mubarak regime even built an underground steel and concrete wall along the border with Gaza to stop the Palestinians being able to use tunnels to smuggle essential goods and break Israel’s siege of the territory.

Much of the depravity of the Egyptian regime is attributed to its pathological hatred and fear of the Muslim Brotherhood. This is the reason given for the regime’s perfidy against the conscience of the Egyptian nation, from handing over sovereignty to the United States to agreeing to become Washington’s watchdog against nationalist and Islamic forces in the region. Now, Mubarak is accusing the Muslim Brotherhood of organizing the revolution in Egypt, a lie that shouldn’t be dignified by passing a comment on it.

There is no doubt that the Egyptian regime is living on borrowed time, regardless of whether Mubarak himself stays on for days, weeks or months. The magic has gone. It is up to him, but Mubarak can now choose from the scenarios that brought an end to tyrannical regimes in places like Iran, Rumania and Tunisia. The choice is likely to narrow the longer he hangs on.

He should also know that when the moment of truth arrives, no one will help him, not even his masters in the White House, for whom he has become a liability. As for the other Arab despots, they can’t even help themselves; soon they too will face a similar, inevitable fate. Israel should watch the situation closely and learn from it; oppression and brutality have a limited shelf-life, no matter where they exist. Freedom waits for those who struggle with patience and constancy; yesterday it was Tunisia, today it is Egypt   could tomorrow be Palestine?

 

Written FOR

7 Comments

THE REAL IMPACT OF THE ‘PALILEAKS’ AS SEEN BY TWO PALESTINIANS

January 28, 2011 at 12:20 (Associate Post, Collaboration, Corrupt Politics, Deception, Israel, Occupied West Bank, Palestine, Palestinian Authority)


Fear and the Palestine Papers
By Mazin Qumsiyeh, PhD

Ignoring the hype about the Palestine papers is hard.  I spent a lot of time
reading through page after page of the documents showing minutes of meetings and other exchanges regarding the Palestinian-Israeli “negotiations” (the quotes are warranted).  The Guardian newspaper summed up the back and forth arguments about these papers as follows:

” PA and PLO leaders such as Saeb Erekat can be expected to point out that one of the core principles of the negotiations is that ‘nothing is agreed
until everything is agreed’. As such they are not necessarily committed to
provisional positions that in the event failed to secure a settlement -
though Erekat made clear to US officials in January 2010 that the same
offers remained on the table. Critics are likely to argue that concessions -
such as accepting the annexation of Israeli settlements in occupied East
Jerusalem – are simply pocketed by the Israeli side, and risk being treated
as a starting point in any future talks.”

See HERE

 

For me two things come out clearly from these painful documents (some of
them have parallel data in the US embassy cables on Wikileaks).  First it is
not that the Palestinian officials are traitors but merely (and this is bad
enough) mistakenly and passionately going through motions hoping against all odds that by talking and compromising more they could achieve a tiny fraction of what we are entitled to. The second observation is that Israel will not sign a peace deal regardless of how low and ridiculous the
concessions on the Palestinian side: hunt down resisters (abandoning the
internationally recognized rights of resistance to occupation even unarmed
one), give up on most settlements built illegally on Palestinian lands,
allow Israel sovereignty over nearly 1/3rd of the occupied old city of
Jerusalem, give up on the refugee rights, allow Israel to keep looting
natural resources in the West Bank, give Israel the right to control our
airspace, and even assure a statelet devoid of sovereignty. Not even tourism income would be allowed in this emasculated state.  Some critics asked:  if, as the documents show, the Palestinian negotiators were willing to accept all of this then WHY did Israeli politicians hold out?

 

The answer is obvious to anyone who ever faced Zionism. They believe
(rightly or wrongly) they can get 100% so why should they settle for 91% or even 99% especially when the ceiling of the Palestinian requests kept
dropping in the past 22 years (since they accepted in 1988 to let Israel
keep most of the looted parts of Palestine 1948).  Today, Israel’s three
main sources of income are dependent on a continued conflict and occupation: the 6.5 billion military and security exports, the 6 billion US and other western direct aid, and 3 billion from the captive markets in the West Bank and Gaza. All three would be threatened with end of conflict even if Israel gets to keep most of its stolen loot.   Israeli officials are keen to keep
negotiations going to avoid an anti-Apartheid scenario and for PR and
normalization to keep pumping more money and more settlers into the
remaining small shriveling Palestine because it is economically profitable.

 

The recorded meetings show no real interest or even emotion or any sense of urgency on the part of the Israelis or their American benefactors.  Saeb
Erekat comes out basically pleading and begging sometimes and other times using the presence of Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran to try and convince these officials.  Jim Jones, David, Hale, and (Israeli lobbyist Dennis Ross),
Tzipi Livni, Mofaz etc. all just repeat utter few selective words and simply
drag their feet to keep the “process going”.  What would be the nature of
the conversations if there was no Hamas to wave as the boogeyman to US
officials and claim success in containing Hamas and other “extremist
movements” (In Egypt Hosni Mubarak uses the same notion of containing
Islamic Jihad but for the sinister goal of justifying his dictatorship)?  US
officials are very confident of their strength and the Israeli strengths and
the fact that they only need the Palestinians to prevent any attempts at
international isolation of Israel.  This they get just by innuendo or hints
of threats on the Palestinians authority.  They studied the situation
carefully and think that Abbas and company have no other options but to
simply keep negotiating and compromising even if it takes another 20 years. In some very rare instances the negotiators seem to connect with their humanity and actually feel sorry for the fate of these Palestinian
negotiators.  But then you could sense how they curb their own feelings (as irrelevant) and go back to the scripted positions of their governments which are simply antagonistic to anything that is not 100% in support of Zionism. Erekat’s occasional threats of a one state seem vacuous and not serious.  My book on Sharing the Land of Canaan showed with lots of data that “two state for two people” approach can never lead to genuine peace (if apartheid was the problem in South Africa, why is it considered a solution here?).

 

I have a suggestion for the Palestinian authority: try to deal with the
issues and do release your own documents instead of trying to shoot the
messenger.  Take lemons to make lemonade.  Help introduce an even stronger resolution at the UN security council (e.g. in support of the Goldstone report or to recognize a Palestinian state along the borders of 1967) or a resolution at the UN General Assembly that calls for expelling Israel from the UN since it has never honored its commitments when it was admitted in 1949.  Maybe announce publicly that the Oslo Process was a mistake or at least is now dead (now every idiot knows it was and most of those who are getting salaries from the authority know in their hearts that it was contrary to basic human rights and to basic international law). This
suggestion essentially is to show courage and backbone.  It could also mean the difference: making mistakes is human, continuing the path as in the past only validates those who accuse the authority figures of treason.  Abbas says he will surprise us in September but I believe he and those around him do not have that kind of time.

 

I, like Edward Said and millions of Palestinians, disagreed strongly with
the choices made by this Oslo group to built the Palestinian autonomous
administration (of the Palestinian people warehouses or concentration camps) that relieved Israel from the burdens of managing us and from International isolation based on not even promises of freedom or return of rights.  But I also can’t help but feel sorry for those who took that path. It must be very painful for a human being to go down a tunnel where there is no possibility of a light at the end and during this trip into the depths of darkness feel the leaches crawling up his back sucking his blood and voices from behind calling him back (some of them his political enemies, others ex-comrades in Fatah). Palestinian negotiators are fearful of going back because they think it might give political opponents a PR tool. They are just fearful of losing face; I am always grateful to a wise advisor who 30 years ago convinced me to drop this fear of admitting mistakes (a fear common especially among men). They may also be fearful of losing a job. The Palestinian people are very angry though many feel afraid to speak out for fear to lose their sources of income, fear that the alternative to Fatah maybe just as bad, fear of Israel, fear of the US or just simply fear of their own power.  But ultimately fear is a lack of self-confidence to take another course. And their fear should be balanced by the fact that people are literally dying for justice and wanting leaders to care about them and not about themselves. [Here we must remember the thousands of martyrs who gave their lives and hundreds of thousands who were injured or lost homes and livelihood and still yearn for freedom]. The status quo is to many humans a comfort in the known/predictable.  Taking another path is feared because humans fear the unknown.  I believe that fear is the most destructive and paralyzing human emotion.  Common people around
the world are just beginning to break the barrier of fear and speak up more for themselves. From Tunisia to Egypt to Lebanon, the walls of fear are cracking.  We common people and even some leaders must  realize that many of these walls are far weaker than we may think.  I can actually hear them cracking.

 

The Arab world is in revolt.  The fire is spreading.  Responsible people
need to step forward with courage and conviction.  There could be surprises along those lines even from Central Committee members of Fatah.  Already Nabil Shaath took a position different than Mahmoud Abbas.  This is just the beginning.  Palestine will survive.  The Palestinian people are not sheep. They are mature enough to take the truth and to rebuild our national liberation movement.  History marches on and I am 100% sure that Zionism will fail and Palestine will be free.

 

——————–

Palestinian Students take over Palestine London offices demanding
representation of all Palestinians.  I think their call for representation
based on the Prisoner’s documents and the Cairo Declaration) should be
taken-up by all Palestinians of conscience.

See HERE

 

A Call to the People and Governments of the Free World from the Egyptian
National Coalition: We call upon all of you to support the Egyptian people’s
demands for a good life, liberty and an end of despotism. We call upon you
to urge this dictatorial regime to stop its bloodshed of the Egyptian
people, exercised throughout Egyptian cities.. We believe that the material
and moral support offered to the Egyptian regime, by the American government and European governments, has helped to suppress the Egyptian people.  We hereby call upon the people of the free world to support the Egyptian people’s non-violent revolution against corruption and tyranny. We also call upon civil society organizations in America, Europe and the whole world to express their solidarity with Egypt, through holding public demonstrations, particularly on People’s Anger Day (28/01/2011), and by denouncing the use of violence against the people. We hope that you will all support our demands for freedom, justice and peaceful change.

The Guardian Newspaper: Palestinian distrust of Iran revealed in leaked
papers. Mahmoud Abbas asked businessman to donate $50m to Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad’s opponents, according to the documents.

See HERE

 

Media Matters M.J. Rosenberg stated about the Papers: “The bottom line is
that, despite the assurances the Palestinian Authority gave to the
Palestinian people that it was driving a hard bargain with the Israelis, the
Palestinian Authority accepted Israel’s position on every key point:
borders, Jerusalem, settlements, refugees.  On no major issue did the PA
hold the line. None. The Palestinians offered Israel everything Israel wants
and Israel still said “no” with the backing of the United States.”

See HERE

It is interesting to see such analysis as from former top CIA official
Robert Grenier.

 

But even though career diplomats are voicing interesting opinions and
diversions from official policy, the Obama administration still shows the
notion of just drawing on AIPAC associated fossilized brains. (see
Why Obama’s “new thinking” initiative on Middle East peace is doomed to fail by Lawrence Davidson )

 

Palestinian intellectuals and activists articulated why this is the end of
the charade of the peace process industry Karma Nabulsi gives a pointed
analysis.

Prof. Saree Makdisi shows more emotion as he writes “The Palestinian people betrayed”


Yet another BDS victory: John Lewis stops stocking Ahava products in Britain

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

 

Furious reaction to Al-Jazeera documents

Revelations contained in Palestinian documents leaked to the television channel Al-Jazeera this week left Palestinian negotiators with much explaining to do, writes Khalid Amayreh in Ramallah
 

 

The Palestinian Authority (PA) reacted with shock and fury to revelations made by the Arab satellite TV channel Al-Jazeera this week that it had received leaked documents showing that Palestinian negotiators had been ready to make far-reaching concessions to Israel on cardinal issues of the Arab-Israeli conflict, including Jerusalem and the right of return for millions of Palestinian refugees.

The seemingly authentic documents, on which PA negotiators’ signatures can be seen, largely consist of the minutes of meetings held between Israeli and Palestinian negotiators. American officials and mediators also took part in some of these meetings.

The documents show Palestinian negotiators as having been willing to cede large parts of East Jerusalem to Israel, including most if not all the colonies built in the Jerusalem region east of the former armistice line since 1967.

The PA is also shown as having been ready effectively to liquidate the paramount right of return of Palestinian refugees by entertaining ideas that proposed the repatriation of a negligible number of refugees to their original homeland in what is now Israel.

Similarly, the documents, now dubbed the “Palestinian Papers”, show a clear PA propensity to cooperate and occasionally even to collaborate with Israel against the Islamist group Hamas, especially during the all-out Israeli onslaught on the Gaza Strip nearly two years ago.

While the papers contain very few real secrets, as details of the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations since the Oslo Accords of 1992 are widely known among journalists and academics, this is the first time it has become known that the PA had been willing to abandon, or at least evade, long-held Palestinian national constants that had come to form the closest thing to a Palestinian consensus.

These constants enjoy general acceptance by all the Palestinian political factions, including Hamas and Fatah, the two largest political movements in occupied Palestine.

It is not yet certain who leaked the documents to Al-Jazeera. Some Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) officials allege that an insider from the PLO negotiations department leaked them for mercenary reasons, while others accuse the hawkish Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman of deliberately leaking the documents in order to embarrass and therefore weaken the PA leadership in the hope of blackmailing it into further concessions.

Whatever the identity of the leakers turns out to be, the leaks are unlikely to be very consequential, given the known positions of both sides.

PA officials reacted angrily to the revelations, accusing Al-Jazeera of attempting to carry out a character assassination of the PA and tarnish its image. One PA official went as far as to charge that the Qatar-based network had “declared war” on the PA and was working with Israel to undermine the Palestinian cause.

Some Fatah supporters tried to storm Al-Jazeera’s offices in Ramallah but were dispersed by police.

Many Palestinians among the more educated segments of the population have scoffed at the near hysterical manner in which PA officials have received the revelations, judging that there is no smoke without fire.

PA chief negotiator Saeb Ereikat, who appeared on Al-Jazeera as the network was broadcasting its report on the documents, seemed unprepared and shaken by the revelations, even losing his composure when responding to questions about documents bearing his signature.

The following day, the PA instructed Yasser Abed Rabbo, the secretary-general of the PLO, to launch a scathing attack on Al-Jazeera and Qatar, including the country’s emir, Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani.

Abed Rabbo said that Qatar was in no position to lecture the Palestinian people and its leadership on patriotism, adding that the existence of a large American military base in Qatar, as well as the emirate’s relations with Iran and its support for “sectarian forces” (a possible allusion to Hizbullah), made Qatar unfit to tell Palestinians what they should think or do.

However, Abed Rabbo’s remarks appeared to be off the subject at hand, as he refused to discuss the serious aberrations from the declared Palestinian stance that appear in the documents.

“Some of these remarks were jokes and human reflexes that were not meant to be formal positions,” said an angry-looking Abed Rabbo.

“I must also thank his highness the emir of Qatar for his promoting the issue of transparency in the hope that he will now expand it to include the American military base in Qatar, especially its role in spying on the Arab nations.”

The most moderate reaction came from PA President Mahmoud Abbas, who described the negotiation documents as “nothing new.”

“I don’t know how Al-Jazeera obtained all these ‘secrets’, because there is nothing secret about the negotiations with Israel. Everything we do with regard to the negotiations we inform our Arab brothers and [Arab League Secretary-General] Amr Moussa about,” Abbas told reporters in Cairo.

Nonetheless, Abbas seemed to have decided to take measures against Al-Jazeera. Fatah sources said a circular had been sent to all Fatah members instructing them to boycott the channel.

A few hours later, Nabil Shaath, a high-ranking Fatah official, appeared on the network, saying that Al-Jazeera should not attempt to make an issue out of every word or observation appearing in the documents.

“It was agreed from the very beginning that nothing is finished until everything is finished. So what is written in these documents has no practical value,” Shaath said.

Shaath was silent, however, when interrupted by one of Al-Jazeera’s presenters, who argued that the observations appearing in the documents showed at least a propensity on the part of PA negotiators to compromise on paramount issues related to Palestinian rights, such as Jerusalem and the right of return for the refugees.

As expected, Hamas also castigated the PA for “hiding the truth from the Palestinian people and for showing a willingness to sell out on inalienable Palestinian rights.”

“We consider these documents to be further evidence of the security and political decadence to which the PA has stooped,” said Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri. “The documents show that the PA is not to be trusted in leading the Palestinian people towards freedom and liberation.”

Another Islamist spokesman, Mahmoud Zahar, called on Arab populations to take to the streets to declare their rejection of PA “treachery and capitulation.”

While the bombshell of the papers may undermine overall Palestinian standing, some pundits have argued that Al-Jazeera’s revelations may also have a long-term positive effect.

They argue that Palestinian negotiators will think twice from now on before ceding to Israel on sensitive matters such as Jerusalem and the refugees, knowing the angry reactions to any capitulations to Israel.

 

 

***********************

FREEDOM OF THE PRESS IN PALESTINE?

The Palestine Preventive Security Forces interrogates Khalid Amayreh and Awadh Rfajoub


The Palestinian journalists  Khalid Amayreh and Awadh Rajoub were briefly interrogated by the Preventive Security Force in Dura, south of Hebron, Thursday, in connection with their coverage of al-Jazeera documents revelations.

Amayreh said  he was interrogated for several  hours and was asked to return to the PSF  local headquarters again on Sunday, ostensibly for  further interrogation.

He described the interrogation as utterly illegal. He also urged the Palestinian Press union to do its utmost to prevent security agencies from  interfering with journalists’  work.

2 Comments

DETAILED REPORT ON WHAT WAS LEAKED ABOUT PALESTINE

January 25, 2011 at 18:35 (Collaboration, Corrupt Politics, Israel, Occupation, Palestine, Palestinian Authority)

A highlighted a collection of quotes and key excerpts from the documents themselves to provide a bird’s eye view of the Israeli/Palestinian negotiations.

Playing to lose

Telling Tidbits from The Palestine Papers
The recently released “Palestine Papers” reveal the extraordinary lengths to which Palestinian negotiators have gone to reach a peace agreement with Israel. Below, the IMEU has highlighted a collection of quotes and key excerpts from the documents themselves to provide a bird’s eye view of the Israeli/Palestinian negotiations. 

 

 

——————————

On November 13th 2007, then Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni made yet another startling remark. She said, “I was the Minister of Justice. I am a lawyer…But I am against law — international law in particular. Law in general. If we want to make the agreement smaller, can we just drop some of these issues? Like international law, this will make the agreements easier.” Read more

——————————

Then Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni made a few disturbing statements during her conversations with Palestinian negotiators. Livni, according to Al-Jazeera, said Palestinians should, “hope for charity “from [Microsoft founder Bill] Gates and his like.” At another point in time, Livni said, “When you want to curse somebody, you tell [them] ‘go to hell,’ but we shorten it and say, ‘go to Gaza.” Read more

——————————

In a 2009 meeting, Saeb Erekat discussed an Israeli settlement freeze with U.S. Middle East adviser David Hale. The conversation is below:

David Hale: We cannot force a sovereign government. We can use persuasion and negotiations and shared interests.

Saeb Erekat: Of course you could if you wanted. How do you think this will reflect on the credibility of the US, if you can’t get this done?

David Hale: We make the call on our own credibility. Read more

——————————

In 2009, Mahmoud Abbas pressed the issue of a settlement freeze with President Obama. According to Saeb Erekat, Mahmoud Abbas said, “Are you serious about the two-state solution? If you are, I cannot comprehend that you would allow a single settlement housing unit to be built in the West Bank…you have the choice. You can take the cost free road, applying double standards, which would shoot me and other moderates in the head and make this Bin Laden’s region. Or say we are not against Israel but against Israel’s actions. If you cannot make Israel stop settlements and resume permanent status negotiations, who can?” Read more

In a September 2009 meeting, U.S. Middle East Adviser Dennis Ross met with Saeb Erekat to discuss Israel’s “partial-freeze” on settlements. The discussion is below:

Dennis Ross: The package includes no new tenders, no new confiscation…

Saeb Erekat: I’m not coming from Mars! 40% of the West Bank is already confiscated. They can keep building for years without new tenders. Read more

——————————

In October 2009, Palestinian negotiators were surprised that the Obama administration would not honor the Bush administration’s guarantee that “1967″ would be a “baseline” for negotiations. U.S. Envoy to the Middle East George Mitchell said, “that difficulties with the Israelis on this and other issues, that they would not agree to any mention of 67 whatsoever.” Read more

In another October 2009 meeting, Erekat attempted to bring up the issue again. The conversation is below:

George Mitchell: Again I tell you that President Obama does not accept prior decisions by Bush. Don’t use this because it can hurt you. Countries are bound by agreements – not discussions or statements.

Saeb Erekat: But this was an agreement with Sec. Rice.
[...]

Jonathan Schwartz: It is not legally binding – not an agreement.

Saeb Erekat: For God’s sake, she said to put it on the record. It was the basis for the maps. Read more

In a September 16, 2009 meeting, Erekat had a similar discussion with U.S. Middle East Adviser David Hale. The conversation is below:

Saeb Erekat: Why not resume negotiations from where the parties left off’?

David Hale: We prefer “relaunch” since there was no agreement – nothing is agreed until everything is agreed

Saeb Erekat: There is a detailed record of our negotiations. The US administration kept it – it is perhaps our only achievement with the Bush administration. And so much for Obama and rapprochement…there is not a new word! Give me something at least to save face!

David Hale: There is a lot of new stuff.

Saeb Erekat: If [Barack] Obama cannot stop Netanyahu for 9 months while we negotiate, why would we negotiate ’67 or Jerusalem?

David Hale: But you are in a position to bring peace – this is what distinguished you and your leadership from the others. So yes we need certain principles, and we need something tangible soon. That is the point of New York…something you can deliver. I understand the freeze possible is a little less than what you wanted, but if there is no New York, we lose everything and you have nothing to show for… Read more

——————————

In a March 24, 2008 meeting with Palestinian negotiators, then Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni discussed the idea of compensation for Palestinian refugees. She said, “Compensating refugees is an international matter and that is why reference to responsibility would be wrong. [The reason for this is] because it was a problem for all Arab states, then it became a Palestinian Israeli conflict, with the Arabs on the sidelines asking for a resolution.”She then added, “What about the people who suffered from terror attacks, are you going to apologize?” To which Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat responded, “We do. We condemn each one.”Livni then said, “People suffer during war. People suffer with their lives. They die. We can relate both of us to the suffering.”

Livni also said, “I feel like we can’t refer to the past.” Former Palestinian Foreign Minister Ahmed Qurei said, “I do not want to go back to the past to become its slave but to pave the way for the future.” Read more

——————————

In a June 21, 2008 meeting Livni said, “By the way on responsibility-whose responsibility is it for keeping them in the camps? The Arab world! Responsibility not just about the war, but what happened after. For creating false hope. [We need to address also] the Jewish refugees. Maybe as part of the international fund.” Erekat responded by saying, “With all due respect – you had an agreement with Egypt. With Jordan. But we never caused anything to the Jews. This will not be in an agreement.” Qurei then said, “All the Arab countries are ready to receive the Jews.” Read more

In a July 16, 2008 meeting U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice made a point similar to Livni’s: Israel is not alone responsible. The conversation is below:

Condoleezza Rice: If you want to talk about responsibility it is the responsibility of the international community, not Israel. They created Israel.

[Zeinah Salahi (of the PLO's Negotiation Support Unit) argues that Israeli actions post-statehood are clearly their responsibility. This is dismissed by Rice.]

Saeb Erekat: It is a nation interrupted!

Condoleeza Rice: That is true – a nation’s development is interrupted. You should [look to a solution that describes the conditions and tries to work from there.] Responsibility is a loaded term. [Notes the example of reparations for slavery in the US.] I’ve always objected to it. It’s not forward looking. Would I personally be better off? I don’t know. But I do support affirmative action…[Bad things happen to people all around the world all the time. You need to look forward.]…Israel had to put away some of their aspirations – like taking all of “Judea and Samara.” Read more

——————————

In an August 14, 2008 meeting Erekat discussed again discussed responsibility and refugees. He said, “Recognition of responsibility is a bilateral issue. I don’t want the Americans to be involved in this.” Livni’s then legal adviser Tal Becker said, “Our respective narratives cannot be reconciled. You think you are the victims. We think we are the victims.” Read more

UPDATED 3:14 p.m.

——————————

In an October 21, 2009 meeting with U.S. Special Envoy to the Middle East George Mitchell, Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said, “Palestinians will need to know that five million refugees will not go back. The number will be agreed as one of the options. Also the number returning to their own state will depend on annual absorption capacity.” Read more

UPDATED 3:06 p.m.

——————————

On January 27, 2008, then Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni ended a meeting with Palestinian negotiators by saying, “Israel was established to become a national home for Jews from all over the world. The Jew gets the citizenship as soon as he steps in Israel, and therefore don’t say anything about the nature of Israel as I don’t wish to interfere in the nature of your state. The conflict we’re trying to solve is between two peoples. They used to say there were no Palestinian people; my father used to say so too. They used to say Palestinians were Arabs so let them find a solution in an Arab country. The basis for the creation of the state of Israel is that it was created for the Jewish people. Your state will be the answer to all Palestinians including refugees. Putting an end to claims means fulfilling national rights for all.” Read more

UPDATED 2:55 p.m.

——————————

In a March 23, 2007 meeting with then Belgian Foreign Minister Karel de Gucht, Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat discussed refugee voting rights. The discussion is below:

Karel De Gucht: Why haven’t you reformed Fatah? You’ve had 14 months.

Saeb Erekat: No good reason. Abu Mazen wants reform to happen, but he’s being blocked. Reform needs money, and you need to help Fatah more.

Karel De Gucht: For Permanent Status Negotiations, you need a strong Israeli government, need Fatah reform. You need to be more than just president in title.

Saeb Erekat: We’ll take the agreement to referendum. We’re experimenting with the third party role now: EU BAM, Japanese, TIPH.

Karel De Gucht: What about the diaspora?

Saeb Erekat: I never said the diaspora will vote. Its not going to happen. The referendum will be for Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Can’t do it in Lebanon. Can’t do it in Jordan.

Karel De Gucht: I don’t think it will go to referendum. I think the only way you can do it is to pass it through Parliament.

Saeb Erekat: I told Sharon before disengagement to do it bilaterally. He said no. I said Hamas will claim victory, like they did in Lebanon. And that’s exactly what’s happened.

Saeb Erekat: Abu Mazen is not a politician. He’s the most decent man. He’ll never call early Palestinian Leadership Council elections without also calling presidential elections.

Karel De Gucht: That may be his weakness.

Saeb Erekat: He’s also tough and smart. Read more

UPDATED 2:06 p.m.

——————————

On June 21, 2008, then Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, along with then adviser to then Israeli President Ehud Olmert and Livni’s legal adviser Tal Becker, met with former Palestinian Foreign Minister Ahmed Qurei, and Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekeat. In the meeting, Livni proposed swapping “Israeli-Arab” villages to a future Palestinian state. The discussion is below:

Tzipi Livni: Two issues related to the borders. When you talk about the line of 1967, there were some Palestinian villages separated by 1967. I visited an Israeli Palestinian village on Friday in Wadi Ara.

Ahmed Qurei: What were you doing there? Campaigning?

Tzipi Livni: There are 12,000 Palestinian members of Kadima.

Udi Dekel: Israeli Arabs. I said from the beginning that it can be part of the swaps.

Ahmed Qurei: Absolutely not.

Tzipi Livni: We have this problem with Raja [Ghajar] in Lebanon. Terje Larsen put the blue line to cut the village in two. [This needs to be addressed.] We decided not to cut the village. It was a mistake. The problem now, those living on Lebanese soil are Israeli citizens.

Udi Dekel: Barka, Barta il Sharqiya, Barta il [Garbiya], Betil, Beit Safafa

Ahmed Qurei: This will be difficult. All Arabs in Israel will be against us.

Tal Becker: We will need to address it somehow. Divided. All Palestinian. All Israeli. Read more

On April 8, 2008, Livni (two months prior to the above discussion) Livni discussed the villages. She said, “Let us be fair. You referred to 1967 line. We have not talked about Jerusalem yet. There are some Palestinian villages that are located on both sides of the 1967 line about which we need to have an answer, such as Beit Safafa, Barta’a, Baqa al-Sharqiyeh and Baqa al-Gharbiyyeh.” Read more

January 23, 2010

——————————

In late 2007, former Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni told former Palestinian Foreign Minister Ahmed Qurei, “Israel takes more land [so] that the Palestinian state will be impossible.” She added, “the Israel policy is to take more and more land day after day and that at the end of the day we’ll say that is impossible, we already have the land and we cannot create the state”. She conceded that it had been “the policy of the government for a really long time.” At the end of 2007 she said, “it is still the policy of some of the parties but not the government.”Read more

——————————

Saeb Erekat said to Israeli negotiators on May 4th 2008, “We are building for you the largest Jerusalem in history.” Erekat was referring to these maps of proposed area swaps:

Then Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni responded to the Palestinian negotiating team’s area swap suggestions by saying, “I want to say that we do not like this suggestion because it does not meet our demands, and probably it was not easy for you to think about it but I really appreciate it. I think we have a reason to continue.” Read more

Saeb Erekat said, “In Jerusalem it was hard for us but we decided to give you.” Read more

——————————

On May 29, 2008, Udi Dekel told Palestinian negotiator Samih al-Abed, “I do not have permission to discuss Jerusalem without knowing what arrangements will be in Jerusalem.” Read more

In the same May 29, 2008 meeting, Dekel told Abed, “Since 2000, something happened in those 8 years so we are not at the same starting point. You started a terror war on us and we created facts on the ground. This is the reality that we live in today, so we can’t go back to Camp David. Circumstances changed considerably since then. Facts have changed. So we can’t freeze time and consider that we are in 2000 reality. The Middle East has changed.” Read more

——————————

In a June 15th 2008 meeting with U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, then Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, former Palestinian Foreign Minister Ahmed Qurei, and chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat, Ahmed Qurei explained the Palestinian proposition for Jerusalem by saying, “This last proposition could help in the swap process. We proposed that Israel annexes all settlements in Jerusalem except Jabal Abu Ghneim (Har Homa). This is the first time in history that we make such a proposition; we refused to do so in Camp David.” Read more

Livni responded, “When we decided on the annexation, we made it clear to the Palestinians that we will not compensate them with land that is part of Israel now. The issue now is that the Palestinians will not accept that some locations become part of Israel.” Read more

Saeb Erekat said the Palestinians were willing to give up, “Zakhron Ya’cov, the French Hill, Ramat Eshkol, Ramot Alon, Ramat Shlomo, Gilo, Tal Piot, and the Jewish Quarter in the old city of Jerusalem.” Read more

Ahmed Qurei proposed the idea that the Palestinian state could include Jewish settlements. He said, “Perhaps Ma’ale Adumim will remain under Palestinian sovereignty and it could be a model for cooperation and coexistence. We may also have international forces and make security arrangements for some time. It is the location of Ma’ale Adumim not its size.” Then Foreign Minister Livni responded by saying, ” Future borders will be complicated but clear. I have seen in Yugoslavia how areas can be connected. The matter is not simply giving a passport to settlers.” Read more

——————————

In a July 2, 2008 meeting, Israeli adviser Udi Dekel did not want to discuss Jerusalem. He said, “Why does your side keep mentioning Jerusalem in every meeting – isn’t there an understanding on this between the leaders?” Read more

——————————

Later, in an October 21, 2009 meeting with U.S. Middle East Envoy George Mitchell, Mitchell’s Deputy David Hales, and then State Department legal adviser Jonathan Schwartz, Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat devised a way to divide Jerusalem. He said, “Even the Old City can be worked out except for the Haram and what they call Temple Mount. There you need the creativity of people like me…” Read more

Erekat added, “It’s solved. You have the Clinton Parameters formula. For the Old City sovereignty for Palestine, except the Jewish quarter and part of the Armenian quarter … the Haram can be left to be discussed – there are creative ways, having a body or a committee, having undertakings for example not to dig [excavations under the Al Aqsa mosque]. The only thing I cannot do is convert to Zionism.” Read more

Jonathan Schwartz responded, “To confirm to Sen. Mitchell, [this is] your private idea.

To which Erekat said, “This conversation is in my private capacity.”

Schwartz then said, “We’ve heard the idea from others. So you’re not the first to raise it.”

Erekat said, “Others are not the chief negotiator of the PLO.” Read more

——————————

In an August 31, 2008 meeting, the issue of Haram Al-Sharif was to, “continue to be negotiated bilaterally between Israel and Palestine with the involvement of the United States, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt, but without the ability of these third parties to force an agreement on the parties.” Read more

The Israelis offered their package to the Palestinians which included, “Israel would annex 6.8% of the West Bank, including the four main settlement “blocs” of Gush ‘Etzion (with Efrata), Ma’ale Adumim, Giv’at Ze’ev and Ariel), as well as all of the settlements in East Jerusalem (with Har Homa), in exchange for the equivalent of 5.5% from Israeli territory.” On refugees, Israel said, “Not clear what the heads of damage for compensation would be, just that there would be no acknowledgement of responsibility for the refugees, and that compensation, and not restitution or return (apart from the 5,000), would be the only remedy.” Read more

——————————

In 2009, Saeb Erekat, chief Palestinian negotiator, told U.S. Middle East Envoy George Mitchell, “The Palestinians know they will have a country with limitations,” he told Mitchell. “They won’t have an army, air force or navy.”Read more

——————————

Saeb Erekat later said in a January 2010 meeting with U.S. President Obama’s adviser David Hale, “Israelis want the two-state solution but they don’t trust. They want it more than you think, sometimes more than Palestinians. What is in that paper gives them the biggest Yerushalaim in Jewish history, symbolic number of refugees return, demilitarised state… what more can I give?” Read more


Source

5 Comments

AMERICA’S SILENCE IS GOLDEN

January 25, 2011 at 08:12 (Collaboration, Cover Up, Illegal Settlements, Israel, Occupation, Palestine)

Still, the U.S. State Department’s desperate attempts to avoid the issue of Israeli aggression, continued colonization, and its consistent criminal violation of international law with impunity and American protection, were never more blatant than in recent statements by both Secretary Clinton and her State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley.


How To Say Nothing Without Really Trying: State Dept. Spokesman Stonewalls on Settlement Stance

By Nima Shirazi


“It is true that How not to do it was the great study and object of all public departments and professional politicians all round the Circumlocution Office.” 

- Charles Dickens, Little Dorrit

On Wednesday January 18, at 1:51PM, a master class in American obstructionism, political spin, question-dodging, the zombie-like repetition of non-committal and meaningless talking points was held by United States State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley. When asked by journalists about a new United Nations Security Council resolution draft condemning Israel for its continuing colonization of Palestinian land during the daily press briefing, Crowley managed to avoid giving even a single straight or substantive answer to many of the questions, demonstrating once again the U.S. government’s outright refusal to be honest about anything related to Israel.

 

 

The brilliance of Crowley’s performance as a whole might best be summed up by the following statement he made, which came about in the middle of the lengthy exchange between the spokesman and numerous State Department correspondents:

 

“These are complex issues, and we think they’re best resolved through direct negotiations, not through the unilateral declarations, even if those unilateral declarations come in the form of a multilateral setting.”

In truth, Crowley’s verbal acrobatics speak for themselves and require very little commentary to demonstrate the boundless energy expended by the U.S. government to protect Israel from any public scrutiny. As such, the conversation will be presented in all its glory at the bottom of this post.

But first, some background:

The new resolution, which reiterates the illegality of all Jewish settlements in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem and demands an immediate cessation of their expansion, will soon come to a vote in the United Nations Security Council. The resolution draft, first put forth by Lebanese representatives and supported by virtually the entire planet (it has nearly 120 co-sponsors from Arab and other non-aligned nations), is wholly uncontroversial in that it simply reaffirms long-standing tenets of international law and repeats the call for the very actions the United States have long demanded, namely for both the Israelis and Palestinians to abide by “previous agreements and obligations” and to continue direct “negotiations on the final status issues in the Middle East peace process.”

The most relevant text of resolution, as revealed by Jewish Telegraph Agency stalwart Ron Kampeas, states that the United Nations Security Council…

1. Reaffirms that the Israeli settlements established in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, are illegal and constitute a major obstacle to the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;

2. Reiterates its demand that Israel, the occupying Power, immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all its legal obligations in this regard;

3. Calls upon both parties to act on the basis of international law and their previous agreements and obligations, including under the Roadmap, aimed, inter alia, at improving the situation on the ground, building confidence and creating the conditions necessary for promoting the peace process;

4. Calls upon all parties to continue, in the interest of the promoting of peace and security, with negotiations on the final status issues in the Middle East peace process, according to its agreed terms of reference and within the time frame specified by the Quartet in its statement of 21 September 2010;

5. Urges in this regard the intensification [sic] of international and regional diplomatic efforts to support and accelerate the peace process toward the achievement of a comprehensive just and lasting peace in the Middle East.

Besides the United States, the four other permanent members of the Security Council – Britain, France, China and Russia – are all expected to vote for the draft without objection. Additionally, the ten non-permanent member states currently sitting on the Council – Germany, South Africa, India, Brazil, Portugal, Lebanon, Nigeria, Colombia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Gabon – are also expected to vote in favor of the resolution.

In the interest of preserving the “inalienable rights of the Palestinians,” the United Nations human rights board supports the measure, and has called upon “world powers to force Israel to put a dead-end on peace-impeding settlement plans,” while expressing “sorrow over the world’s lack of political will.”

Earlier this week, a letter, signed by fifty academics, journalists, rabbis and public officials, including a number of former Assistant Secretaries of State, U.S. ambassadors and diplomats, and a former U.S. Secretary of Defense, was sent to Barack Obama urging the president “to instruct our Ambassador to the United Nations to vote yes on this initiative.”

The letter continues:

“The time has come for a clear signal from the Unites States to the parties and to the broader international community that the United States can and will approach the conflict with the objectivity, consistency and respect for international law required if it is to play a constructive role in the conflict’s resolution.”

The signatories, who include Lawrence Wilkerson, Thomas Pickering, Andrew Sullivan, Peter Beinart, Paul Pillar, and Chas Freeman, refer to well-established international law and United States policy to strengthen their case. “The settlements are clearly illegal according to article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention,” they write, “a status recognized in an opinion issued by the State Department’s legal advisor on April 28, 1978, a position which has never since been revised.” They also warn that “if the proposed resolution is consistent with existing and established U.S. policies, then deploying a veto would severely undermine U.S. credibility and interests, placing us firmly outside of the international consensus, and further diminishing our ability to mediate this conflict.” 

 

The so-called “pro-Israel, pro-peace” advocacy organization Americans For Peace Now issued a statement to the White House, calling upon Obama to consider the resolution “on its merits: both the context and the content of the resolution matter,” explaining that the draft has come about due to “Israel’s dogmatic refusal to refrain from settlement activity that is destructive to peace and to Israel’s future” and “is a resolution whose text is consistent with longstanding U.S. policy regarding settlements.” The statement concludes,

“Given this context and content, APN calls on the Obama Administration to not veto this resolution in its current form. Vetoing this resolution would conflict with four decades of U.S. policy. It would contribute to the dangerously naive view that Israeli settlement policies do no lasting harm to Israel. And it would send a message to the world that the U.S. is not only acquiescing to Israel’s actions, but is implicitly supporting them.”

The American pro-Zionist lobbying group J Street has also given tacit, albeit begrudging, support of the resolution by stating, “we cannot support a U.S. veto of a Resolution that closely tracks long-standing American policy and that appropriately condemns Israeli settlement policy.”

An article in the International Herald Tribune, written by former Palestinian legislator and peace negotiator Hanan Ashrawi, explained that, not only is it “universally recognized that Israeli settlements are illegal under international law,” but they are also “a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention” and “under the Rome Statute, they are considered a war crime.” Nevertheless, Ashrawi continues,

“With America unwilling to hold Israel accountable to international law and existing agreements, Israel has remained intransigent in the face of international efforts to revive genuine negotiations. A Security Council resolution would reaffirm today’s international consensus in support of the two-state solution by recognizing the threat posed by illegal settlements.”

The draft resolution also ignited a frantic move on the part of Israel and its American apologists to render the settlement issue moot by presenting maps of a potential Palestinian state with provisional borders. These maps, drafted by Israel’s fascist Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman and presented by a Zionist think tank in Washington D.C., are intended to “freeze the existing situation in the territories, with minor changes,” thereby legitimizing and entrenching decades of ethnic cleansing, occupation, illegal settlement and land theft. Needless to say, the proposals, which would force Palestinians to create a demilitarized prison state on a mere 13% of their homeland, have even been dismissed by the collaborationist Palestinian Authority as an “invention and a joke.”

Clearly terrified of supporting any resolution that reflects negatively on Israel, however truthful or obvious it may be, the U.S. government’s reaction to the proposal has been nothing short of embarrassing.

A letter, delivered to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton from seventeen U.S. Senators and initiated by Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), claims the resolution “hurts the prospects for a peace agreement and is not in the interest of the United States” and “strongly” urges Clinton “to make clear that the United States will veto such a resolution if it is raised at the Council, and to clearly communicate the United States’ intent to do so to other Security Council members.” Undoubtedly drafted by AIPAC and passed along to the most die-hard Zionist apologists in Congress, the letter is so fraught with inaccuracies and misstatements that even JTA‘s Ron Kampeas was forced to admit that it makes no sense. The UNSC resolution, he explains, “doesn’t resemble anything Gillibrand is writing about” and, “weirdest of all,” the letter actually “calls for exactly what the resolution calls for.”

Still, the U.S. State Department’s desperate attempts to avoid the issue of Israeli aggression, continued colonization, and its consistent criminal violation of international law with impunity and American protection, were never more blatant than in recent statements by both Secretary Clinton and her State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley.

Clinton, in response to the draft, said that the United States does not “see action in the United Nations or any other forum as being helpful in bringing about that desired outcome,” and stated that “we continue to believe strongly that New York is not the place to resolve the long-standing conflict and outstanding issues between the Israelis and the Palestinians. We do not think that that is a productive path for the Palestinians or anyone to pursue.”

However, the tour-de-force of doublespeak and duplicity was delivered by Clinton’s spokesman P.J. Crowley at Wednesday’s press briefing. The conversation, led by Associated Press reporter (and perennial thorn in Crowley’s side) Matthew Lee along with others, is remarkable for its clear exposition of both government obstructionism and public stonewalling.

The briefing came one hundred and fifty-four years and four months after the publication of the tenth chapter of Charles Dickens’ satirical serial novel Little Dorrit. The chapter, entitled “Containing The Whole Science Of Government,” contains the following passages:

“The Circumlocution Office was (as everybody knows without being told) the most important Department under Government. No public business of any kind could possibly be done at any time without the acquiescence of the Circumlocution Office…

…It had been foremost to study that bright revelation and to carry its shining influence through the whole of the official proceedings. Whatever was required to be done, the Circumlocution Office was beforehand with all the public departments in the art of perceiving – HOW NOT TO DO IT.”

Crowley’s carefully crafted answers and persistent repetition of the same phrases (notably, “I’m not going to speculate on what happens in the coming days.”) also recall the words of 17th Century English bishop George Morley: “A sudden lie may sometimes be only manslaughter upon truth; but by a carefully constructed equivocation truth is always, with malice aforethought, deliberately murdered.”

Below is the relevant part of the January 18 press briefing.
Fair warning: Reading the following exchange may result in the same severe headache and delirium one would expect from ten thousand hard headbutts to an Apartheid wall. 

 

 

Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
January 18, 2011

QUESTION: Let’s see, where to begin? There are so many places. I’ll – can I start with the Middle East and the Palestinians talking about this resolution that they want to put into the Security Council this week which would condemn Israeli settlement activity. At the same time, they’re continuing their push to get countries to recognize their independence, even without a negotiated settlement. They raised the flag at their mission downtown here today, this morning.

MR. CROWLEY: Which, on that particular point, we had agreed months ago, but it doesn’t change their status in any way.

QUESTION: Well, no, but their status changed in August.

MR. CROWLEY: No, but the granting permission to raise the flag –

QUESTION: Well, that’s actually part of my question.

MR. CROWLEY: — (inaudible) does not change their fundamental status of their diplomatic mission here in the United States.

QUESTION: No –

QUESTION: But did you approve their – the status of the –

QUESTION: Well, hold on a second. Hold on a second. The flag issue –

MR. CROWLEY: We digress.

QUESTION: — would be a sideshow. I want to know what you’re going to do about this resolution at the UN and I want to know if you’re going to continue to oppose or lobby governments not to do what the Palestinians want, which is to recognize them as independent.

MR. CROWLEY: Well, we continue to be in conversation with a range of countries on this issue. Our view hasn’t changed. We’ve made that clear in our discussions with the Palestinians and others. We do not think that New York or the UN Security Council is the right forum for this issue, and we’ll continue to make that case.

QUESTION: Can I follow up on that?

QUESTION: Okay. Well, hold on. What does that mean? If you don’t think that New York or the Security Council is the right venue, that means that you will veto a resolution if it’s brought to the Council?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, I’m not going to speculate on what happens from this point forward.

QUESTION: Well, are you trying to keep – prevent them from, or are you trying to dissuade them from – and their allies from bringing this to the Council?

MR. CROWLEY: We have made clear that we do not think that this matter should be brought before the Security Council.

QUESTION: And when you do that, what do you tell them if it – what does that mean, exactly?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, what that means is that we believe that –

QUESTION: Are you going to veto it if it comes up?

MR. CROWLEY: — these issues should be resolved through the ongoing process and through direct negotiations. That is our position. We’ve made that position clear to those who have an interest in this issue. But again, I’m not going to speculate on what will happen in the coming days.

QUESTION: All right. Well, as I understand it, the resolution merely restates what has been U.S. policy for some time, that – basically, it criticizes settlement activity.

MR. CROWLEY: And again –

QUESTION: Why is it not – why are you opposed to the UN adopting a resolution that isn’t – that supports existing U.S. policy?

MR. CROWLEY: We believe that the best path forward is through the ongoing effort that gets the parties into direct negotiations, resolves the issues through a framework agreement, and ends the conflict once and for all.

QUESTION: So it’s not the contents that you’re opposed to; it’s simply the idea of a resolution.

MR. CROWLEY: We do not think that the UN Security Council is the best place to address these issues.

QUESTION: Can I ask why? Because, I mean, the UN is where Israel was created, basically. Why is the UN not the place to deal with these issues?

MR. CROWLEY: These are complex issues, and we think they’re best resolved through direct negotiations, not through the unilateral declarations, even if those unilateral declarations come in the form of a multilateral setting.

QUESTION: Plus, it undermines your own efforts. I mean, isn’t that the real reason, that it undermines your own peacemaking efforts?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, we do not believe that this is a – would be a productive step.

QUESTION: But the peace process is not working, and your efforts didn’t achieve anything until now.

MR. CROWLEY: Michel, you’re right; as of this moment today, we do not have a framework agreement. That does not necessarily say that one is – that is not a – that’s an achievable task, in our view. And that remains something that we’re actively engaged in.

QUESTION: Are you contemplating any other – do you have any other levers at your disposal to persuade the Palestinians not to move ahead of these two tracks that you’re – you’re saying constantly that you don’t want them to do it, but they’re forging ahead anyway. What can the U.S. do in this situation?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, we continue to engage the relevant actors. We do not think this would be a productive step.

QUESTION: Can you say exactly what will you think would be a productive step?

MR. CROWLEY: We believe the parties ultimately need to – in order to reach a framework agreement, they need to get back into direct negotiations, and we’re working to create the conditions that allows that to happen.

QUESTION: But that’s been going on for the past two years.

MR. CROWLEY: I understand that.

QUESTION: And if you’re talking about productive steps –

MR. CROWLEY: Well, it’s been going on for longer than that if – (laughter).

QUESTION: Well, this Administration, it’s been going on for the last two years. And if you’re talking about productive steps, certainly that process hasn’t produced anything.

QUESTION: Well, but I mean –

QUESTION: Why not –

MR. CROWLEY: I mean, Matt, you’re –

QUESTION: I guess the fundamental question is –

MR. CROWLEY: You’re leading to a kind of a glass half full, glass half empty kind of discussion.

QUESTION: Well, yeah, except that the glass doesn’t have any water in it at all. (Laughter.) It’s not half full or half empty. It’s completely empty. And I don’t really understand why it is that you would be opposed to a resolution that simply restates what U.S. policy has been for a long time. I mean –

MR. CROWLEY: Again, I’m not going to speculate. We’ve made our position clear. We continue to make our position clear. I’m not going to speculate on what happens going forward.

QUESTION: Well, you’ve stated the policy, but the position’s not clear, because – do you think that settlements are illegal or not? And if they’re illegal when you say them from the podium, then why shouldn’t they be illegal according to UN resolutions, which you’ve acknowledged all along? Like why can’t you just restate what you’ve been –

MR. CROWLEY: No, no. Our position on settlements is well known.

QUESTION: Is that they’re illegal.

MR. CROWLEY: It hasn’t changed. You’re talking about is this a prospective step that moves the process forward? In our view, it would not be.

QUESTION: Well, do you think that the building of settlements is a productive step that moves the process forward?

MR. CROWLEY: We believe that unilateral actions on all sides are not productive.

QUESTION: But you seem to think it’s okay – well, I mean, you don’t like it but there don’t seem to – you don’t – there’s nothing that you prevent – you don’t do anything to prevent the Israelis from continuing to build settlements. I mean, they continue to build them.

MR. CROWLEY: Again, I can continue to state our position, but I’m not going to speculate on what happens in the coming days.

QUESTION: Can I have a –

QUESTION: Follow-up?

QUESTION: No.

*****

UPDATE:

January 23, 2011 - According to the right-wing Israeli website, DEBKAfile, American sources have indicated that Barack Obama opposes using veto against the UNSC resolution. The sources added that this would mark the first time the United States had not used its veto against Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem.

*****

Nima Shirazi is a political commentator from New York City. His analysis of United States foreign policy and Middle East issues is published on his website, WideAsleepInAmerica.com, and can also be found in numerous other online and print publications.

Posted  at

3 Comments

« Older entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 826 other followers